|
Post by alanw on Sept 7, 2018 22:12:05 GMT 12
Hi All,
I'm going to participate in a Group Build (another Forum) and was hoping to do an RNZAF P 40K in the RNZAF Pacific Scheme
Question I have is, when 14 Squadron moved to Torokina/Bouganville would they have taken their P40K's with them?
I know they had the newer P40N's there.
Thanks
Alan
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Sept 7, 2018 22:48:55 GMT 12
All our remaining P-40Ks were withdrawn from the frontline prior to the RNZAF Fighter Wing moving forward to Torokina in January 1944, and the P-40Ms were not too far behind them either. Sorry to rain on your parade, but them are the facts of the matter. I could provide more detailed notes if required. David D
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Sept 7, 2018 23:04:39 GMT 12
No. 14 Squadron did not have P-40's in the Pacific, they flew aircraft that belonged to the Servicing Units. The Servicing Units at Torokina were No.'s 2 and 4 Servicing Units.
No. 4 SU only had P-40N's at Torokina,and it was February 1944 when No. 14 Squadron got to that island. Looking at logbook entries for pilots who wre on that tour they seem to have been flying only P-40N's of No. 2 SU.
|
|
|
Post by alanw on Sept 7, 2018 23:13:56 GMT 12
All our remaining P-40Ks were withdrawn from the frontline prior to the RNZAF Fighter Wing moving forward to Torokina in January 1944, and the P-40Ms were not too far behind them either. Sorry to rain on your parade, but them are the facts of the matter. I could provide more detailed notes if required. David D Hi David, I had been wanting to build a K in the Pacific Scheme for a while now I had a gut feeling that the K's didn't go to Torokina, and thank you for clarifying that for me (no problem with the rain on the parade ) I'll just go with a an N Model, and build the K another time. There are plenty of photo's in the P40 Pile to pick a suitable subject. Thanks again for your invaluable knowledge and help. Regards Alan
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Sept 7, 2018 23:19:27 GMT 12
David beat me to it while I was consulting sources. Sounds like you need a P-40N kit?
|
|
|
Post by alanw on Sept 7, 2018 23:27:39 GMT 12
No. 14 Squadron did not have P-40's in the Pacific, they flew aircraft that belonged to the Servicing Units. The Servicing Units at Torokina were No.'s 2 and 4 Servicing Units. No. 4 SU only had P-40N's at Torokina,and it was February 1944 when No. 14 Squadron got to that island. Looking at logbook entries for pilots who wre on that tour they seem to have been flying only P-40N's of No. 2 SU. Hi Dave, I knew that about the SU's - Should have re-phrased that did, 14 Squadron fly K;s from Torokina. Sometimes you just forget when typing (how embarrassing ) Thanks for the information on the N's with 4 SU and the 2 SU log book information. As I said to David D, I'll go with a N and there are a good number of N photos in the P40 Pile Thanks again Regards Alan PS will post the build in the modelling section
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Sept 8, 2018 0:06:07 GMT 12
Is it specifically one operated by No. 14 Squadron that you were interested in? I can suggest some serials from logbooks.
|
|
|
Post by alanw on Sept 8, 2018 8:47:00 GMT 12
Is it specifically one operated by No. 14 Squadron that you were interested in? I can suggest some serials from logbooks. Hi Dave, It doesn't necessarily have to be 14 Squadron flown P40N, but If you have some serials from log books, that would be great! Sort of personalizes your model build if you have some sort of history to go with it Thank you Regards Alan
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Sept 8, 2018 10:32:58 GMT 12
OK, well flown by No. 14 Squadron's CO Stan Quill from Torokina between 12 Feb 1944 and 26 March 1944 were: (I have added in the 2SU chin code numbers where known) NZ3152 - 61 NZ3190 - 67 NZ3193 - 82 NZ3158 - NZ3208 - NZ3202 - 78 NZ3168 - 15 NZ3206 - NZ3214 - NZ3170 - NZ3199 - 69 NZ3177 - A (with 4SU!)
|
|
|
Post by alanw on Sept 8, 2018 11:00:28 GMT 12
Hi Dave,
Thank you so much for those Serials, and the Chin numbers also!!!
