Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Thu Apr 18, 2024 5:55 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Classic Wings Magazine WWII Naval Aviation Research Pacific Luftwaffe Resource Center
When Hollywood Ruled The Skies - Volumes 1 through 4 by Bruce Oriss


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 3:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 2:15 am
Posts: 738
Location: Misawa, Japan
Cvairwerks,

My father caught the tail end of WWII. He got out in '46 & I saw some of his paperwork from that time & some of it was still "Air Corps Form #???". I remember that because it struck me as odd. They were probably left over from before the change & used until the supply was exhausted & replaced with the USAAF forms?

He did another 2yr hitch with the AF & got out in '49. I don't remember anything about the paperwork from that time frame. I'm thinking that those forms were probably USAF forms, because they didn't stand out to me like the USAAC forms did.

Mac

_________________
WWII Naval Aviation Research - Pacific
https://www.ww2nar-pac.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 10:30 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:51 pm
Posts: 1185
Location: Chandler, AZ
While the name was changed to US Army Air Forces in 1939 with the GHQ reorganization, the Army Air Corps was not abolished, but soldiered on as an administrative organization until the middle/end of 1943.

Given the use of "Air Corps" in popular media (and it rolls off the tongue better anyway) the Air Corps having a hand in procurement for the Air Forces, "Corps" being in line organizationally and grammatically with 'Signal Corps", "Chemical Corps" et cetera, combined with doses of inertia, apathy, indecision and confusion it should come as no surprise to find "Air Corps" all over.

In collecting and using bits I have seen:
US Army Air Corps
US Air Corps
US Army Air Force
US Army Air Forces
US Air Forces (which is always a fun one)
not to mention commercial goods overstamped with US Property marks.

I don't think anyone at the time cared much as long as whatever it was was of acceptable quality and quantity.

Now, the USAF WAS a stickler for it starting with new contracts in 1947, but they also changed teh contract number format as well

_________________
Lest Hero-worship raise it's head and cloud our vision, remember that World War II was fought and won by the same sort of twenty-something punks we wouldn't let our daughters date.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 4:46 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 2:02 am
Posts: 4613
Location: Yucca Valley, CA
Duggy009 wrote:
Image
A tankman of the 55th Royal Armoured Corps in the nose gun position of a B-17 Flying Fortress nicknamed "Martha the II" of the 381st Bomb Group during a visit to Ridgewell, 1 September 1943.

Dave Osborne has this IDed as 42-29761:
Dave Osborne wrote:
42-29761 Del Denver 15/2/43; Walker 27/2/43; Salina 10/3/43; Presque Is 8/4/43; Ass 338BS/96BG Grafton Underwood 17/4/43 RUTH L II (re-named LUCKY LADY); tran 533BS/381BG [VP-W] Ridgewell 14/7/43; MIA {28m} Brunswick 30/1/44 w/Henry Steele, cp-Jim Settle, n-Bob Anderson, b-Leopold Flores, ettg-Perry Beach, tg-Paul Welch (6POW); ro-Wilbert Eason, btg-Harry Lee, wg-Harry Holtz, wg-Pete Hlynsky (4KIA); flak & e/a, c/l between Bakel & Deurne, Hol. MACR 2244. MARTHA II.

"Ruth L II" appears to be what's painted over above the seven mission symbols.

_________________
Image
All right, Mister Dorfmann, start pullin'!
Pilot: "Flap switch works hard in down position."
Mechanic: "Flap switch checked OK. Pilot needs more P.T." - Flight report, TB-17G 42-102875 (Hobbs AAF)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 1:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 11:44 pm
Posts: 238
JohnB wrote:
But why wasn't a change made? It seems simple enough.

I'm guessing it's one of my hypothesis...:)

Most likely (1) leaving it as-is didn't change a single thing as far as effectiveness and (2) nobody thought to go back and change it. I'd bet that those cushions made after 1941 after the name change to USAAF were properly marked at time of manufacture.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 7:43 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:51 pm
Posts: 1185
Location: Chandler, AZ
junkman9096 wrote:
JohnB wrote:
But why wasn't a change made? It seems simple enough.

I'm guessing it's one of my hypothesis...:)

Most likely (1) leaving it as-is didn't change a single thing as far as effectiveness and (2) nobody thought to go back and change it. I'd bet that those cushions made after 1941 after the name change to USAAF were properly marked at time of manufacture.



Add (3) no one is willing to call in a government inspector to make or verify any changes in an existing contract without it being absolutely necessary. If the current product is being accepted, leave it alone

_________________
Lest Hero-worship raise it's head and cloud our vision, remember that World War II was fought and won by the same sort of twenty-something punks we wouldn't let our daughters date.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Warbird Kid and 92 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group