B-29 S/N 42-65377 history needed - just brought her home.

APG85 · **Posted:** Sat Sep 04, 2010 8:29 pm

Aircraft "Tail Numbers" aren't typically stenciled or stamped on individual parts or structural components but Contract Numbers/Construction Numbers are...at least in my experience...

Quest Master · **Joined:** Fri Oct 06, 2006 2:42 pm **Posts:** 387

Ok, here is a picture of the data plate as furnished on a frame in the tail. I will post a close up of a better one later:

It states exactly:
AIRPLANE MOD. B-29
DWG. NOR PART NUMBER 3-14335-14
CONT NO. W33-038-AC-117
SER. NO. 377

Per T.O. No 00-25-30 dated 1 August 1945 (original - which I own), page 2, Model B-29 Contract Number AC-117 (stated above on the data plate) were assigned to AAF Serial Numbers 42-65202 through 42-65401. The S/N stamped on the data plate is 377, which falls under the S/N block of the stated contract as serial numbers 42-65377. It does not say sub-assembly or craft number on the nomenclature plate, it says serial number. Could this have been a serial number of JUST the tail - sure, but I have to believe it has something to do with the contract number since they are listed directly next to each other. Could parts have been interchanged at the factory....sure. BUT, this tail WAS built under contract AC-177, so it HAS TO BE within serial numbers 42-65202 through 42-65401. But...that is why I'm am throwing this up here on the WIX, because history, preservation and research is what we do!!! :supz:

This is the only section of the aircraft that remains (that we collectively know of), there is no vertical stabilizer to look up at to see a factory painted S/N stencil painted on the tail and there are no crew members around to ask. We as historians and preservers of the past have to crawl through countless books and chunks of metal to weed through the puzzle pieces of history that are left for us to figure it all out. If WWII was fought in a vacuum with a person taking perfect dictation - it would be easy.....but that isn't what causes us to pursue it.

Tell me your thoughts. I have only the tail section that remains to base my assessment from and the manuals and TMs/TOs to back it up. This is a known fact: the tail was last modified as a TB-29 based on the removal of the gun ball and the two target "chutes" added to the bottom. She was bare metal and later painted (at least partially) black. Her final years were spent as a ground target, indicated by the multiple holes that remain in hers sides from all angles and then she was cut up for scrap. Let's fill in the rest of the details.

And.....I have an entire second tail section to list and research....this was just the first one to be put out there. The second B-29 tail (not discussed in this thread) has the EXACT same plate mounted on the frame just inboard of the pressurized hatch - but it is made of phenolic material and does not have the same clear stampings. I will look at the other plate again tomorrow, but I will not add this to this discussion, but rather start a separate thread. Two different B-29s, two different threads.

What am I going to do with the two tail sections? The same thing I have done with all of the other stuff in the collection: research, preserve and present for the future. Everything is up on the website for the world to enjoy for free: aircraft, cannons, vehicles, uniforms - on and on: http://www.questmasters.us The B-29 tails are just the most recent additions. I want to accurately preserve and present them correctly.

Another notable detail on this tail that that is present: on her horizontal stabilizers (part of starboard one is still present) she had dark orange/red stripes painted. This orange/red paint is over her black paint. Several B-29s from China Lake had these orange/red stripes painted on their wings and horizontal stabilizers. This scheme was not done as a ground target, but rather for aerial recognitions while in service as a TB-29.

Keep the info coming - fire away!!

Edward Sheetmetalhands · **Joined:** Sat Oct 25, 2008 6:44 am **Posts:** 257

Probably what we need to do is prove this out; that the tail gunner's data plate matches the s/n of the aircraft. If anyone here has access to a complete B-29 and can crawl around back there with a flashlight to jot down the numbers... Especially a Martin Omaha B-29.

I imagine that some subcontractors would have no difficulty matching their s/n to the a/c, but this might vary due to four different B-29 plants in production. I would have no idea if there were four or more different subcontractors on the tail gunner's compartment. If we could get the information off of many different B-29's we might be able to see a correlation in the data between contractors, final assembly plants, and serial numbers.

Doc will be on display at the McConnell open house September 25th and 26th. It is normally locked up so this would be a good time to arrange or ask one of their volunteers to look into this. It is a Boeing Wichita built aircraft, though.

Doc also had the orange striping on the fuselage from the target tug days. With many of the airframes being painted either stateside or in combat with the black paint towards the end of WWII, the black paint in and of itself could have existed during the described crash, though the orange paint I am not sure of.

The section on ebay a year or two ago fortunately had the a/c s/n spray painted on the inside of it by someone with some foresight. It would be fun to get a few more threads going on these tailgunner's compartments, complete with photos of each and their dataplates. :idea:

Maybe their owners can post them. :mrgreen:

Another idea is for someone to comb through all of the China Lake B-29 photos that are on their historical website, to see if any characteristics of that tail section match one of those a/c. There were definitely some black B-29's there.

