Pearl Harbor P-40

Holedigger · **Posted:** Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:20 pm

We actually corresponded earlier this year when I was working on a Pearl themed PBY project. He is very knowledgeable and a decent gentleman. I am at some point getting back to my Pearl P-36 scramble project, more details to gather.

Nathan · **Posted:** Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:28 pm

Holedigger wrote:

We actually corresponded earlier this year when I was working on a Pearl themed PBY project. He is very knowledgeable and a decent gentleman. I am at some point getting back to my Pearl P-36 scramble project, more details to gather.

I was just going to talk to you about that. Whatever interest you have in possibly doing some art work depicting the P-36 flight please let me know!

Holedigger · **Posted:** Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:57 pm

Here is where I am at the moment on the P-36 project, it has kind of been back shelved. Trying to make a living and all that jazz! Just building out the 3-d airframe, mostly done on that, just haven't figured out just what background to do, burning P-40s, burning hangars, or Diamond Head!

Nathan · **Posted:** Thu Sep 03, 2009 1:08 pm

The top of the nose should be painted olive drab as part of the anti-glare.

Holedigger · **Posted:** Thu Sep 03, 2009 1:21 pm

I have been debating that, just have not been back to it in a few months to push it along. The USAF seems to be debating it as well. Their REAL P-36 does not seem to have the paint there either, which is why I am still trying to find a historic pic proving one way or another.

Nathan · **Posted:** Thu Sep 03, 2009 1:40 pm

Holedigger wrote:

I have been debating that, just have not been back to it in a few months to push it along. The USAF seems to be debating it as well. Their REAL P-36 does not seem to have the paint there either, which is why I am still trying to find a historic pic proving one way or another.

all other renditions show with the anti-glare panel. Even in a P-36 book it states the USAFM does not have it correctly. I hope anyway...I like the anti glare panel. :lol:

Pogmusic · **Posted:** Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:02 pm

If portraying a Pearl Harbor P-36, wouldn't it be OD all over? By this time the vast majority of COMBAT aircraft were being repainted. Check the Air Force Colors and Markings series on that. Not to say they didn't have some in bare metal...

Pogmusic · **Posted:** Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:11 pm

I've added a couple links to the Navy Historical Foundation's Pearl Harpor site. There are few in bare metal. http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/even ... arlhbr.htm
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/imag ... g32896.jpg

Holedigger · **Posted:** Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:21 pm

Planning on his wingman in OD if I can get verification on it.

Nathan · **Posted:** Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:19 pm

Pogmusic wrote:

If portraying a Pearl Harbor P-36, wouldn't it be OD all over? By this time the vast majority of COMBAT aircraft were being repainted. Check the Air Force Colors and Markings series on that. Not to say they didn't have some in bare metal...

Not all P-36's by dec 7th were olive drab. Rasmussen's P-36 was NMF showed in a photograph after the attack. The flight of 4 P-36's....two were olive drab, the other two NMF.

HTH

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:43 pm

Nathan wrote:

Holedigger wrote:

I have been debating that, just have not been back to it in a few months to push it along. The USAF seems to be debating it as well. Their REAL P-36 does not seem to have the paint there either, which is why I am still trying to find a historic pic proving one way or another.

all other renditions show with the anti-glare panel. Even in a P-36 book it states the USAFM does not have it correctly. I hope anyway...I like the anti glare panel. :lol:

Actually I was researching some P-36 info, and have not seen any with an anti glare panel. I have seen many modelers that have said that some of them did not have anti glare.

Steve Nelson · **Posted:** Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:24 pm

I asked WWII US colors/markings guru Dana Bell about the lack of an anti-glare panel on the NMUSAF P-36, which is painted in Rasmussen's markings. He said it's unknown whether the original had one or not..some did and some didn't. The only known photo of Rasmussen's plane only shows the aft fuselage.

SN

armyjunk2 · **Joined:** Wed May 16, 2007 8:15 pm **Posts:** 833

I have this one and might have more, looking now...anyone have any idea why this is posting so big? is this thread about P-36's or P-40's I'm confused as usual....

Nathan · **Posted:** Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 pm

A few items via David Aiken:

Here are a couple of myths about P-40s and 7 Dec...from my forthcoming text:

1) that only T&W's P-40s and a couple others were at Haliewa.
fact: the entire 47th PS was on temporary duty for gunnery practice (30 caliber is all they had).

2) 47th PS had only 47th assigned aircraft on 7 Dec...
fact: there was a lot of borrowing of planes between squadrons and even 15th Pursuit Group flew 18th PG planes (vice versa).

3) The 44th PS was assigned to Bellows Field. Fact: Only the 86th OS was newly based at Bellows...Like unto the 47th PS, the 44th PS was on temporary duty at Bellows. and a good portion of the pilots were NOT in tuxedos attending parties with the higher officers...they were 'stuck' at base!

4) P-40 with Buzz Number '300' was NOT part of the 44thPS just because the plane was at Bellows when photographed. It was at Bellows when it was the 78PS time to get gunnery training at Bellows. The plane was assigned to the 78th Pursuit Squadron's Commander, Captain W.R. Clingerman, in late August 1941. The overpainted 'plane-in-group' marking on the tail was done when the huge 'Buzz' number was applied. Neither the 'plane-in-group' nor the 'Buzz' number have ANY relation to the serial number. Note that while the red dot in the national insignia has been painted over on the fuselage, it is still showing on the undersurface of the starboard wing.

Robbie Roberts · **Posted:** Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:15 pm

Gabby Gabreski was at Pearl Harbor during the attack as I recall... I can't seem to remember if he got off the ground or not. I seem to think so: I will have to reread his book to be sure

Robbie

Warbird Information Exchange

Pearl Harbor P-40

Who is online