A mystery Corsair

[komata]

Dave

Thanks for your reply and for the additional questions:

FWIW, my father was at RNZAF Rukuhia when the aircraft came back from the islands', demobbing in late 1946. In 1947 he was in Britain.

It appears that the 'rifle-butt' treatment meted out to these machines was intended to leave the 'important machinery' (the 'moving bits' such as engines etc.) intact, but to make sure that the aircraft couldn't be started from inside the cockpit by 'unauthorised personnel'. With large numbers of potentially-dangerous aircraft literally 'lying around', this was presumably considered to be a reasonable action by 'those in charge'. Presumably too, if the aircraft were to be returned to service, replacing instrument panels would have been a 'relatively' easy matter.

[Dave Homewood]

Perhaps that is what the team was doing from 1946-1948, fixing the panels?

[scrooge]

strange, because simply removing the fuel and/or battery would make the aircraft impotent, reuseable and both of those items would have had value at the time.

[davidd]

The majority of the American combat aircraft at Rukuhia (plus 12 PV-1s at Ohakea, and the 22 SBDs at Hobsonville) were advertised for sale in later November 1947 and the vast majority were sold to Larsen as mentioned above, in March 1948. Thre were some aircraft at Rukuhia and other places that were specifically excluded from sale; these were the designated "reserve aircraft", and included examples of practically all types, including (briefly) four PV-1 Venturas at Rukuhia which were back-up for the 12 in service at Ohakea with 2 Squadron. However the 2 Sqdn aircraft were hustled out of service in June 1946, and the need for "stored reserve" PV-1s ceased at this point. A few F4U-1Ds and quite a few FG-1Ds were designated as "stored reserves" as well for a period, to act as back up for "the Japan commitment" (who had actually taken 6 reserves with them to Japan anyway), and the CFE establishment at Ardmore (soon moved to Ohakea). However these Corsair commitments ceased in about late 1947. Incidentally the reason that most of these aircraft were sold for scrap was not primarily lack of money as such, but more like a lack of any perceived operational requirement to maintain even a modest standing strike force. Admittedly the outlook at the time was {apparently) not particularly threatening, and everybody was hoping for the "Peace" dividend. The incumbent Government (at this time Labour, under Fraser) could see no real need to maintain a Ventura squadron for instance, and figured that a small number of Catalinas and Hudsons could handle any needs in the immediate future (although probably mostly for the ASR obligation to ICAO). However the biggest problem insofar as the Ruukuhia aircraft were concerned was that they were all American! Professed Government policy (National AND Labour) was to re-equip with entirely British aircraft when came the time, but this process was considered to be a few years down the track, as the Government had "other priorities" in the short term, and believed they had several years before this particular expenditure bullet had to be bitten. However they were probably a little bit optimistic on this estimate, and in the short term it resulted in poor morale throughout all the NZ armed services. In the event, even after new aircraft were ordered in 1950, it took several years to receive all of these, as the RAF was all through this period (basically late 1940s and most of the 1950s) desparately re-equipping with modern aircraft (some of which had to be funded by the American taxpayer, as Britain was economically on the ropes and quite groggy), and British industry was also trying to meet export orders from foreign customers - "Export or Die") - the RNZAF found itself at the end of a very long queue.
David D

[Dave Homewood]

OK, so Derm and his team were maintaining SOME of the aircraft at Rukuhia then, not all. This makes a lot more sense then I guess. Thanks David.

[komata]

As an indication perhaps, of the less than pristine condition of the aircraft concerned, I recall reading (though not sure where) that the 14 SQN aircraft that went to Japan were 'The best that were available at Rukuhia'. The implication of that statement seemed to be that they were not exactly 'factory fresh'. Given that these machines had only been at Rukuhia for a few months, the comment perhaps says a lot about the prevailing conditions under which they were 'stored'.

Just a thought...

[Dave Homewood]

Don't forget that they had all come down from the Pacific where they had been accepted, assembled and used. None of the RNZAF Corsairs by 1946 were 'factory fresh'.

[baz62]

They weren't repainted were they? Or rather they didn't have any major repaints, they painted out the "Bars" on the roundels I know that much, perhaps the roundels was modified too? So I presume they would have had a look at the servicing records (Form 700?) found the ones with the lowest "faults" and perhaps lowest hours and picked the ones that appealed.

[Dave Homewood]

Chris McDell just discovered this photo on the Hamilton Library Heritage page, which seems to be the same Corsair that this thread is about. In this the aircraft is sitting on a patch of lawn said to be in front of the Hamilton Railway Station (now long gone) and the building seen in the shot across the road was the Horse Bazaar on Ward Street, part of the Waikato Show complex of buildings.

[A4k]

G'day guys.

Was the identity of this Corsair ever settled?
I am making a diorama of this bird at Rotten row with one other Corsair to stbd (possibly F4U-1D NZ5537), and what I think is P-40K-15 NZ3060 or K-10 NZ3052 in front.

The Corsair at the start of this thread is (IMO) definitely FG-1D NZ5623 (sans- rocket stubs) during her ATC days. I agree with the comment made earlier that she had her roundels repainted.

I too am not 100% if she is our bird on the line - depends when the photo was taken. According to Warren P. Russell, NZ5623 was moved to the ATC Hamilton on 1.2.49, as INST127.

The rocket stubs of the rotten row bird suggest an FG-1D, which (assuming the 23 on the cowl is the end of her serial) would make her the same NZ5623, but the colour scheme does seem to match F4U-1 NZ5523 better, the patch of lighter colour under the cockpit possibly overpainting of the 'RK' codes.

Is it possible an F4U-1 serving with 17 and 14 Sqns would/could be retrofitted with rocket stubs, or should we assume she's an FG-1D?
(F4U-1Ds could be retrofitted with them, but according to NZDF-Serials she was an F4U-1, which I don't think could?)


Cheers,
Evan

[davidd]

To retrofit rocket-stubs on a Corsair, all the electrical wiring would require to be installed as well as all the buttons and what-not in the cockpit. Remember that the F4U-1s received by the RNZAf dated back to 1944, in fact mostly in the earlier months of that year) whereas the FG-1D'a dated to about mid-1945. Not certain when provision for air to ground rockets was introduced on producion lines.

[chrisr]

How sure are we that the aircraft is 23? The overexposure on the numbers could mean what we see as a 2 is actually a 3.

NZ5233 Lost in service
NZ5333 Lost in service
NZ5433 Advertised for sale by WARB tender number 1704 and sold from Rukuhia to J. Larsen, Palmerston North
NZ5533 Advertised for sale by WARB tender number 1704 and sold from Rukuhia to J. Larsen, Palmerston North on 02 March 1948.
NZ5633 Advertised for sale by WARB tender number 3381 dated 09 May 1949 and sold from Rukuhia to J. Asplin on 26 May 1949.

Is the aircraft then NZ5633?

[A4k]

It looks more like a '2' than a '3' to me.
The top left curve of the first number is slightly different to that of the 3, and there doesn't appear to be any sign of a lower '3' section (that I can see).
Looks more like a downward stroke to the left and bottom line like a 2. (Could just be my eyes of course :-) )


David, cheers mate. I have since read something about the rockets, will write here properly when I have that info to hand.