P-40N-1CU A29-448 and a Tale of two indentities

[buzz]

Ladies/Gents

After chatting with Dave H over this subject he suggested I start a thread on here about this. For those that know me, you know what my passion is. For those that don’t………Hello my name is Buz and I’m a P-40olic…..its been 2 hours 3 mins and 15 secs since my last batch of research into P-40’s and I’m an addict

Ok enough of that, so the question discussed was why the dual identities of A29-448?. Well we know she was built at Curtiss, had the Customer Sequence no. of 302, Construction number 28492 and the US Serial of 42-104730.

She was delivered by Curtis on the 8th May 1943, Invoiced and Accepted on the same day, handed to the US Army Air Force on the 13th May, where she was sent to New York for forwarding to “LYNN”.
She was placed on “Bill of Lading no. 83” and departed New York on 24th Jun 1943 being shipped to Australia. After arrival in Sydney she was sent to No.2 Aircraft Depot at Richmond, for erection and then flown up to the front and saw service with 75 SQN until she suffered a taxing accident. After repair at 11 RSU she was issued to 78SQN but before she had a chance for more operational flights she was damaged again. This time she was sent to 12 RSU where she was written off. All (or at least most) of the data above is known, but what isn’t widely know is how did she end up with the two serials.

When the airframe was recovered from Tadji, she had A29-448 hand painted on the left hand side in small characters and the right side she had the large number A29-1050 in black (stenciled on). It’s stated there was no indication that A29-1050 had been painted out nor that the serial A29-448 had been painted on the right, and that A29-1050 hadn’t been placed on the left side. Other aircraft recovered at the time had similar markings, such as A29-405/A29-1068, A29-528/A29-1134 and A29-556/A29-1172.

That’s enough for now, I’ll post more shortly, as we investigate the rumoured Frankenstein Hybrid machine or one idea other that’s been mentioned before but not so well know.

Buz

[30sqnatc]

Two serials! Sounds like a murky scheme by the supply officer to balance his books for a mislaid P-40

[shorty]

As we found it
Currawong Tadji1 by Neville Mines, on Flickr
Currawong Tadji 2 by Neville Mines, on Flickr

[buzz]

Part 2 – The Frankenstein Plane myth

So one of the ideas for the dual serials is that this aircraft became a hybrid of A29-448 and A29-1068, this is an interesting idea, but lets not look at A29-448 in isolation. Lets look at all 4 Aircraft found at the same time all with dual serials, to see if this can work for any of them.

A29-405/A29-1068
A29-448/A29-1050
A29-528/A29-1134
A29-556/A29-1172

A29-405 – This aircraft was a P-40N-1CU, was badly damaged when a F-5B lightning of a US Unit ran off the strip at Tadji and struck this aircraft. The aircraft was written off in line 1748 of “9/16 Part 2 Conversion of aircraft engines” (funnily enough A29-453, A29-405, A29-421, A29-448, A29-349 and A29-389 are all mentioned on the same line although all the others apart from A29-405 have been crossed through).

So was it a hybrid aircraft with parts from A29-1068?
Well no. A29-1068 was a P-40N-35 that arrived in Australia in Nov 1944. It was sent to 2 AD, then to 1 AD so it could be converted to a TACR aircraft. In the end the aircraft never left Australian shores and the furthest North it got was Oakey in Queensland where it was scrapped in 1946. A29-1068 is clearly shown on the list of aircraft at Oakey, by both its RAAF serial and by its USAAF serial.

A29-448 – As we known the history of this one I won’t bore you again, but Tadji is her final place of rest.

So was it a hybrid aircraft with parts from A29-1050?
Again the answer is no. A29-1050 was a P-40N-35, which arrived in the same convoy as A29-1068. This time she managed to get North to the front, however it doesn’t look like she got into action, going to 11 RSU Replacement pool and was last noted with 14 RSU Replacement pool, before being sent south again in Nov 1945, where she, like A29-1068 ended her days at Oakey and with the scrapman.