Quick question (going on memory here) didn't Stan Quill fly NZ3008 (Umslopogass), earlier on back in New Zealand?
Thanks again
Regards
Alan
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Sept 8, 2018 11:49:26 GMT 12
Alan (and other interested bods)
Following is a list of P-40Ks at Kukum strip (Fighter 2, also known as Fighter II), at Guadalcanal, 1943. As will be quickly observed, much of this "information" is speculative, but it is the best that I can do at this stage, and it is likely that all the code/serial number relationships will never by known for certain. The following data is in order of the known code numbers painted on both sides of the radiator cowlings, and were normally applied in black paint, although by the time they arrived at Ondonga (New Georgia) in late October 1943, the colour of these numbers had changed over to white, probably for better readability. Incidentally these code numbers were intended to be used for rapid identification of individual aircraft at any distance, and were therefore applied in somewhat larger characters than the aircraft's individual serial number which was applied on rear fuselage, below the tailplane. In other words, the code numbers were simply a convenient tactical device, and in all other matters the aircraft were identified by their unique aerial number. Of course there were several Servicing Units located overseas, and each had their own systems of tactical numbers: 1 SU had progressive numbers (which were NOT re-issued should that aircraft be lost), and these aircraft were handed over to 2 SU in October 1943 when the personnel of 1 SU (at Guadalcanal) changed places with those of 2 SU, previously located at Espiritu Santo. The 2 SU aircraft also used numeric codes (like 1 SU) but should any of their aircraft be lost, its number was painted on the replacement aircraft. No. 4 SU also arrived at Guadalcanal in October 1943, fresh from NZ, and they decided to use letters rather than numbers. Should any of their aircraft be w/o or otherwise lost, their replacements likewise assumed the same letter.
In the following list, each entry commences with the "code" or "tactical" number applied to the radiator cowlings. This is followed by the actual (or speculative) unique aircraft serial number, and any other brief notes on the aircraft's history. It is not known why a few of the P-40Ks arrived so late on the scene; they may have been held back at Espiritu Santo as reserves, with P-40Ms being issued in preference to the older type.
1 (probably 3045), last on ops July 43, with 14 Sqdn, returned to Espiritu Santo.
2 (probably 3046), last on ops 23/7/43, rtd to E/Santo.
3 (NZ3049), lost on operations 1/7/43 (14 Sqdn).
4 (NZ3050), lost on ops 1/5/43 (15 Sqdn).
5 (probably 3052), badly shot up 4/7/43, Nairn of 14 Sqdn, then on ops again 18 - 22/7/43, then rtd to E/Santo.
6 (probably 3055), flown by 15 Sqdn, but never flown by 14 Sqdn, unless it wa the aircraft crash landed at the Russells 26/6/43.
7 (NZ3056), damaged 16/6/43 (Gifford), on ops again by 22/7/43, then presumed rtd to E/Santo.
8 (probably 3058), damaged in accident on Russells strip 22/9/43.
9 (probably 3060), damaged 19/7/43 (Sgt Ferrier), whilst on test flight, presumed later rtd to E/Santo.
10 (probably 3061), last on ops 23/7/43, then rtd to E/Santo.
11 (probably 3062), flown till 12/8/43, then on ops again 17, 18/9/43, presume then rtd to E/Santo.
12 (probably 3063), flown up till late May 1943, never flown by 14 Sqdn, presume rtd to E/Santo.
13 (code apparently never used at Guadalcanal)
Aircraft codes 14 to 20 (all P-40Ms, respectively 3066, 3068, 3069, 3070, 3071, 3072, 3078).
21 (probably 3057), damaged on ops 4/7/43 (14 Sqdn), after repair rtd to E/Santo.
22 (possibly a P-40M, but no further speculation as to which one! This a/c was on ops as early as 30/4/43, and remained in service on ops till damaged in a crash landing on 22/10/43).
