Airframe Identification?

bdk · **Joined:** Sun May 02, 2004 1:16 am **Posts:** 11281

I'm sure one will turn up, someday!

Mustanger55 · **Posted:** Mon Dec 09, 2013 11:45 pm

Wow! So Much new information to digest!
To address several questions.....

Haven't a clue as to whether the wings have fuel bladders or not.

Will have to check the fuel gages' capacity and the fuel drain ports in the wings. Photos I have aren't clear, but left appears to be 50 gal. The fuel selectors show L,R & Reserve, but I'm not sure the plates are original. (Most of the placards are reproductions.)

If this frame is from Mk 4 20347, might explain the replaced assemblies. Tail section, wing center section and possibly even outer wing panels. Doesn't explain the T-6D cockpit panels, though.

Didn't know the Mk 3 & 4 didn't have the ballast weight in the tail. (Limited documentation)

I have an information request out to the RCAF for service history that will hopefully confirm the accident and disposition. Our curator is checking with the NMUSAF for any additional information on this airframe as well. Perhaps we can find civil registration information prior to acquisition, and more answers about past mods.

I got the sense early on this airframe was a bit of a mongrel, made up of various assemblies. More investigation is required but as usual, the group has given me more insight on what to be looking for.

Still finding my way through all the variations and variants of the Harvard/AT-6/SNJ family.

Thanks for all the input.
Any direction and assistance is greatly appreciated!

rcaf_100 · **Posted:** Sun Dec 15, 2013 12:58 am

Mustanger55 wrote:

Perhaps we can find civil registration information prior to acquisition, and more answers about past mods.

My sources quote the civil registration as N96224.

So I received an email inquiry through CHAA's website yesterday from the Air Force Museum in Trenton looking for info on 20347...hmmmmm :lol:

I passed along all the info I had on her.

I should say that although there is a 'Serial No.' portion on the dataplate located on the rear tubular frame, the serial number stamped on the plate doesn't necessarily match up with the actual serial number (or in this case, construction number) of the aircraft, which would be on the main dataplate on the left side of the front cockpit. I was at the airport today and did a quick look through all of our Harvards. Not one tubular frame dataplate matched the actual construction number of the aircraft. This is especially true with the Mk II's since all wartime examples retained for postwar use were completely rebuilt by CC&F around 1947-48, with the aircraft being completely disassembled and the various components repaired or replaced if necessary. AFAIK the Mk 4's had a similar process done during their service lives, with the work being done by Aircraft Industries of Canada in St Jean, Quebec or Northwest Industries in Edmonton, Alberta. No idea if or when this overhaul was done to 20347.

I'm still leaning towards this being a collection of AT-6/SNJ/Harvard parts assembled and registered using the identity of 41-17372, or possibly the actual 41-17372 restored or repaired using some ex-RCAF Harvard components, but I'd love to be proved wrong.

Mustanger55 · **Posted:** Mon Dec 16, 2013 12:28 am

Thanks RCAF_100.

Ran the N number through the civil registry database but it gave no worthwhile information.

I understand that the frame data tag may not reflect directly to the assigned construction number or RCAF serial number for that matter. Must have been a nightmare for the RCAF to keep track of their aircraft. Did they have an Aircraft Data Card record system like the USAAF used?

I haven't looked so closely at the left side, front cockpit area, and haven't stumbled across another data plate. Can you narrow down the location? Harvard 2 and 2A seems to be shown as being in plain sight on the LF finishing strip, but not shown on Mk4 illustrations. So much of the interior has been sprayed with layers of green zinc chromate I might have overlooked it.

Personally, I'm of the opinion that the frame and fuselage shell are both from Mk4 aircraft, given that the cockpit finishing strips are Mk4. IF the CC&F number does in fact match to 20347, at least we have an identity on which to look for additional information.

I didn't get to the museum this weekend, so was unable to check on the fuel drains P51 Fixer cited as indicators of the wings being of Harvard lineage.

