T. Claude lied?March 4 2012 at 8:00 AM
|Jacques (no login)|
Response to Re: Ryan SOR-1 production cancelled...
Well, Ryan did say that "the revision involves tapering off of production of the Ryan SOR-1" which does imply that his company was producing SORs but now it is less clear whether they were Seagulls or Seamews. It is possible that Ryan Aero was in the process of tooling up for production under license of the SO3C Seamew (at that time still known as the Seagull) and actually assembled a few, when the Navy decided to pull the plug and cancelled the entire Seamew program. I have also not being able to find anything else on Ryan Aero's production of SORs, except for the Wiki page on the Curtiss (SOC) Seagull and these two sites listing the SOR as a Ryan built SOC. The confusion most likely caused by the use of the Seagull name for both the SOC and SO3C.
A wartime magazine article features the SO3C Seagull (actually Seamew) and also makes reference to the Ryan built SOR-1
On page 137 of the book, "United States Naval Aviation 1919 1941" it states that plans for Ryan to produce the SO3C (Seamew) under license as the SOR-1 was cancelled. Parts of the book can be viewed online at:
In your photo essay on OMAHA-class CLs you wrote:
"One caveat before we continue: some of the photos from the interwar period identifying the biplanes aboard these ships as Vought O2Us may be incorrect. They may be instead Berliner-Joyce OJ-2s."
According to this book (see pages 102, 119, 131 and 294), BerlinerJoyce OJ2s served on OMAHA-class cruisers until replaced with SOC's while Vought O2Us and O3Us went to heavy cruisers.