23 (NZ3059), on operations until 21/7/43, presume then rtd to E/Santo.
24 (P-40M NZ3075, on ops from 7/5/43, finally lost on ops 12/9/43, S.L P G H Newton.)
25 (Thought to have been a P-40K, although P-40M NZ3080 possibly implicated with this nose code; damaged on ops 13/5/43 with 15 Sqdn, presume later rtd to E/Santo. First of the replacement aircraft to arrive.
26 (believed to be P-40M NZ3077, on ops from 30/6/43.)
27 (NZ3053, on ops from 30/6/43, lost on ops 30/6/43 (Avery, 14 Sqdn).
28 (NZ3064), on ops from 30/6/43, last on ops 22/7/43, presume rtd to E/Santo).
29 (NZ3065, last of the original P-40Ks), on ops from 30/6/43, damaged on ops 4/7/43 (Quill, 14 Sqdn), repaired, back on ops August, Sept 1943, lost on ops 18/10/43 (F/L L R Renolds, 14 Sqdn, at E/Santo).
Aircraft codes 30 to 47 all P-40Ms.
Aircraft codes 48 to 97 all P-40Ns, including subtypes -1, -5, -15, -20. The P-40N-25-CUs received were never ferried to the operational area, and were retained in NZ at OTUs.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Sept 8, 2018 12:14:07 GMT 12
Dave H, That number code "15" does not sit well in your list - I thought it may have been "51", but apparently not. Several of the P-40Ns with serials in the NZ3150s and 3160s had code numbers like 49 (3155), 50 (3154), 51 (3157), 52 (u/k), 53 (3166), 54 (3150?), 55 (3151), 56 (3156, now there's a coincidence!), 57 (u/k), 58 (3172?), and 59 (3169), 60 (3165), and 61 (3152). David D
|
|
|
Post by alanw on Sept 8, 2018 12:59:53 GMT 12
David, WOW!! Thank you ever so much!!! Interestingly after my initial post above, I found out that the Group Build also includes the Solomon's, so the P40K is back on. I will also do a P40N with what Dave H has supplied above. My main interest in the K's is No 9 on your list NZ3060, reason being these comments on Pete Mossong's site (lower part of page) rnzaf.hobbyvista.com/gf.htmlI know the colour profile is wrong, given your previous comments on the RNZAF Pacific Scheme (Dark Earth should be NZ Sea Blue Grey) the Green probably can suffice for NZ Pacific Green. Interestingly, just yesterday a gent from the US posted this WWII Diary drawing on Britmodeller - The Diary notes/annotations lead me to conclude the drawing was of a RNZAF P40K in the RNZAF Pacific Scheme. thisdamnnavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Nolan-NZ-P-40.jpgThanks again for your much appreciated help! Regards Alan
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Sept 8, 2018 13:14:11 GMT 12
A plausible explanation for NZ3168 having the code number "15" could be that it was one of the P-40Ns on strength of 1 SU at Pallikulo field (Espiritu Santo) from October 1943 onwards (and was moved forward to Kukum, Guadalcanal in January 1944), which, as hinted at in previous post, used recurring numeric codes on their radiator cowls, never seemed to get much above about the number 20. Very few of these 1 SU serial/code relationships are known to me (and I think this would be a fairly general problem in the enthusiast community). Also there were cases (as Dave H points out) of occasional "loaning" of the aircraft of 1 SU to another SU on same field, rare, and usually of very short duration, but not unheard of. Dave D
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Sept 8, 2018 13:36:54 GMT 12
I frequently notice that there is a certain amount of less than accurate information floating about on web sites (and in books - this is not merely an internet problem!) One of these erroneous beliefs is that RNZAF P-40s flew from Henderson Field (otherwise known as Bomber 1) on Guadalcanal, but this is so wrong. Now I am certain that our P-40s OCCASIONALLY had to land on Henderson for various reasons, including emergencies, but 99.9% of the time they were firmly ensconced at Kukum (Fighter II, or Fighter 2) which was within a mile or two of Henderson, just to the west of it, on the coast. Also the type of paint known as "Pacific green" is unknown to me, but I presume this is seen as the partner in crime of the infamous "Pacific blue". However my impression is that this general scheme was introduced by merely over-painting the dark earth colour on such aircraft as Hudsons and P-40E Kittyhawks (in fact this was how it was introduced by ADO action in late March 1943), but the case of the P-40Ks was somewhat different in that they were presumably received in NZ in the standard USAAF general scheme of dark olive drab on all upper and side surfaces, and neutral gray (American spelling) on lower surfaces. I have always imagined that when applying the new blue/grey paint to these aircraft, they simply added this colour in the appropriate pattern to give the desired camouflage effect, and left the existing olive drab in situ as the "Green" component. It is also presumed that the existing under-surface colour was also completely repainted in a new colour, although the exact shade of this is wide open to speculation. The famous photo of the partially stripped P-40 on this web site some months ago (6 months to a year?) has convinced me that this was probably a locally applied paint which had suffered an embarrassing adherence failure in the tropical conditions - this certainly happened to a lot of our Hudsons too, judging be the complaints received on the subject during 1943. A lot of the story of what our aircraft actually looked like (using what the modelling fraternity thinks on subject as a starting point, then trying to locate actual documentary evidence for these beliefs); sometimes these beliefs seem to hold up, other times, not so well. But we have to keep trying, and sifting and hunting for verifiable facts, or at least strong-ish hints. David D
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Sept 8, 2018 14:42:06 GMT 12
You may be right David, I got the '15' code from adf.serials but that site does have a few errors so maybe NZ3068 was not '15'.
|
|
|
Post by alanw on Sept 8, 2018 23:09:18 GMT 12
Hi David, Thank you again for your reply. Just when I thought I had a handle on the RNZAF Pacific Scheme I certainly, on this path of discovery am aware of Myths and Erroneous information both in books and Websites/forums I certainly recall one of the urban myths in RNZAF circles, was that RNZAF Corsairs did not have folding wings - We know different now My following comments are not meant to be disparaging or throwing people under the bus so to speak in any shape or form, but have helped me form an opinion on the Pacific Scheme (rightly or wrongly). I used the term Pacific Green (rightly or wrongly) from the following Profile I received from Nathan at the Museum - I assumed it was correct? drive.google.com/file/d/1IfCwqR1QauiZup6u_LtaO5SZ6p4wkYtg/view?usp=sharingThe other, is this photo from the RNZAF Museum;s restoration of the P40, and this paint scheme which I imagined (rightly or wrongly) as being the Pacific Scheme (I am aware it's a restoration) www.warbirdsonline.com.au/warbirds/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/P-40F-1-CU-Serial-Number-41-14205-being-restored-as-P40E-NZ2034-at-Ardmore-RNZAF-Museum-NZ.jpgCharles Darby as you are probably aware has this profile in his book "First Decade" drive.google.com/file/d/0B3Yff6LKWML1Mk1JTTItaHhzQzg/view?usp=sharingI recall/noted Pete Mossong making mention that the initial batch of P 40K's arrived in RAF Camouflage (never challenged this)and again I took him at his word. Now As I read your comments on the P40K in the USAAF Olive Drab and Neutral Grey scheme and painting on the NZ Sea Blue Grey, you certainly got my attention and intrigued me (but it was a light bulb moment and made sense). I have for a time had a personal premise, that The RNZAF Pacific Scheme was a NZ equivalent/copy of the then RAF Day Fighter Scheme, Dark Green/Ocean Grey/Medium Sea Grey. To me the Use of NZ Sea Blue Grey was a fit for purpose operational choice, a Dark Grey over the Deep Blue of the Pacific, would stood out like the proverbial sore thumb. A paint choice for Medium Sea Grey is a little more difficult, also given that later P 40's M/N's wore a lower colour of Neutral Grey As you mention in the P40E post, and the painting of NZ3035 (HQ-O) with NZ Sea Blue Grey over the Dark Earth, I note that there is no scalloping of the edging between upper/lower colour, so to me the DuPont Sky Type S remained. As you mentioned above, the Hudson's also had the Dark Earth over-painted, and I am assuming again the lower colour (most likely a Sky/Duck Egg Blue) probably left as is? Given that the Freshish Olive Drab with Fresh NZ Sea Blue Grey, had a lower colour "Scalloped" I ask the question what would that be? 1) Could the lower colour be Sky Type S/NZ Sky (as used on aircraft codes)? 2) NZ Sky Grey - given it was 1943, when did this paint make an "Official" appearance? Sorry for the long narrative (hope it makes sense), but I really enjoy this type of research/discussion. I look forward to any additional information you might have on this? Thanks/regards Alan
