Hal Marshman Sr Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Tourist, and anybody else that's interested in 8th AF fighter groups, do GOOGLE up Little Friends. Lots and lots of gtreat stuff, broken down by the various fighter groups. Hal Sr Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tourist Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 I have been aware of the LittleFriends website for quite a few years. I also have a lot of pictures of my own, many in hi-resolution. I do not understand what makes you think the wings on 44-15267 are stripped, we'll have to agree to disagree. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
FrankC Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 (edited) Here you go, Tourist, and in color yet. Found on little friends. Lots of P-51 pics at that site, although most are of little use proving this point, due to the angle from which they were taken.. There was also a color pic of Kit Carson's Nooky Booky IV, but it was a close up, and didn't show the rudder. This one is great because it shows the silver painted rudder to contrast with the NMF wing surface. To be fair, there are a goodly amount of pics that also show the painted wing surface, and I've never said that all planes had the paint removed. I think that is some tempting evidence! Note the stripped invasion stripes. That's a a neat picture. It's not conclusive though. I don't think you can look at that wing and "know" it's NMF. But you also can't look at it and completely discount that it's NMF either. But when you take into account other things maybe it becomes even more possible? You of course know about "old crow" and it's transformation from Green/Grey to NMF by the crew stripping it overnight? All the postings so far indicate the wing was painted with aluminum lacquer . Not some super urthane finish that was strip resistant! I think the old crow shows that at least some planes did have paint stripped off them and left them with essentially NMF wings. But they probably are stained with traces of the original finish somewhat just like that photo you posted! That's a cool photo and I think that could be NMF Frank Edited July 27, 2011 by FrankC Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Edgar Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 I've been clobbered, for this, before, so once more won't make much difference. Danny Morris, when he was researching for his "Aces & Wingmen" series, travelled all over the U.S., interviewing pilots and groundcrew of the 8th Air Force, and he told me that crews told him how they got so fed up with trying to keep the wings' surfaces perfect, they stripped one airframe, completely, and the pilot reported that it had made no difference, so they stripped the lot. He didn't tell me how many crew told him this, and, of course, he could have lied (why?) or the crews lied (why?) However, it leaves a possibility that, somewhere, at least one Squadron didn't have painted wings; Danny, by the way, was absolutely obsessed with the history of the 8th., and went out of his way to get at the truth, being a historian, not a modeller. Edgar Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tourist Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 I don't think anyone lied (as you mentioned why would they?) but all the evidence points to such things a being the exception not a common practice. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hal Marshman Sr Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 In the original article I read, the fill material would crack and chip, probably due to vibration (particularly when those 6 big fifties began their chatter), wing flex, and the great temp differences between ground, and say 30,000 ft. Apparantly they had to dig out the old stuff, and re-apply the filler. (Anyone remember the Bondo of the fifties? Pretty safe bet it was a very similar material). Labor and time intensive, particularly when the planes were needed for missions.. Once proven it was unecessary to maintain the airflow over the wing's airfoil, the attitude was probably, " who needs the aggravation?" Hal Sr Quote Link to post Share on other sites
B-17 guy Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I would just have to say that both of you are correct with regard to the issue of wing putty/filler and painted or unpainted. There is evidence going both ways. I can say from my own experience as an army mechanic (I worked on trucks from 2000-2008), just because the manual says the truck needs it/factory recomends it, does'nt mean that it always happened. As long as it could roll, it rolled. Army maintence hasnt changed much that way, doent matter what era, truck, tank, helicopter or airplane. Shiny planes is another thing too, some were waxed, most probably werent. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rightwinger26 Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 And I can say that as a Navy aircraft mech for the last 14 years, just cause the book "says so" doesn't mean its going to be so. Not in regards to anything that could be a safe for flight issue, but things that really dont matter compared to getting a bird airborne. We're not going to let a bird sit on the line or in the hanger for 24 hours or longer depending on weather to let sealant dry, when the jet can fly just fine without it, then seal it later when the bird comes in for specials. Why wouldn't combat mechs in the 40's do the same. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tourist Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 That's not the point. During WWII the Laminar airflow was still something of a secret and NAA and the USAAF believed it gave the Mustang an edge, that's why they insisted crews take care of it. It was not a cosmetic decision as some here seem to think. The vast majority of period pictures on which you can actually see the wings clearly show the crews did their job. Furthermore a lot of modelers believe the factory finish cracked and fell off easily, when in fact it was extremely solid. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rightwinger26 Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 I actually wasnt suggesting that it was cosmetic, or getting in this whole little spat cause I think it is rediculous, I was actually responding to B-17Guy about military maintenance, but please feel free to get your apu spooled up over nothing, its actually a little funny Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hal Marshman Sr Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 rightwinger26, it would appear that Tourist is one who must have the last word. I've pretty much said all I mean to, and maybe I've caused a few to at least look at things a little differently. You may now stand by for Tourists dissenting last word. Hal Sr Quote Link to post Share on other sites
B-17 guy Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 Winger, your experince and mine sound very similar, just differant branches. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
terrysumner Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 The last 10 posts that turned this thread into the toilet have been removed. You can now continue with the discussion hopefully without the French language swearing crap. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
B-17 guy Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Thank you Terry. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.