Next is A29-528
She was a P-40N-5CU, arrived in Sydney and shipped to 2 AD Sep 1943, she headed North to be held as a reserve aircraft, until she was issued to 78 Squadron. Aircraft force landed at Tadji on the 2nd May 1944 when her electrical system went out on an Operational flight. She was sent to 12 RSU for repairs, however the aircraft was written off in line 2095 of “9/16 Part 3 Conversion of aircraft engines”.

So was it a hybrid aircraft with parts from A29-1134?
Well once again the answer is no. A29-1134 was a P-40N-40CU that was delivered to 3 AD in Dec 1944. She went to the front, serving with 76 SQN as SV-S and was lost when she crashed into trees on a strafing run at Keningau Strip 27th Jun 1945. The place she was lost is a long way from Tadji being over near Brunei.

So far I think the Frankenstein plane myth is busted but just to make sure, lets look at the last one.

A29-556 - This aircraft was a P-40N-15CU, aircraft had service with 80 SQN, before it was hit by a landing aircraft whilst at Tadji 3rd Oct 1944. Aircraft was sent to 12 RSU and the aircraft was written off in line 2008 of “9/16 Part 3 Conversion of aircraft engines”.

So again a Hybrid with A29-1172?
Well for the fourth time no – A29-1172 was a P-40N-40 received at 2 AD in Jan 1945, she was allocated to 84 SQN , before being sent to 13 ARD, from there she went to 14 RSU replacement pool, before being flown to Oakey and her appointment with the scrapman.

As we can see the idea that A29-448 or in fact all the aircraft being shown with dual serials came about because of taking parts from a later aircraft is just that, an idea. When looking at the facts there is no way that the airframes actually ever crossed paths, let alone been damaged at the same time and place that would facilitate the RSU’s making a Hybrid aircraft.

So now what??? – well time to hit the files for you all and give what I believe is the answer that’s been lacking

Buz

[buzz]

Shorty

Thanks for the pictures, she such a lovely looking lady even half dressed (ok I think I may have a P-40 issue)

Buz

[buzz]

Part 3 – The Answer……..well maybe

Well I’ve got you this far, so lets see if we can answer the question.

Australia had been a major point of arrival for the SWPA for a great many aircraft, both for the RAAF and for the US forces. Up to the start of the P-40N’s Australia had seen many hundreds of P-40’s arrive, to head off to Java in early 1942, over to Tonga (and later the RNZAF), and finally up to New Guinea and the islands.

Starting with the P-40N’s, the documentation changed. All RAAF aircraft were coming from a British requisition (BSC 322). Earlier documentation showed an aircraft by USAAF serial, the location, CV number, Bill of Lading No. and the sailing. These aircraft were marked as a count, so an example Oct 1942 Allocation of 35 aircraft. Once the P-40N’s started there was a new column, this column had the title AUS Serial No. These numbers started at A29-1000 with 42-104634 which went on to become A29-420, these A29-1000’s serials continue in sequence of the aircraft allocated to Australia up to A29-1545 (actual RAAF P-40 serials went to A29-1221).

So if this is the case, lets look at A29-405, A29-448, A29-528 and A29-556, and see how they were marked coming into Australia………………………….

A29-448 - 42-104730 – Appears on the list of April allocation of airframes marked as A29-1050
A29-405 – 42-104818 - Appears on the list of May allocation of airframes marked as A29-1068
A29-528 - 42-105710 – Appears on the list of July allocation of airframes marked as A29-1134
A29-556 - 42-106101 – Appears on the list of August allocation of airframes marked as………………….well at this point if you guess A29-1172 you’d be getting my drift here.

Ok well I’m not going to say I’m 100% here but certainly of the 4 known airframes marked with dual serials we have a match…………I think if I was playing lotto instead of researching P-40’s I’d be sitting on a fortune based on these odds.

But ok…………….so have we seen pictorial proof of these large pre-marked serials on aircraft?...................... Well it seems to be something the hasn’t often been seen (see below on why). However at least one photo is known showing A29-142X as the last part of the serial isn’t visible. Based on the fact this serial is in large black stencilled markings (ala A29-1050 on 448), the aircraft is otherwise clean (no roundals), it’s a P-40N (late not N-1), no theatre markings and that RAAF serials for P-40’s finished at A29-1221, I think we have a winner. Based on the 142X serial it would make it 1 of 4 P-40N-35’s or 1 of the 6 N-40’s in that range.

