This is the place where the majority of the warbird (aircraft that have survived military service) discussions will take place. Specialized forums may be added in the new future
Post a reply

Re: Any P-40 experts care to comment on this image?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 9:27 am

Lotsa Pics

https://picasaweb.google.com/114682566226043469349/Zdj_samolot?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCKjxkt6rkNTFKg&feat=directlink#

Looks like the Code might be "HS-B"

Shay
____________
Semper Fortis

Re: Any P-40 experts care to comment on this image?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 9:41 am

Ok a bit concerning here is the parachute and no other sign of the pilot..

Re: Any P-40 experts care to comment on this image?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 9:49 am

peter wrote:Ok a bit concerning here is the parachute and no other sign of the pilot..


The pilot may have used the parachute as shelter from the sun while waiting on rescue.

Shay
____________
Semper Fortis

Re: Any P-40 experts care to comment on this image?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 9:56 am

This photo has me very CURIOUS - https://picasaweb.google.com/1146825662 ... 1343253970 - its a US built Kittyhawk from 1941/42 maybe so what is a aircraft part from Australia doing this aircraft? Does this mean this is a RAAF aircraft now?

Whats the reason a Australian company would supply Curtis with such a part doesnt seem right when the RAAF was importing P-40 and i am highly skeptical that Australia would export such items to US? Now if this was inserted into the aircraft in Australia before deployment to Africa???

Re: Any P-40 experts care to comment on this image?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 10:08 am

Liberator wrote:This photo has me very CURIOUS - https://picasaweb.google.com/1146825662 ... 1343253970 - its a US built Kittyhawk from 1941/42 maybe so what is a aircraft part from Australia doing this aircraft? Does this mean this is a RAAF aircraft now?

Whats the reason a Australian company would supply Curtis with such a part doesnt seem right when the RAAF was importing P-40 and i am highly skeptical that Australia would export such items to US? Now if this was inserted into the aircraft in Australia before deployment to Africa???

Probably provided to the RAF rather than to Curtis.

Re: Any P-40 experts care to comment on this image?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 10:35 am

Shay wrote:Looks like the Code might be "HS-B"

Better not tell Vintage Wings then.... :lol:

Image

:partyman:

Re: Any P-40 experts care to comment on this image?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 10:35 am

Liberator wrote:This photo has me very CURIOUS - https://picasaweb.google.com/1146825662 ... 1343253970 - its a US built Kittyhawk from 1941/42 maybe so what is a aircraft part from Australia doing this aircraft? Does this mean this is a RAAF aircraft now?

Whats the reason a Australian company would supply Curtis with such a part doesnt seem right when the RAAF was importing P-40 and i am highly skeptical that Australia would export such items to US? Now if this was inserted into the aircraft in Australia before deployment to Africa???


These are Australian made batteries likely to be supplied to the RAF and RAAF as part of the British Empire war effort and to suit british radios fitted to the US made Kittyhawks, nothing to do with supplying Curtiss in the USA, or evidence the aircraft came via Australia before Africa, or that there is any other Australian connection to the airframe.

An interesting historical quirk that Australia was supplying such items to the Air Ministry but if the raw materials were being mined in Australia it was no great manufacturing task to refine and process them, put them inside a battery can then put the batteries in a cardboard box, and certainly no bearing on the identity of the aircraft or its pilot.

(Although while the airframe apparantly sports HS squadron codes relating to RAF 260 Squadron it might be plausable that later codes have weathered off and this aircraft was flying with another unit when it forced landed, including the risk of it being 3 Sqn or 450Sqn RAAF who were operating in the same area, or equally another RAF or SAAF Sqn - but there is no evidence of "hand me down" P40E's so far, so at this stage its expected to be an RAF 260 Sqn aircraft?)




Widdis Diamond Dry Cells Pty Ltd was making radio batteries from the 1920's in Melbourne, including for the Australian Post Office (and therefore Telecom), and the Royal Australian Navy so its not surprising that the Air Ministry sought reliable supply from them during WW2.

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/56770686

DIAMONDDRY CELLS.

Manufactured by the Widdis Diamond ' Q*2 CelkA.r Proprietary,.;: Limited, 119 Hawke street, -West Melbourne, Diamond Dry Cell* have earned a well deserved repu

tation tor general excellence. In illustra tion of this fact it may prove of interest to quote what a representative .of the Aus tralasian manufacturer has to say:— 'I tried-out - ? three Diamond Dry Cell batteries on my two-valve set at home and found 'them moat satisfactory in every way. In fact, 'they were more efficient than others I had previously used of American manufacture. The volume of sound given was something like. 20 per cent, greater than I had previously been receiving.' This is an expression of opinion Rained from; practical experience, and is wholly, authentic, and indicates that dealers in' wireless accessories and users cannot do better - than secure Diamond Dry Cells. It is interesting, therefore, - to note tart Widdis Diamond Dry Cells Proprietary, Limited, have a xreU cqmpped v factory- in . West Mel bourne, and are making many types of- first-class dry cells, using Austra lian* raw material .wherever possible. The range -of standard, manufactures, four types of single cells, three round and one square, nine sizes of B battery for radio work,- with voltages of 22}, 45, and 00. and a C battery of US volts. In addition, cells are made if necessary to fulfill spe cial requirements. Practically all the dry cells required by the Postal Department, the Australian -Navy, the Victorian Rail ways'.- and the South Australian Govern ment ire-supplied by this company. These . batteries are obtainable from all radio dealer*, in South Australia, or from the distributor, L. A. Harper, CSS. Build iijs; £lpc 'William ttarcet, Adelaide,



regards

Mark Pilkington

Re: Any P-40 experts care to comment on this image?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 10:44 am

rcaf_100 wrote:
Shay wrote:Looks like the Code might be "HS-B"