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Sept 9, 2018 11:59:53 GMT 12
Alan, You throw up all the reasons why coming to definitive answers in relation to what actual paints were employed on RNZAF aircraft during the WW2 era is a very difficult area. We know the NAMES of many of the paints but not necessarily the actual colour shade. We also know certain things about the introduction of the new Sea Blur Grey colour in March 1943 and what it was intended for, although there is no mention of a corresponding green shade for use with the blue grey colour at this time, nor later. Much of what has been written on this subject over the last 50 or more years has been put to paper with the best of intentions, but errors and misconceptions have inevitably crept in. Very few official colour schemes were ever compiled for RNZAF aircraft during WW2, often a note to overpaint the existing "brown colour" for instance, or a crude sketch of a new roundel, or fin flash, with dimensions if you were lucky, and another was prepared on the design of the white tail area of P-40s, although this was either ignored in some cases, or alternatively somebody in the forward area redesigned it to a simpler form. Even the staff officers in Wellington only learned of developments in the forward area by word of mouth or brief mentions in rather brief reports, and I really don't think they were that interested anyway, as the theatre commander had general jurisdiction over operational markings, etc. Much seemed to depend on the interpretation of such official orders as were issued, and the exact choice of paint colour (or even any particular specification) was rarely mentioned. And remember that there is no actual evidence that the P-40Ks were painted as I have suggested, this is my own theory formulated after consideration of all known (or at least self-evident) facts that I am aware of, and these are mighty scarce on the ground I can tell you. Recollections of people involved in these decisions (or merely carrying out orders) are often interesting, but actual written orders or even mentions of aircraft repainting in unit histories is almost unheard of. One of the reasons I have postulated that the P-40Ks were painted as I have suggested is that one colour seems to have been very matt, while the other has a degree of gloss, which I think is a bit unusual. This observation is based on several photographs of some of these aircraft taken in bright sunlight in NZ and on Norfolk Island, when the paint would have been only a matter of weeks, if not days old. Also the fact that the "scalloping" of the undersurface colour into the other side/upper surface colours to me indicates that it was more than likely painted on AFTER the upper surface coats were applied, although you would think they would have done it the other way round. This scalloping is highly unusual for any P-40, and certainly does not seem to be a factory job. My guess is that after repainting all 21 of these aircraft (presuming they all got the treatment), they resolved to not bother on future aircraft (P-40Ms and Ns) as this scheme was rather unusual to the eye, and it did not wish to have American personnel jumping to the conclusion that anything unusual was to be regarded as the enemy. New Zealand already had experience of American jumpiness with regard to unfamiliar colours, with the Union Airways incident at Rongotai in May 1942 (no hits, caused by A/A gunner or ship seeing the colour red), and one of our Empire boats being fired on by F4Fs as it approached Hawaii in early 1942. We continued to suffer further indignities during 1943 (15 Sqdn Kittyhawk incident in May, serious damage), and Ventura incident in mid year on delivery flight, plus another Ventura incident in November 1943 (hits in wing), and the actual loss of a P-40 in November 1943 (shot up by Corsair, then a destroyer, then pilot in fear of being machine gunned in sea by a trigger happy sailor in recue craft!) The Australians had one of their Catalinas shot down in early 1942 (mistaken for a 4-engined Mavis). You may also have noticed that I seldom, if ever, proffer any opinions on the actual colours used on undersurfaces of RNZAF aircraft. This is because we all think we know the factory colours applied to Lend-Lease aircraft (although that seems to be an ongoing story), and then we have the problem of how our official undersurface colours match up to RAF and Australian ideas on