Cvairwerks · **Posted:** Sun Sep 05, 2010 5:59 am

A couple of things to keep in mind Van. An aircraft production contract will not only build a particular number of deliverable a/c's, but a quantity of spare components, training aides, mock-ups and so on. There can be and usually are numerous amendments to production cotracts that will make changes on virtually anything covered by the contract. It could have also called for follow on production of assemblies for a subsuquent production contract. Another possibility is that it could have been a repair order part or it could have even been a mod to an already delivered component.

As to s/n's, AC-117 would only specify the ship s/n as it's DD-250'd...it's title so to speak. Seqence numbers and manufacturer s/n's are just inhouse assigned and used for parts tracking. Parts, individually can be serialied for various reasons. Fatigue/fracture critical, vendor supplied, model specific, critical material and process, ect... Once the a/c is completed and the delivery s/n affixed to it, and the a/c is prepared for DD-250, all of the production part s/n's will be compiled into the delivery records and handed over to the customer. And until the a/c gets that dataplate, it's not gauranteed to be a particular s/n.

Don't forget that you could have subcontrators building parts as well as multiple production lines too. At one time we had 4 seperate locations building F-16's, with multiple locations building assemblies with compenents being delivered to the various assembly locations. It was possible to see identical assemblies ready for installation going into sequential a/c, but coming from different production lots and different subcontractors. Oh the glories of interchangability....

Just to add confusion, a major component can have multiple s/n's, depending on what p/n level you are looking at. In the case of on of the a/c I built, the aft fuselage was built out of two sections, each with their own s/n and there was no direct correlation. Once the entire aft was completed and ready for delivery, it got it's own unique s/n. It didn't get an a/c s/n until it was actually assembled to an a/c and installed on it. As the sections were completed, they were stenciled with an assigned a/c designation, but those coiuld be changed due to numerous reasons within the production needs of the factory. Once the a/c goes to final finish, they lost the stenciling.

Second Air Force · **Posted:** Sun Sep 05, 2010 8:27 am

TonyM wrote:

Just took a look at the USAAF Form No. 14 Aircraft Accident Report for this aircraft.
The report is substantial and includes numerous photos.
TonyM.

Van,

I suggest obtaining and studying these accident photos to see if the tail enclosure is visible. Anything we speculate on at this point might be substantially different if we know what condition the tail was in after the Pyote crash.

I am nearly certain that I have a document somewhere here at the house with the list of primary subcontractors for Martin B-29 production components. It'll take time, but I'll find it eventually.

A great mystery!
S

Quest Master · **Joined:** Fri Oct 06, 2006 2:42 pm **Posts:** 387

Ok, here is a close up of the data plate (don't worry....I'm going to put it back on). I removed it only to take this picture:

I agree that this tail COULD have ended up on a completely different A/C (we all followed the Ole'927 thread with the RY-3 nose). Pieces parts were intermixed - especially during the wartime years....and once warbirds hit the civilian market, oh boy what a mess. The B-29 did not have a civil role, so that is a good thing when it comes to these two tails. That is why I posted this thread up here. I understand contracts and spare parts, but this tail (and the other one) were definitely mounted on an A/C. Now I'm just trying to figure out which ones. A good part about these two tails is that they were modified as TB-29s which narrows it down a little. How far did they break down a B-29 to make it a TB-29....did they remove the entire tail assembly and could they have been intermixed during the mod? Hmmmm.

I have gone over the China Lake alumni page and looked through all of the detailed TB-29 photos. None seem to exactly match these two existing tails....but I know that not every A/C was photographed for posterity.

This is the other B-29 tail (this is the same one that was on ebay). I now own both of them. At some time someone spray painted the number 44-62208 on the inside of the tail. I do not know if that IS the real S/N. One of the fun little details about this stuff that I enjoy - on the second tail, someone carved the name "CHUCK" directly below the gun mounting bracket. Was that the gunner...the Rosie's boyfriend....a kid at China Lake adding a little graffiti?

I will start a separate thread for this B-29. This tail was also painted black at one time, although it was removed when the TB-29 conversion was done. This is indicated by black paint under and in between the tow target chutes on the bottom. The rest of the black paint is not present on the remainder of the tail - not worn away, but rather removed.

Fire Away! Fun fun fun stuff!!

PbyCat-Guy · **Posted:** Sun Sep 05, 2010 4:11 pm

So you're the one that outbid me for that! Glad to see it in someone hands that appreciates it. Interesting stuff.

Second Air Force · **Posted:** Mon Sep 06, 2010 10:27 am

Quest Master wrote:

Ok, here is a close up of the data plate (don't worry....I'm going to put it back on). I removed it only to take this picture:

It took me less time than I thought it would to find this material. :rolleyes:

This Martin Blueprint Book contains a chart with all of the subcontractors and what they contributed to the Omaha plant as of July 1944:

This is the table, noting that Hudson built the tail compartment. The drawing number is exactly the same as your data plate, so we can be sure it went through Omaha:

Thinking out loud now--isn't there a list of most (if not all) of the China Lake B-29s? If one were to ferret out all Martin airplanes that were known to be at China Lake perhaps another airplane in the general serial block might be discovered. My thinking is that the data plate on your section may have been stamped with the 377 but actually installed on a different machine during assembly. Just another possibility to consider.

