Doolittle Raid B-25B Questions?

[RyanShort1]

Just noticed reviewing the official stills (third group link above) that the port wing upper national insignia does not have a meatball...

Trust me, there are a few shots that appear that way, but they DID have the meatball. It all has to do with the film process, angles and lighting, etc...

Ryan

[Pathfinder]

Ryan--

In my line of work "Trust me" doesn't count. I mean no offense to you, nor am I intending to start a flame war here, but in the world of forensic studies one has to offer proofs.

Based on all the official photos extant, taken from several "angles" and likely with different cameras, in varying conditions of light and doubtless different qualities of film--EVERY official photo of the upper port wing shows no evidence of even the slightest contrast of red-on-white.

The proof of your theory, therefore, is to show me ONE photo of an upper port wing insignia that DOES show a meatball.

The theory of "film process, angles and lighting" is possible, and I am aware of this phenomenon as regards blue...but not red--particularly against a purely white background.

Another thing in these photos that I have never seen before (or perhaps better said--been conscious of--) is the presence of the war games markings on the extreme starboard upper wing tip.

I find it a little odd, that something that shouldn't be there (the war games markings) does show up; while something that should be plainly obvious (on purpose) the red meatball on a white star--does not show up.

Red on white--even in degraded light conditions should at minimum show as a shade of gray in contrast to the white.

Standing aircraft marking regulations and conventional thinking tells us that the upper insignia is supposed to have a meatball--but photographic evidence overwhelmingly--and at present exclusively--shows us that they didn't.

Please show me one instance in the 16 aircraft involved with a meatball on the upper wing.

EDIT: I just reviewed the original take-off footage that appears in TSOT on YouTube and the meatball is evident on one identifiable plane (Avenger/McElroy) and one other anonymous plane. Case not completely closed unless we can show the take-off roll film footage of the planes in the stills with "missing" meatballs.

Dave
PS: Again--no offense intended.
PPS: I have packed ALL of my reference away pending a move so have absolutely nothing in print to go by.

[RyanShort1]

Same planes as the ones I think you're talking about. Different scan, better resolution, better detail and lighting on the photo. A lot of the stuff online isn't that good quality.


Those two pictures are the same as the one you're referring to here: http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/020839.jpg and http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/020824.jpg which I will agree do not really represent the red dot in the middle very well. However, when looking at these higher-quality versions, it becomes quite obvious. The red dot DOES show as a shade of gray in the higher quality scans... which goes to show that without access to an original photo (or in this case a good scan) we should be careful about a dogmatic conclusion if a better quality version exists.



Satisfied? I only said trust me because I didn't have time to post proof. But if I say that kind of thing, I've got some proof to back it up.

Ryan

[RyanShort1]

For comparison with the movie takeoff photo, here's the takeoff photo from the bow area that is original.



If you work with the brightness / contrast, you can see some details not present in the movie version.

Ryan

[Pathfinder]

Ryan--

EXCELLENT!

That is a slam dunk forensic proof!

Now curiosity creeps in....do your higher quality shots show that the war game markings are even more obvious than in the low-rez prints?

Dave

[Pathfinder]

History vs. Hollywood comparison of your original to MGM. They did an excellent job.

[Ken]

Just re-watched some of "Thirty Seconds" on youtube. It is amazing to me that a wartime film was made with so much attention to detail. Real names. Correct A-2 jacket insignia. Aircraft markings. Film locations. Bomb sight. Lots and lots of small details. Guess it helped that Ted Lawson and Dean Davenport were around to qc the effort.

One thing I did not remember was that very brief clips of actual Hornet takeoffs (the name of McElroy's "Avenger" can clearly be seen) and what appear to be from the post-takeoff flyover (to verify directional gyro, etc) were included in the film. Nice touch.

One final impression concerns a couple minutes of film as Lawson's B-25 crosses the Japanese coast. There is little to no dialogue spoken for some time. Guys flying the plane, scanning for threats, etc. Today's Hollywood would never tolerate such a long silence, but I'm sure it was quite accurate. Sometimes nothing need be said.

Ken

[Pathfinder]

Ken--

You're right! Watching the YouTube movie (with stop action!) yields tons of detail, curiosities and avenues of investigation.

