Warbird Information Exchange

I am not sure if our Naval Bretheren would have clear title to this one. Mainly diue to that the Jug was never a Naval Bird in the first place...though I could be wrong.

They really should keep their grubby hands off this one anyway...the Army Air Corps flew these and the type was mainly and AAF aircraft so why would the Navy get involved in it in the firt place at all ???


Paul

i agree.... just because h20 water, or liquid is involved doesn't make it navy territory for control,

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

AirMech Paul...some points of Title 14 contend to include NHC's control of
ANY submerged former American-origin artifacts...regardless of Service
Branch! Get out the lawyers and congressman.....

_________________
He bowls overhand...He is the most interesting man in the world.
"In Peace Japan Breeds War", Eckstein, Harper and Bros., 3rd ed. 1943(1927, 1928,1942)
"Leave it to ol' Slim. I got ideas...and they're all vile, baby." South Dakota Slim
"Ahh..."The Deuce", 28,000 pounds of motherly love." quote from some Mojave Grunt
DBF

Just like flies on Poop

_________________
www.tailhookstudio.com

There was a Twin Mustang F-82G 46-394 that went missing in Korea in 1950 with the name 'Dottie Mae'

The pilot was Capt Julius Cleveland FLUHR Jr who was born 1919, and I know who was in the USAF in 1945

Does anyone know which unit he served with in 1944/1945 - I wonder if he was the assigned pilot if (and this is a big IF) he was on the 405 FG, 511 Sqn

For a picture of the F-82G see:

http://mitglied.lycos.de/FlugzeugArchiv ... _F-82G.htm

It is a P-47D-28-RA s/n 42-29150

I am the master! (no ego here!)

_________________
Don't touch my junk!!

Really ??

I was unaware of that particular portion of this law or act. I always beleived that if a plane was or saw USN service then it was Navy until it was smelted back into the original aluminum. Interesting info...food for thought though as far as just how far the USN and this Title 14 will go when t comes to "aquiring" the remains of these aircraft.

Respectfully,

Paul

Well, it's really the D.O.D. who put the language in a bill, under the influence of the NHC. It doesn't mean they will enforce it. How could they enforce it?

Well done Jack !

just received a closeup scan showing the data-block; it's somewhat blurry but it seems to confirm firms your ID-tag here.

Martin

Martin,

Would it be possible to see a picture of the datablock scan ?

Groetjes,

Paul

PS: did you get the picture of Rob's painting ?

Paul

sure

here's the scan, courtesy and copyright of Dave McDonald from NZ




Martin

Paul - did get it - I am envious !

Fast delivery Martin, thanks !

Rob payed 200 EUR for it...

Paul

The trouble I have.. Is that the photos shows an aircraft WITHOUT a dorsal fin.. Martin, earlier you said

"I figured, that it definitely is an early P-47D, either a D-25-RE or a D-26-RA variant, because following the D-27-RE and D-27-RA had the a dorsal fin fitted just ahead of the rudder (at the factories). "

Can anyone confirm when the block numbers changed with the application of a Dorsal fin???

I wish I could read the pilots name?
Martin any luck on the a/c code letter?????????????

_________________
Don't touch my junk!!

Paul

I have to adjust my earlier statement re. dorsal-fin - as a P-51 specialist, I struggled to learn a lot on the P-47 during the past few days. As it turns out, the dorsal fin was introduced later than stated - I have photos of P-47's in the same serial-block as the ship from Traunsee - 42-29140 didn't have the dorsal fin, 42-29259 had it - later s/n's in the FY44 region came without...... need some more time here

Martin