So how was this missed?? How did this slip through to the keeper? ...................Well it didn’t we just misread the info and thought it meant something else. All the RAAF E/E.88 for the P-40N’s have (normally) the second line which reads “Renumbered RAAF” or “Renumbered RAAF no.” or “A/C Renumbered RAAF No”. Now why would you need to renumber something if it had no number??, no other previous E/E.88 card reads that way (E/E-1/K and M models) yet they all needed a RAAF serial………….the only ones that don’t have this line are the airframes that the RAAF borrowed off the Dutch Air Force……as such they didn’t need to be renumbered.

Ok so I got you over the line, however still doesn’t answer why 448 has two serials………..well I think that’s the easy bit. I believe over time and due to the environment the paint has been stripped off, showing the serials on one side and not the other. I cannot fathom how the aircraft (remember almost all P-40N's had these numbers marked on them), managed to evade someone taking a photo of them with these large numbers on them (I have around 300 photos of P-40N’s of the RAAF and none have the A29-1000 type serial showing in Squandron usage, although some do show what could be the painting over of the serial - and I have in some cases both sides of the same aircraft in photos).

Shorty may be able to help with which side A29-448 was lying when she was found. What is interesting is the other aircraft had numbers showing in different places. A29-528 had her large black numbers showing on both sides, A29-405 small serial (not the A29-1068) was on the right rear vice the left on 448, and I have no idea where A29-556 was marked. Would be interesting to assess the actual positions of these aircraft before they were moved and photographed against the exposed numbers)

(all documentation is available, both on line and I have copies if required and I can post some on here if requested – I just didn’t as there’s pages and pages of stuff.)


References for this information:
RAAF File 9/16 Part 2 and Part 3 “Conversion of aircraft engines”
RAAF Form E/E.88 – Record card – Airplanes, aero engines, mechanical transport and Marine craft – For A29-400 to A29-1221 (with gaps as per serial gaps)
Document – C Darby on dual serials numbers found at Tadji circ.2002
RAAF File - 7/205/EQ PART 1 - Acquisition of Aircraft for the RAAF - 1943 Case - 200 Pt.1
RAAF File - 7/205/EQ PART 2 - - Acquisition of Aircraft for the RAAF - 1943 Case - 200 Pt.2
RAAF File - 6/205/EQ PART 2 - Acquisition of aircraft 1943 Case 126 Part 2.
Curtiss P-40 List of holdings 6AD circ.1945/1946
Plus many many more…….plus the odd photo or 5

[buzz]

Anyhow I’ll leave this in your courts……….do we have an answer or not? - please post your thoughts below........I'm open to be challenged or to be incorrect here.

ok I best go take my meds……..try and get on top of this P-40 habit I have

Buz

[baz62]

I see you have a similar affliction to me, except mine isn't as exciting (Austers) Personally I think you have hit the nail on the head. You'd think they would allocate the actual A29 serial number straight off rather than driving us mad wondering why there are 2 serial numbers painted on them!
Good job Buz!

[Dave Homewood]

Buz is nowhere near as badly afflicted as you Baz.

Buz is a well known and respected historian of everything P-40, especially RAAF P-40's, and he knows his stuff. I think this theory is most likely correct. I have heard or read a very similar theory on the dual numbers before but I cannot recall who it was, Shorty was it you?

[mit]

I thought this was explored and explained the the book "the Whole Nine Yards" about the aircraft?

[buzz]

Jul 9, 2020 18:22:03 GMT 12 mit said:

I thought this was explored and explained the the book "the Whole Nine Yards" about the aircraft?

Yes but no. Page 63 mentions it, but to quote the book “the owners are still searching for an answer”. I did present the information at the time on the what I.e the aircraft being pre-marked. Also suggested strongly that they were painted over, and that environmental conditions and time had abraded the marking. Hence to mark her as a half and half aircraft was not accurate unlike the claim “has been painted accurately in its original 75 Squadron colours and includes the dual serials”. (Ok long bow but colours maybe accurate markings possibly not).

Also we didn’t explore all the aircraft only 448

Buz