Yesterday I slow rolled the film several times and was stunned to see how many "Hollywood" noses were included in the filming. There is (Robert Mitchum's) "Turkey"...one called "Our Little (Mermaid?)" and another called "American Beauty". These last two appear in the flight deck scenes.

There are also two different Ruptured Duck's. There is the one used in all the flying sequences and the other in the sound stage (carrier deck) sequences.



I also ran the tail numbers on all the planes that appear in the movie and find them all to be B-25 D's.

The flying sequences for the Duck are done by 41-29754 both before and after the Duck gets nose art. (The flying Duck is always identifiable by the wide dark color streaks radiating aft through the Ducks head.)

Some notes:

Opening flying sequence "0-2241 requesting traffic and landing...")

Landing/Taxi Sequence: 41-30137 (North American B-25D-5 Mitchell )
: 41-29754 (North American B-25D Mitchell ) "Lawson" plane without art
Short Take-off Practice Sequence: ("Gray/Manch" 41-29911 (North American B-25D-1 Mitchell)
"Lawson" taxi: 41-29754) (Tail skid sequence: 41-29754)

Alameda Arrival (with Duck art): 41-29754

"Night air" sequence: 43-3729 (North American B-25D-35 Mitchell )


Carrier take-off Sequence: 41-29911 (North American B-25D-1 Mitchell [in block modified as F-10's])
132874 (not a B-25 sequence tail number--movie make-up?)

Bomb run Sequence: 41-29754 (with Duck art)


40-2344
40-2292 (Van Johnson mis-counts planes and pilots leaving out Hallmark...)
40-2270 Gray (TSOT: "You up ahead?"..."4th spot!") (TSOT: "There goes Bob"--shows 2247/Avenger)
40-2282
40-2283
40-2298 (TSOT: "There goes Hallmark"--shows 132874
40-2261 Lawson/Ruptured Duck
40-2242
40-2303 Watson/Whirling Dervish
40-2250
40-2249 Greening/Hari Kari er
40-2278
40-2247 McElroy/Avenger
40-2297
40-2267
40-2268

Last edited by Pathfinder on Mon Jan 11, 2010 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Pathfinder]

[mustangdriver]

The nose art on the Ruptured Duck has been the subject of much debate for modelers as well. It was always understood that the Ruptured Duck nose art looked like it did in the movie. But in reality it was different. When a model company wanted to produce a model of the Ruptured Duck they asked Ted Lawson about the art work, and he said that the one you see in the film was close but off a bit. he then showed them the design he had painted on the plane which is close to the movie example, except that Donald Duck should be seen on sort of a left quartering angle.

[Pathfinder]

True...and in the end pages of his book (on the maps) the Duck is wearing a helmet and goggles!

If I can find it, I'll post a picture of the nose art on my first car--'65 Ford Econoline van..."my ruptured duck!"

[RyanShort1]

This shot was taken in Minnesota at one of the places they went for mods. I forget the source.

Quality isn't that good, but I think the source probably had access to better quality for his comments. Think this aircraft (63) still has it's colored cowl ring. Also note that possibly the other aircraft (next photo) is York's #3.

I know, I know... quoting myself.

Just to update, I found my copy of Destination: Tokyo, by Stan Cohen and it definitely has the two photos in better resolution than I posted here. The photo credit is a Mr. Mark Copeland of Bloomington, Minnesota. The caption says that the photos were taken at the Mid-Continent Airlines mod center at Wold-Chamberlin Field in Minneapolis, MN. Says that extra fuel tanks were installed, along with 24 high-pressure valves in the hydraulic lines, seat back armor for the pilots, and additional consumption, cruise control and range charts.

Ryan

[Ken]

Re-reading Doolittle's "I Could Never Be So Lucky Again" again. I had forgotten about his special instructions to install motion picture cameras on those airplanes, in addition to their other special mods. Even if Ski York's B-25 is never found, I have to pose the question ... did the Russians keep the film from the cameras in their archives???? Just an angle I've never heard discussed.

Ken

[AeroLogic]

Has anybody an explanation as to why the propeller tips were not painted yellow?

Thanks!

Dave P

[RyanShort1]

Has anybody an explanation as to why the propeller tips were not painted yellow?

Thanks!

Dave P

I don't know that I've ever seen an explanation...

Ryan