Better not tell Vintage Wings then.... :lol:



:D Yeah I saw that. LOL

As posted by PaulMcMillan over on Fly Past

Maybe.. A BIG BIG MAYBE

From KITTYHAWK PILOT

"The following day, 23 October 1942, the last day before the major Allied offensive, enemy fighters put forth a particularly fine effort. 260 pilots were involved in heavy dogfights and Sgt Cartwright recorded: "Pilots racing to go after recent victories. 1st show: 109's shoot up Mink in N. Crash-lands. 2nd show: 109's get going again and shoot down B and C — one pilot safe. 3rd show: they shoot down Sheppard (comes back O.K.) and damaged X and O badly. We only get one damaged and Shep got a Macchi." Pilot Officer Mink, the American, was shot down in the first show by one of the German aces of Jagdgeschwader 27. Warrant Officer E. Tomlinson, one of the new Canadians with 260, was killed and Sergeant Colley was shot down in the second show. In the third show, Sergeant Sheppard was shot down and Kittys flown by P/O Thornhill and F/O Aitchison were badly shot up. It had been a good day for the Macchi pilots. No German claims were recorded for Tomlinson, Colley, Sheppard, Thornhill or Aitchison.
"The big push at Alamein started tonight when tanks advanced," Sgt Cartwright wrote in his diary on 23 October 1942. The final battle for El Alamein had opened."

Colley is F/Sgt (Pilot) John C. COLLEY - 1378464 - 260 Sqn (Nefatia, Libya), who died of wounds or injuries received in action 10-3-1943


Tomlinson is Canadian Warrant Officer Eric Tomlinson on El Alamein memorial

Colley forcelanded his aircraft on this date but got back ok...


Pretty fascinating.

Shay
____________
Semper Fortis

Re: Any P-40 experts care to comment on this image?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:29 am

If the data plate was mounted just in front of the throttle it looks like it has been removed.
https://picasaweb.google.com/1146825662 ... 6762365746

Re: Any P-40 experts care to comment on this image?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:49 am

those guys with their faces blotted out aren't locals. Brits or some other type of "Advisor" maybe?

Re: Any P-40 experts care to comment on this image?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:51 am

mustanglover wrote:I just don't think those videos are real.

They are too good to be a typical camera phone video, and kind of strange looking for being your average quality video camera.

Something is just not right.

Those of you who believe these videos probably believed (if just for a few moments) the video of the guy last month flapping his arms and flying away.

So are these all fakes too?

https://picasaweb.google.com/1146825662 ... irectlink#

Re: Any P-40 experts care to comment on this image?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 1:18 pm

Mike wrote:
mustanglover wrote:I just don't think those videos are real.

They are too good to be a typical camera phone video, and kind of strange looking for being your average quality video camera.

Something is just not right.

Those of you who believe these videos probably believed (if just for a few moments) the video of the guy last month flapping his arms and flying away.

So are these all fakes too?

https://picasaweb.google.com/1146825662 ... irectlink#


More than likely.

Re: Any P-40 experts care to comment on this image?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 1:24 pm

Great shots and what a treasure.

Looks like the IFF contactor that was missing from the instrument panel was stowed in its transit case:

Image

Photo link here:

https://picasaweb.google.com/114682566226043469349/Zdj_samolot?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCKjxkt6rkNTFKg&feat=directlink#5734882338866208370

Re: Any P-40 experts care to comment on this image?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 2:11 pm

Taigh

That's a question???

IFF removed and put in transit case but left. Does the aircraft retain is transit case onboard? If not where did it come from?

Parachute is there as well. Radio is missing or could have been taken out by locals. Think there was a pic of it. (Photo 21)

Does look like it attempted a wheels down landing seeing how far away the main wheel is and the tail wheel down. All I can assume is it was a lot sandier in 1942 and the pilot was trying to land. Unusual as the procedure was to belly land no matter what. Soft spots and the like.

I cannot see a lot of combat damage though there is something to the rear fuselage. (Photo 28)

Photo 30 shows the doped fabric over the shell exits? Never seen that before. Assume to stop entry of dust and sand and blocking the guns.

regards

Mark

Re: Any P-40 experts care to comment on this image?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 2:54 pm

Here's some pictues i found intresting...

https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/h ... -exif=true
https://picasaweb.google.com/1146825662 ... 3210527170
Those part numbers may be traceable...

https://picasaweb.google.com/1146825662 ... 9334328690
If the tire's there, that tells me it tried to land there...

https://picasaweb.google.com/1146825662 ... 6419145730
https://picasaweb.google.com/1146825662 ... 7527892850
https://picasaweb.google.com/1146825662 ... 9234481122
Is it just me, or do those grey/ camo lines look extremely straight...

https://picasaweb.google.com/1146825662 ... 5057594850
Engines don't just fall out of the bottom like that... Espcailly on soft sand... There may be a chance he had a piston blow out the block or explode on the inside??

EDIT- I'll bet you he tried the wheels down landing, broke the gear, and as he slides along in the sand he nails a rock, breaking away the prop, keeps going, hits another one that stops him for good, and dumps engine parts.
Post a reply