-4Y getting new clothes

[Fouga23]

[i]

so sayeth the poor fellow with the small fire bottle...

Yeah, That ain't gonna do much!

Awesome aircraft though!

[JFS61]

Never understood how Consolidated came up with such an awkward and ill-fitting looking greenhouse nose for this plane. It's almost as if they had a bunch of noses that had been designed for a different plane laying around gathering dust and decided to save some time (as well as a few bucks) by jamming them on the front end of whatever plane happened to be coming down the line at the time (in this case, it being the Privateer).

[Pooner]

The nose cone on this airplane can't be blamed on Consolidated (by the time this one was built it was Convair), as when this a/c was delivered from San Diego in 1945 it was originally fitted with the ErCo bow turret.

The bulbous nose, tail turret dome and the large waist area windows were modifications as made by aircraftsmen at the US Coast Guard overhaul and repair depot. This Privateer had been transferred from USN storage to USCG, and their needs for the airframe were very different. All of the defensive armament, bombing equipment and radar was removed, and the nose and window treatment installed to make it easier for USCG crews to spot shipping in distress over open water.

- Robert in PHX

[JFS61]

Thanks for the correction. Being a depot mod certainly explains its odd appearance (the side windows always looked a bit "off" as well).

[Pogo]

Pooner - thanks for that, I always wondered who made those mods...

[Chappie]

While they look nice, are these USCG markings an indication that the aircraft will not be returned to its factory appearance with all the turrets?


Chappie

[shrike]

While they look nice, are these USCG markings an indication that the aircraft will not be returned to its factory appearance with all the turrets?


Chappie

I believe this is supposed to be an intermediate step, while all of the turrety things are found and put in order.

[seabee1526]

Pooner, the turrets were stripped by the Navy prior to transfer correct? I know Yankee would love to come across the "front end" mount for their Privateer.

[Pooner]

Seabee1526, I don't suspect the Navy had removed the turrets prior to the transfer of one service branch to another. IIRC, the airframe had about 8 hours TT from factory and flight testing to a delivery to a storage facility (this particular airplane had been built late in the war and didn't have any combat history or pedigree). I'm of the opinion it'd been flown from the storage pool to the USCG depot and the mods and changes began there.

I have a feeling these items were probably removed at the modification center and then sent off to a Navy depot somewhere on the east coast for spares inventory.

The group with this airplane does have a bow turret, but you are so right - the front turret mount and support structure is a real critical piece to cradle it. I've only seen a couple of these over the years, and both of them are preserved and on museum airplanes. I suspect a "front end mount" will have to be reproduced from the Convair blueprint drawings. If there's enough interest, perhaps three could be tooled at one time as I suspect there's interest in multiples (with Yankee and Yanks being the others who'd benefit from the endeavor).

- Robert in PHX

[Bubak]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qO_xyHj-QNA

[JFS61]

As others have said, I'd like to see the bird kept in her USCG configuration as we already have a number of Navy configured restorations out there.

Last edited by JFS61 on Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Chappie]

As others have said, I'd like to see the bird kept in her USGS configuration as we already have a number of Navy configured restorations out there.

That would be true if we already had two Navy PB4Y-1 Liberators and three PB4Y-2 Privateers airworthy. Seems strange to say this Privateer should stay in USGC markings because we already have 20+ Wildcats and Corsairs flying.

Equipping this aircraft with original ERCO turrets would be a beautiful contrast to the CAF B-24A and Collings B-24J and highlight how far the B-24 airframe was taken. But that is just me.

Chappie

[K5DH]

I don't think the Coast Guard gets enough love in the world of restored airplanes, be they static or flying. I'd like to see this Privateer be restored accurately in Coast Guard configuration. Since it actually served with the USCG and not with the USN, that's even more fitting.

But that's just my opinion.

[shrike]

I don't think the Coast Guard gets enough love in the world of restored airplanes, be they static or flying. I'd like to see this Privateer be restored accurately in Coast Guard configuration. Since it actually served with the USCG and not with the USN, that's even more fitting.

But that's just my opinion.

Interesting thought. She was delivered to the USN with full turrets etc. On the books for a short while before going to the USCG where everything was removed. Served with the USCG for roughly 15 years before becoming a firebomber for the next 40.
The argument for USCG restoration would be that she served there, in that configuration, longer than her Navy service, but the same reasoning would would also give us a lot of ANG F-51's and TB-25's with no guns in gaudy silver. Taken further you could say that the tanker scheme was worn longest, and arguably of greatest value to the country as a whole.



Personally I'm in favour of seeing here in all her great turrety glory.

[Pogmusic]

Do they plan to add the empennage and tail stripe at some point?