I'm thinking if the 20347 serial does match the frame serial number, the picture might indicate the assemblies replaced. The tail and for sure the firewall forward needed to be replaced. Starboard wing doesn't look bad but if it was a ground-loop, the port could be damaged like the Harvard in the background. Looks like she's on her belly, so the wing center section may also have qualified for a swap. Still need to look at those more closely.

This may be an exercise in futility, but I really want to establish as much of the lineage and history of this plane as I can.

Thanks again

Mustanger55 · **Posted:** Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:57 pm

A few questions for the Harvard guys out there.....

While looking through the Harvard 2, 2A, 4 parts catalog, I took note that while the assemblies and parts carry the same part number system as used by North American, there are a lot of prefix numbers I've not seen before, notably a 45- prefix for Harvard Mk4 aircraft. Mk2 and 2A aircraft use a lot of 33- and 66- prefix numbers. Would these have been new/modified drawings done by CC&F, or NAA drawings?
I'm used to the prefix numbers relating to models, so usually the higher the prefix the later the model. To have Mk4 assemblies and parts with 45- prefix in the early 1950s doesn't seem to follow normal practice.

Is there a source out there for Harvard engineering drawings? (Preferably in digital format)

Is there a Canadian equivalent to the US Air Force Historical Research Agency, or NASM where drawings and manuals might be available?

I know I'm asking a lot, but seems to me there are enough Harvard enthusiasts/owners around for someone to have sought out this stuff long before me.

Thanks

snj-5 · **Posted:** Wed Dec 18, 2013 12:39 am

I don't have a good answer specific to the CCF-manufactured Harvards, but the T-6/SNJ (and Inglewood-built Harvard) aircraft
used a mixed bag of part number prefixes. If a design change (fit, form or function) warranted a part number roll, the part number
rolled, and often times, it did so when a new sub-model of the type went into production. So an 88- or 121- T-6D/SNJ-5 for example
will have 19-, 28-, 36- detail part numbers on it (as well as 88-, 121-, etc. part numbers on it). The old 19-, 28-, 36-, etc. parts
didn't change (fit, form or function again) so they went on the airframe without a drawing change.

Bela P. Havasreti

RobC · **Posted:** Thu Dec 19, 2013 7:06 pm

Hi Norm,

First, I am sorry, I owe you some pictures. I will get them tomorrow. Your questions are good and actually should be pretty easy to solve. The Mk 4 is very different from any T-6 other than the G model, in a lot of ways. A picture of the left cockpit console will answer a lot of questions. I am going to guess you have a T-6 with a Harvard tail cone, as others have suggested. -45 parts are unique to the Mk 4. A real Mk 4 will contain many T-6 parts, -66' -88' etc. But only the Mk4 will have -45 part numbers.

You definitely have a T-6 QEC. It is not compatible with a Harvard and would require major modifications to fit. I cannot emphasize enough, how big a deal this is. You cannot just bolt a T-6 QEC on a Harvard. Almost nothing matches up. It also appears your May Wests (slang for the wheel fairings) were modified for air racing. Your landing gear legs have fairings, which means they are not Harvard Landing gear, although many have had them changed to T-6 over the years.

Your instrument panels and the coming over the rear panel are not even faintly similar to a Harvard 4. Your right side panel (the thing that covers the right side of the fuselage) should have provisions for the long exhaust pipe, including the heating duct on the inside. Unfortunately, your picture cuts off right about where all that stuff would be.

So, we can quickly get to the bottom of this if you can put up pictures of the interior, left, right and where your panel was. Look for part numbers on your wing attach angles, and publish them here.

I happened to be around Mojave a lot in the 80s, when a lot of airplanes were being prepped for trades to the AFM. Do not be surprised if a lot of unairworthy work was done to get planes ready for display.

Mustanger55 · **Posted:** Thu Dec 19, 2013 10:48 pm

Hi Rob,
As has been plainly evident, I'm new to the T-6 and terminology. What's a QEC? :shock:

Okay. Hope these photos are what you were referring to. Don't have a general right side picture of the front cockpit.

The little cone on the canopy rail looks like the ones that fit the bottom of an instrument shroud on a Mk4?
I'm still intrigued by the cockpit finishing strips being Mk4 type.

