Restoration Progress on O-58A 42-7796

Taylor Stevenson · **Posted:** Tue Dec 17, 2013 1:20 am

L-4Pilot wrote:

Here is the same type of stencil located in the exact same position on the airframe of this Taylorcraft L-2. I find it hard to believe that Piper and Stinson were not required to be in compliance with the regs. but like you I have never seen empirical proof.

Just saw this. I don't know about L-4s... I've seen them on several restorations, but that's not in my area of, albeit self-proclaimed, 'expertise'. I had people at OSH tell me L-5s should have cover codes because L-4s do. That line of thinking doesn't quite convince me.

Should L-5s have cover codes? Apparently yes, according to the TO. Did L-5s have cover codes? Not looking like it.

I apologize for straying off the O-58 topic, but your faithful portrayal of the O-58 with all her quirks got me thinking about L-5 quirks. Once again, great work!

Taylor Stevenson · **Posted:** Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:44 pm

Not to beat a dead horse, but Duncan Cameron (the ultimate L-5 restoration guru) chimed in via email. His take reinforces my position that Stinson did not adhere to the cover code TO. With his permission, I've included what he had to say...

"Reference to my experiences with NASM and NAHI competition. One judge firmly believed that I was wrong in not having [cover codes]. I, with Jim Gray and all of our collected 1000's (literally) of photos, with NO doping codes except on refinished, recovered or replaced parts- could not support putting them on a factory plane. My guess (strictly a guess) it IS possible AN gave Stinson an exemption because the hard use and that constant abuse made " time related" recover non-applicable since they were slow speed and small and constantly inspected "on condition" and were therefore recovered before "calendar limits" ever happened... But we don't yet have a document to support that supposition. (Was it an oversight by USAAF contract people? Not real likely.) Were the L-2 3 4 contracts earlier when AN thought it still necessary? Stearmans had them too. Flight controls on metal planes needed them badly...yes. So I cannot know for sure the reason. I showed the judges where I had even put the "build number" on the vertical stab (sprayed out) That I researched from factory newspaper shots of the assembly line that I had collected...and that lack of codes was NOT an oversight. (I researched and used the Glossy Sea blue repaint code on the '08 winning USMC [L-5]E.)
So I asked: If I can't find it referenced in the blueprints, it's not in the manuals and it's not in ANY photos... what am I supposed to do; put one on to "please" judges who haven't studied ONLY Stinson L5's for 20 years? There are all sorts of "showy" but historically inaccurate things I could have done... But I didn't. The main guys acquiesced.
I cannot not find ONE conclusive original paint picture. Even on "flipped over" new planes...

Somebody please prove otherwise.... I'll make a stencil immediately."

Hopefully, one day I'll know as much as Duncan, and Jim Gray with regards to L-5s.

Stepping off soapbox.

T

L-4Pilot · **Joined:** Tue Jan 18, 2011 10:35 pm **Posts:** 616

My thoughts mirror Duncans comments, if I can't document something thru either period photos or factory drawings then it does not go on the aircraft.

In addition to the Aeronca factory drawings here is a photo of an Aeronca O-58 during the La. Maneuvers. You can see the stencil in the same location as the factory drawing.

I think the practice was not as prevalent later in the war as it was in 1941 and 1942.

Taylor Stevenson · **Posted:** Tue Dec 17, 2013 5:12 pm

Very cool photo. Did the early O-58's not have the s/n stenciled on the tail?

L-4Pilot · **Joined:** Tue Jan 18, 2011 10:35 pm **Posts:** 616

Taylor Stevenson wrote:

Very cool photo. Did the early O-58's not have the s/n stenciled on the tail?

No, the yellow radio call numbers were not painted on at the factory until June 4th, 1943. Attached are the factory drawing and the date the master Fuselage Cover and Finish drawing was revised. The tails were clean when they left the factory prior to this drawing revision and the practice in 1941 and early 1942 was that the Observation Squadrons among others assigned a number to the aircraft when it was assigned to that unit. The tail numbers then represented the aircraft # on top followed by the Squadron # below, in my case 42-7796 was aircraft # 24 of the 109th Observation Squadron assigned 11/18/1941. The Squadron numbers were either yellow/orange or black at the discretion of the Squadron .

The photo below showing a couple of O-58A aircraft parked alongside their sister ships in the 158 Squadron, the O-58A in the foreground was aircraft # 20 assigned to the Squadron of mixed aircraft parked. This photo was taken at Ft. Sill Photos of O-58A aircraft are extremely rare.

L-4Pilot · **Joined:** Tue Jan 18, 2011 10:35 pm **Posts:** 616

Taylor,

The Stinson boys probably spend more time on research than any of the other groups I have met. I do also, I probably have as many research hours on this Aeronca project as I do restoration hours.

You don't see many restored aircraft that were built in 1941 on the show circuit, that is why I wanted to do this aircraft as it was in the earlier years without the very common yellow radio call numbers painted on all of the L Birds built in the later war years. This old Aeronca O-58A was engaged in maneuvers and traing before msot L Birds were even built or were in diapers.

Sadly virtually none of the early Liaison aircraft survived, not a single of the original Piper O-59s that were built is in existence and only one YO-58 still remains and it belongs to Gene Oshrin.

OY-SemperFi · **Joined:** Wed Oct 12, 2011 10:50 pm **Posts:** 6

Wow- Your O-58 is absolutely gonna be stunning! Colors and "sheen" just look fantastic. I cannot wait to see it in person!!

Taylor queried me this morning and I was out flying- my response to him was posted; I hope this is an addition to your thread and not a distraction...We "grasshopper" types gotta stick together :-)

Otherwise I truly do apologize for the "thread creep".

I will add a little to the mystery- I was fortunate to be invited to "help out" at Garber when the Serial # 1 O-62 (as first block L5's were known) was still unrestored- being torn town etc. I supplied to NASM the first digitized microfilm prints and a number of parts for that restoration. #1 had been been last used at Barksdale AFB and given to NASM in 45 (ish) It had been well used and was pretty rough. It had been painted and patched, even had the "primary instrument" yellow box on the panel- (like a P51) so it had been "monkeyed" with during the war and was far from a "factory original" example. It DID have a Barksdale recover doping code in the same spot as depicted in your examples- in yellow dope. We have a bunch of hi-res photos (100's) from that angle of operational and new planes- no code...As I alluded to in my response to Taylor, it doesn't look like Stinson used them on the L-5. However: ALL of us doing this seriously know better than to say something was "NEVER done" during WWII!! I am working on a late WWII original paint USN OY-1E1 ambulance that has the original War Bonds decals (which I was able to save along with the type written school names- The navy painted it in July 45 Sea Blue just sloppy sprayed over the OD... as the paint chipped of the screws...they brushed on flat black to hide them; it looks horrible... but its real. I LOVE this stuff!
Congrats on your O58. I'm planning to do an O-62 next.
Merry Christmas to all-
Duncan Cameron

L-4Pilot · **Joined:** Tue Jan 18, 2011 10:35 pm **Posts:** 616

Duncan, Than k you for your kind remarks concerning our O-58A. I really enjoyed your comments, no worry of thread creep, an excellent discussion.

Steve

Warbird Information Exchange

Restoration Progress on O-58A 42-7796

Who is online