Good morning Trevor! Thank you for jumping in!
First, I have discontinued the direct correlation between Craft Number of the A/C and the Unit Number stamped in the tail, other than for linear production tracking purposes and ease of discussion in this thread.
I do want to point out, that all of the discussion here is for the average reader, with lots of explaining done so everyone can follow along, and not directed as a challenge directed at anyone making a reply. The focus is preserving history and not ruffling feathers.
Trevor, what are the markings in your B-29 tail?
B29Gunner wrote:
First, let's look at the assy # for your "unpainted tail," which is 3-14335-13. This tells us right away that it is for a B-29A, and was installed beginning with serial # 42-93874 and on. That means it did not come off of any B-29 other than an A model.
So, let’s discuss this first. The unpainted tail that I own is marked ASSY 3-14335-13 UNIT 998 and the one that was attached B-29A-45-BN 44-61739, New England Air Museum, and attached to "Jacks Hack" is marked: ASSY 3-14335-16 UNIT 528. The -13 and -16 is the revision of the original drawing of the part: 3-14335. So why does my tail have UNIT 998 as a -13 revision and UNIT 538 have a -16 revision. With my posting on Wed Jan 21, 2015 10:07 am, the arithmetic works almost perfectly for unit number working almost exactly with the aircraft # produced in the factory, B-29A-45-BN 44-61739 was the 530th B-29A produced at Renton, with a tail unit number of 538. Do you have documentation that only -13 revision numbers were only produced at Renton?
B29Gunner wrote:
Second, there is no correlation between the "unit number" of the tail compartment and the construction number of the B-29 it was bolted on to. What I have seen though is partial (and sometimes full) C/N's written in grease pencil on various components and assemblies.
I agree. I’m still including the Craft Numbers in this discussion only for ease of thorough tracking and so this thread shows up if someone “googles” a Craft Number for a B-29 when they are doing research.
B29Gunner wrote:
Third, B-29 parts can be very confusing. There were constant changes and revisions going on during production, but the parts catalog can help us here too.
Ah yes, I agree! But, there are a few factors that are 100% true when it comes wartime production, everything came down to $. A contract was specified between the United States Government and the manufacturer. When a change or revision went into effect, it changed the $ amount for the contract, increase or decrease. Changes were not done on the fly because someone “wanted to”. A minor change in a drawing for a part created a revision (the -13, for example, in this discussion). A major change in production would be B-29 to B-29A or B-29B, because there were major changes in the design. Every change had to be approved before being put into actual production because it all came down to $. Most changes in any wartime production would be put into effect in the next contract production block (because the price would go up or down for that block of production). This applies to Jeeps, Rifles, Airplanes….anything being produced for the government.
B29Gunner wrote:
For instance: 3-14335-10 tail compartments were used on B-29A's 42-93824 to 42-93873. The -11 tail compartments were also used in this same S/N range as well. The -12 tail compartments were used on B-29A's 42-93874 to 42-94123.
Now you REALLY have my attention. AWESOME!
Do you have the blueprints that support this, that these tail unit revisions were ONLY used at Renton and not used at Wichita?
Is this info from the Boeing B-29 Aircraft Parts Catalog Manual AN 01-20EJ-4?
If so or not, what is the name and date of the manual you are referencing?
B29Gunner wrote:
The -13 tail compartment was used on B-29A 42-93874 and on, but my parts catalog does not show the S/N that this particular dash ended on. The A model parts catalog also lists tail compartments 3-14335 without a dash number, and they were also used beginning with 42-93874 and on.
Which manual or manuals are you referencing so everyone can follow along. Please also include the date the manual was produced.
B29Gunner wrote:
Now to bring it all home, if we apply Occam's Razor, about the simplest solution, your "unpainted tail" has the S/N 44-62208 painted inside it. I'd say that was your B-29A (a Renton Block 60).
Although that is spray painted on the inside, and not totally discounting it yet, Boeing B-29A-65-BN 44-62208 would have been built AFTER B-29A-45-BN 44-61739 (New England Air Museum, and attached to "Jacks Hack" is marked: ASSY 3-14335-16 UNIT 528). B-29A-65-BN 44-62208 would NOT have had a -13 revision tail after a -16 tail.
B29Gunner wrote:
One thing to keep in mind here Van is that the S/N list on the China Lake Alumni website is NOT an accurate accounting of all the B-29s that were at China Lake. In fact, it's FAR from complete. Based on my research, which is still ongoing, there were a lot of B-29s that met their end at China Lake, but none of their individual record cards show them as being disposed of at China Lake. And yet, they were there.
I totally agree. They were using them as ground targets…and not keeping them to preserve history, so the accurate accounting is not there. But, what is available is a start.
B29Gunner wrote:
The other thing to keep in mind is that both of your tail compartments came from Bill Huffman at Mobile Smelters, via Gary Larkins. Mobile Smelters was already operating in the 1950s at China Lake, and by the time Gary first arrived at Bill's yard in Mojave in the 1970s, there were, to use his words to me, "a big pile [of turrets] about the size of a house" at the yard. That is where your two tails, my tail, and a lot of other parts came from. This fact also tells us that a lot of the parts that came out of Bill's yard would not appear on any published serial number list, such as the one on the China Lake Alumni website, because all of those B-29s were already blown up before that list was compiled.
I have TOTALLY taken this into consideration. No one cared, not even into the 1980s the “actual” history of these aircraft. They were being scrapped. And the ones that were saved were put into some museums or used in the movie industry. Only recently has provenance played a key role in preservation.
B29Gunner wrote:
Another piece of evidence is that your "unpainted tail" was painted black before the TB-29 conversion. 44-62208 was a Korea vet ("Miss Liberty Belle") and would have been painted black at some point during the war.
I have also considered this, but it also comes down to the TB-29 conversion aspect and my discussion above about Boeing B-29A-65-BN 44-62208 would have been built AFTER B-29A-45-BN 44-61739 (New England Air Museum, and attached to "Jacks Hack" is marked: ASSY 3-14335-16 UNIT 528). B-29A-65-BN 44-62208 would NOT have had a -13 revision tail after a -16 tail.
B29Gunner wrote:
What I would suggest you do now Van is pull the record card for 44-62208 from Maxwell and it will show if it was indeed converted to a TB-29. You would then have conclusive proof of the ID,
and owe me a beer (even though I don't drink!)
I have already looked at the microfiche at the Smithsonian Air and Space archives for every one of the 67 B-29s listed there were disposed of at China Lake, and almost none of them are there because they saw service after 1953, and that is as far as the Smithsonian archives go. So, there are a bunch of history cards that I need to see if are at Maxwell. The other (here comes the additional headache) variable is IF the aircraft were officially transferred to the United States Navy, the history cards many not be at Maxwell because the Navy officially took ownership of them.
Great discussion Trevor, thanks!