Not a great photo, but shows lack of a gun support which is expected with a Mk4 tube frame.

No provisions in this side panel for the exhaust/heater exchange, but others note this is likely a T-6G side panel.

As I mentioned before, the instrument and electrical panels appear to be T-6D. The front instrument shroud has provision for a gunsight reflector. Photos I've seen of Mk4s don't have the round hole. Hadn't really paid enough attention to the rear shroud.

I'll have to see about the wing attach angles. The cover strips are riveted together, so not a quick removal. It's mighty cold in the hanger right now.

I don't mind this plane being a mongrel, but I have this need to know it's true identity. Ultimately it's still going to be presented as a WWII T-6 with most of it's existing parts.

snj-5 · **Posted:** Thu Dec 19, 2013 11:33 pm

The hydraulic control shelf has T-6 levers on it and the configuration suggests T-6/SNJ origins. If you start pulling wing inspection panels, CCF-built Harvards had 4 larger bolts connecting the outer wing panel main spars to the wing center section main spar. US-built T-6s utilized 5 smaller bolts per side.

Bela P. Havasreti

bdk · **Joined:** Sun May 02, 2004 1:16 am **Posts:** 11281

snj-5 wrote:

The hydraulic control shelf has T-6 levers on it and the configuration suggests T-6/SNJ origins.

Concur. Harvard 4 didn't have the hydraulic gauge on the shelf, it was in the panel.

RobC · **Posted:** Fri Dec 20, 2013 8:11 pm

Hi Norm, this is good; there is plenty to work with here.

For starters, QEC is an abreviation for Quick Engine Change and I used it as a shortcut to describe everything firewall forward. In the good ole days of radial engines in the military and especially airlines, it was common to build up a QEC in the warmth of the engine shop and have it ready to go. In the event an engine change was needed in the field, it could quickly be performed by disconnecting everything at the firewall and swapping for the new QEC. You could not take the T-6 QEC and swap it with a Harvard. Nothing fits, not cowling, exhaust, nada.

In your first picture, as Bela and BDK noted, you have a standard wartime T-6 control shelf. Take a look at your Harvard 4 manual, and you will see the gear and flap indicator needles are in a box under the instrument panel, instead of where yours are on the left side control shelf. You can also quickly verify that your gear and flap control handles are T-6 part numbers. Both the Harvard 4 and T-6 G use a later setup, that is not interchangeable, that removed the power control lever from the list of items a pilot needed to remember everytime he used the gear or flaps.

Your second picture is also very useful. If you had a Harvard side panel, you would have distinctly different ribs, where the heater duct runs down the side to the rear cockpit. As you noted, there is no reason to doubt that your structural tube frame is from a Harvard 4. Not only is there no reason to doubt the id tag, note that there is no mount for the gun on the right side under the windshield. Yet your instrument panel has a cutout for the gun, and the outside fairing that attaches to the windshield and firewall is a gun fairing. This will not fit on a Harvard (don't ask me why I know this, unless you want to make me grumpy). It is obvious that the tube frame was replaced. The question is, why? It is unlikely that the original T-6 that all your pieces came off was wrecked. Is it possible that this was one of the very corroded Pensacola planes that wre used in the movie Swingshift? The timing is right, but who knows?

In your last picture, there are a couple of items. Further verification that the right side panel did not come with the tubeframe, as you previously noted. There is no provision for the long exhaust pipe or the hole where the heater pipe enters the cockpit. Second, you have a postwar 3" fuel cap, instead of the 2" cap I would have expected. First question is, are there actually fuel tanks in the airplane? Can you unscrew the cap, or has it been permanently attached?

I don't know whether it is really worth checking the wings. You have what you have. In my opinion, it is far more representational of a wartime T -6. You call it a mongrel. I would call it a Bitsa. Bitsa this, bitsa that. The T-6 is a bitchin airplane, but I don't like calling it a dog. The only dog i ever flew was a Piper Warrior, but that is another story...

snj-5 · **Posted:** Sat Dec 21, 2013 12:28 am

Is there any documentation as to who donated the aircraft and maybe when?