Scott

TonyM · **Posted:** Mon Sep 06, 2010 11:01 am

How about this link:

http://www.aviationarchaeology.com/src/resources.htm

There are three people who can help you with this ID of the B-29:

Craig Fuller of AAIR

Nick Veronico

Robert Mann, author of B-29 airframe history book.

TonyM.

Edward Sheetmetalhands · **Joined:** Sat Oct 25, 2008 6:44 am **Posts:** 257

Excellent chart, Scott. Thanks for posting that!

Todd Hackbarth · **Posted:** Mon Sep 06, 2010 2:38 pm

Photos of the B-29s at China Lake during the 1950s can be found in the LIFE magazine photo archives at:
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q ... ource:life

Also see: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=34766

Todd

Quest Master · **Joined:** Fri Oct 06, 2006 2:42 pm **Posts:** 387

TonyM wrote:

How about this link:

http://www.aviationarchaeology.com/src/resources.htm

There are three people who can help you with this ID of the B-29:

Craig Fuller of AAIR

Nick Veronico

Robert Mann, author of B-29 airframe history book.

TonyM.

Both of the tail came from Nick.

And he has chimed in on this thread.

Quest Master · **Joined:** Fri Oct 06, 2006 2:42 pm **Posts:** 387

Todd Hackbarth wrote:

Photos of the B-29s at China Lake during the 1950s can be found in the LIFE magazine photo archives at:
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q ... ource:life

Also see: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=34766

Todd

I'm not certain that those images are from China Lake. I have seen them all before and none of the S/Ns correlate to the known S/Ns on the China Lake Alumni website.

Quest Master · **Joined:** Fri Oct 06, 2006 2:42 pm **Posts:** 387

Ok let’s see if I can do a little more CSI work on this.
Let’s look at the definitive: The data plate is marked: AIRPLANE MOD. B-29, DWG. NOR PART NUMBER 3-14335-14, CONT NO. W33-038-AC-117, SER. NO. 377. This tail was built under Martin Contract W33-038-AC-117 for AAF Serial Numbers B-29-5-MO 42-65202 through B-29-35-MO 42-65401. The S/N stamped on the data plate is 377, which I believed was for B-29 42-65377….but we have established that aircraft crashed on August 4, 1945. :oops:

The 377 could be a C/N (craft number). The C/N 3377 was assigned to B-29-1-MO 42-6243, which was the contract exactly before W-33-038-AC-117 BUT B-29-1-MO 42-6243 crashed on 10/8/1944 with a bail-out after Nagasaki due to being out of gas. Swing....miss. :roll:

I decided to look at the contract number again W33-038-AC-117 and apply what is known: the aircraft was a TB-29 and it was scrapped at China Lake, so I looked at serial numbers of known aircraft that fit into these criteria and this is what I came up with: B-29-25-MO 42-65281 “Miss America”….but that aircraft was salvaged and is now at the Travis Air Museum. :shock:

This is the last theory. What if we take the known criteria: contract number, TB-29 and China Lake and apply that the tail section ended up at the Martin factory and was assembled into the very next batch of serial numbers: B-29-35-MO 44-27259 through B-29-35-MO 44-27325 and this is what I’ve found:
The following aircraft were the only TB-29s at China Lake that were within this contract, were converted to TB-29s and were at China Lake:
B-29-35-MO 44-27298 “Full House”
B-29-35-MO 44-27304 “Up An’ Atom”
Both were “Siverplate” B-29s that were assigned to the 509th Composite Group for the attacks on Japan.
That batch of aircraft were 44-27296 through 44-27304…..”Bockscar” being 44-27297! So….an easy way to prove this theory would be to crawl into the tail of “Bockscar” at the NMUSAF and see what that data plate says.

Your thoughts?

Cvairwerks · **Posted:** Sat Sep 11, 2010 9:50 am

Van: Start the process on getting a copy of the production contract and all the amendments to it. From there you should have a little better chance of tracking it. From having been in the military a/c production world since 1986, there are so many possible production combinations, that the contract is the only way to get a picture of where to concentrate your search. That tail unit could have been produced for :

1. A Martin produced aircraft
2. Martin spares
3. A Boeing produced aircraft
4. Boeing spares
5. AAF spares
6. AAF mod program
7. Mod program spares
8. A test article
9. Produced, but a/c cancelled prior to assembly.

Because the data plate p/n is so low in the assembly p/n hirearchy, it's s/n relating to an a/c is probably only going to be found through the actual production and maintenance records of the individual a/c. I've had parts come out to my a/c that were tagged for a different a/c, but due to operational needs, they get swapped. I've also had instances where we needed to replace a part, none were in stock and would not be for a period of time, so we canibalized a bird way back in production, or elsewhere on the flightline and installed the part to get ours back in the air. 40 years from now, guys like us might be trying to figure out why a particular part with one a/c identity is on another..and now you know one reason it happens. Now you also know why the DD250 production records get delivered after the a/c is handed over to the customer and not before. I've had to change serialized parts less than 4 hours prior to an a/c delivery ferry due to a problem rearing it's ugly head at delivery time, which meant an update to the delivery records.

Warbird Information Exchange

B-29 S/N 42-65377 history needed - just brought her home.

Who is online