this subject. Even guessing the colours used for the large code letter groups used on RNZAF aircraft seems to me to be a perilous subject. However whether the RNZAF was much worse than other major air forces in their attitudes to colours, and the orders issued to their own aircraft painters were in any way better than ours, I am yet to be convinced. They (USA) certainly seemed to exert tight control on most of their factories in this regard, but once aircraft arrived on distant shores or at active battlefronts, things probably got a lot murkier. I am hoping you can now see where I am coming from, and why I refuse to arbitrate on certain questions of colour, application, etc. Generally speaking all I give are suggestions, supposition, and wild theories, which may or may not be close to the mark. Also it can be a mistake to assume that each type of aircraft had a series of "standard" schemes, and even if they did, you will always find exceptions, but I believe that most modellers would already be well aware of this. For instance, the overpainting of the dark earth colour on KIttyhawks and Hudsons was intended as a general order, but not all such aircraft were so treated, whether because the local engineer officer just never got around to actioning these orders, or asked to be exempted because of pressure of other work and distance from front line. Very many years ago (late 1970s?), I personally inspected the remains of a Hudson (NZ2080) at Lyndhurst, still in its original factory scheme, with not a sign of any blue grey paint in sight. However another one I saw at Wigram (many years later, but not 2013) DID have much evidence of the new colour applied.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Sept 9, 2018 13:55:31 GMT 12
To throw another angle in here, in the past there has been a discussion on the forum where it's suggested that the "well known" colour of P-40M NZ3072 as being overall olive drab with neutral grey undersides might not be the case because Pete Mossong found some good quality photos where it looked like - but we're not certain - that it in fact had camouflage. I think everyone was thinking factory applied green-brown camouflage - looking like NZ3009 looked when she flew in NZ3072's markings, but in fact could it be that the aircraft went to the Pacific in factory applied olive drab, but later the orders caught up with it and the NZ Pacific Blue camouflage was added over the OD scheme?
|
|
|
Post by alanw on Sept 9, 2018 14:12:30 GMT 12
Hi David, Thank you again for your comprehensive reply, and my utmost apologies if I have proffered any offense or similar, if I have taken any comments out of context or assumed anything wrongly. I have a friend in the UK who has done a lot of research on US Colours on US Aircraft used by the RAF/Commonwealth forces, his go to word is "Suggests" for anything we cannot offer cold hard evidence or shreds thereof With respect to your comments on the K and the Olive Drab scenario, I more or less arrived at the same/similar conclusion to you, looking at the photos of the K's on Norfolk (that happened after reading your previous comments) with the NZ Sea Blue Grey appearing Darker/Fresher I know it is a suggestion on your part, but I have struggled with the scalloping effect, in that if the K's did arrive in the same colours a the E-1's the lower colour didn't come up that far, so some thing didn't fit?? With the undersides and scalloping, again I agree it was/appears a cackhanded way to do things but we're Kiwi's that's what we do right I certainly understand the issues of wartime compliance/lack thereof to any orders for change of paint colours and so forth. I also understand the whole drawings thing - Nathan at the Museum sent me some information on the Mk III Sunderland Roundels, and they were drawings like you mention, but they obviously did the job My question on the introduction of the NZ Sky Gray, is more to do with giving me a time frame (if possible) of Official (or otherwise) issue. If after the departure of the K's to the forward area, then I can effectively rule that out, and have to consider what else could be used (who knows could be another gray paint) such as Sky or Duck Egg Blue (is that an actual RNZAF colour?) For what it's worth, please keep up the great work you are doing with researching our great Air Force. With the likes of you, Dave H and others, we have a far better understanding of the WWII RNZAF than previous. Thanks/regards Alan
|
|