Bruce Orriss (LA area) built up at least 2-3 static T-6 airframes out of the stuff left over
from the Goldie Hawn / Kurt Russel Swing Shift movie (I think one of them is on the
USS Midway, there is another one on outdoor display at one of the Air Force Bases
somewhere (forget where now), and another one is the ersatz XAT-6E on display at
the Western Museum of Flight in Hawthorne, California. My initial SNJ-5 project came
from the Swing Shift movie pile of parts, much of which had spent decades outdoors
and suffered moderate to severe corrosion over the years.

In any event, as RobC pointed out, it is what it is, and 99% of the public who might visit
the airplane in the museum will never know that it has a Harvard tailcone or a few other
Harvard parts on it here or there (who cares?).

Many flying T-6s have various bits and pieces on them from different marks (owners
having sourced said parts from wherever they could). One "T-6" came up for sale
here several years ago masquerading as an American-built T-6 (or SNJ, forget which
now) but those familiar with the differences could obviously tell it was a CCF-built
Harvard with a US data plate + paperwork attached to it.

In the end, only us anoraks can tell the difference, and we don't matter anyway... 8^)

Bela P. Havasreti

Mustanger55 · **Posted:** Sat Dec 21, 2013 12:55 am

Hi Rob,
All this is great information. Calling this a/c a mongrel is a bit negative. I think I'll steal your "Bitsa" label. I too have a great fondness for the T-6, as it is the only warbird I've had the pleasure of flying in, even if it was just an hour fun flight. (Warbird Adventures in Florida) Took days to wipe the grin off my face.
I won't ask about the gun fairing not fitting a Harvard. Don't want to make you grumpy. :wink:

I'll have to put a light in the fuel filler to see if the fuel tanks are in there. You mentioned the 3" fuel caps being "post war". So that at least means the wing center section is likely not T-6B. (I wonder if anything besides the data plate on this plane is from a T-6B)
The QEC fit issue was one of those "lack of information" points for me, where I made some assumptions. Looking at the photo of 20437 (if it was the same A/C as the frame) it looked like the firewall and the QEC would both have needed replaced. So, having a firewall with the gun cutout and matching gun cowling didn't seem like such a stretch as replacements.
I also saw the Mk4 cockpit finishing strips as an indication that the fuselage structure (minus the side panels) was Mk4 like the steel frame. Most likely just the canopy rails were traded out at some point.

Hi Bela,
We have an inquiry in to the NMUSAF for any further info on the previous owner, but no news yet.
And, I say, being able to tell the difference is important, and those that can DO matter.

I'm still going to keep investigating the various assemblies, but I have to agree with your advice. It's time to focus on making a good, representative AT-6 exhibit that visitors will enjoy. Plenty of time to check part numbers as I work my way through the plane.

I greatly appreciate all of the input everyone has passed along to this noobe.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS!!!!

51fixer · **Posted:** Sat Dec 21, 2013 10:33 pm

Early T-6 series such as -A, -B have a different exhaust system than the later -C through -G types.
That would be different than any of the Harvards with the heat system type exhaust.
The exhaust outlet that would have been on a -B would appear to be mounted a little higher and would exit flush with the cowling.
The manifold was different, particularly the outlet assy, as well as the stainless dishpan as the cutout position for the outlet is in a different place, the R\H accessory cowl is different and also the R/H Mae West cowl that covers the wheel when retracted.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... e_1942.jpg

Mustanger55 · **Posted:** Mon Jan 13, 2014 11:58 pm

Hectic holidays have meant museum visits few, but I wanted to put up a few photos of the front cockpit area with the windscreen and front sliding canopy off. The cockpit needs a lot of clean up and repaint. Instrument and electrical panels are definitely AT-6D. The front electrical has had all of the switches replaced with wood pegs. Did some searching and found components on the wing center section with 88- part numbers and am guessing it is AT-6C or later. The firewall has the cut-out for a .30 cal, so it's from a C or later also.

I also found a pair of light fixtures for the fuel gauges in our parts stock and repainted them for possible installation. I may just put them up for sale or trade.

Warbird Information Exchange

Airframe Identification?

Who is online