P-61 photo

tulsaboy · **Posted:** Wed Oct 29, 2008 9:54 am

Anyone know anything about this P-61 photo? It just appeared in a stack of photos I'm sorting through right now.

kevin

mike furline · **Joined:** Wed May 05, 2004 3:45 pm **Posts:** 2644

Nice pic. It falls right in the range of two of the survivors.

43-8330 of NASM,
http://www.warbirdregistry.org/p61regis ... 38330.html

43-8353 of the NMUSAF,
http://www.warbirdregistry.org/p61regis ... 38353.html

43-8348, 43-8356 were used in the Air Forces Operation Thunderstorm Project.

Regards,
Mike

n5151ts · **Posted:** Wed Oct 29, 2008 1:18 pm

mike furline wrote:

Just two planes from the one at the NMUSAF.

http://www.warbirdregistry.org/p61regis ... 38353.html

Regards,
Mike

there is nothing worse than a poor CAGED BIRD.....

Django · **Posted:** Wed Oct 29, 2008 1:43 pm

n5151ts wrote:

there is nothing worse than a poor CAGED BIRD.....

I think your record is stuck.

TAdan · **Posted:** Wed Oct 29, 2008 3:28 pm

n5151ts wrote:

mike furline wrote:

Just two planes from the one at the NMUSAF.

http://www.warbirdregistry.org/p61regis ... 38353.html

Regards,
Mike

there is nothing worse than a poor CAGED BIRD.....

Dont feel so bad. In a few years time 25% of the worlds P-61 population will be airworthy. Thats not bad. :wink:

Steve Nelson · **Posted:** Wed Oct 29, 2008 9:20 pm

Quote:

there is nothing worse than a poor CAGED BIRD.....

Just to tick you off...

Seriously, though..you've continually ranted on this forum about the evils of static museums in general, and NMUSAF in particular, like some sort of conspiracy theorist. I'm wondering, do you have the billions of dollars and tens of thousands of personel necessary to acquire, restore, maintain, and operate all these aircraft indefinately? If not, then please quit belittling the efforts of those who are doing their best to preserve them. It's getting old.

SN

ltdann · **Posted:** Wed Oct 29, 2008 10:03 pm

I am more interested in the B-18 behind the P-61!!!

Django · **Posted:** Fri Oct 31, 2008 4:11 pm

Has it ever been determined what the original markings on the NMUSAF P-61 might have had? Or for the Bejiing or MAAM?

Obviously the Bejiing is a CBI (most likely combat) vet.

MAAM is a PTO combat vet.

What about NMUSAF? ETO or PTO?

NASM? ETO or PTO?

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Fri Oct 31, 2008 4:33 pm

Steve Nelson wrote:

Quote:

there is nothing worse than a poor CAGED BIRD.....

Just to tick you off...

Seriously, though..you've continually ranted on this forum about the evils of static museums in general, and NMUSAF in particular, like some sort of conspiracy theorist. I'm wondering, do you have the billions of dollars and tens of thousands of personel necessary to acquire, restore, maintain, and operate all these aircraft indefinately? If not, then please quit belittling the efforts of those who are doing their best to preserve them. It's getting old.

SN

Thanks man.

n5151ts · **Posted:** Fri Oct 31, 2008 6:18 pm

Steve Nelson wrote:

Quote:

there is nothing worse than a poor CAGED BIRD.....

Just to tick you off...

Seriously, though..you've continually ranted on this forum about the evils of static museums in general, and NMUSAF in particular, like some sort of conspiracy theorist. I'm wondering, do you have the billions of dollars and tens of thousands of personel necessary to acquire, restore, maintain, and operate all these aircraft indefinately? If not, then please quit belittling the efforts of those who are doing their best to preserve them. It's getting old.

SN

spoken like a true non-pilot or FAA administrator, lets put them all in museums and then burn the museums down, that will take care of those pesky flying warbirds.

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Fri Oct 31, 2008 6:20 pm

n5151ts wrote:

Steve Nelson wrote:

Quote:

there is nothing worse than a poor CAGED BIRD.....

Just to tick you off...

Seriously, though..you've continually ranted on this forum about the evils of static museums in general, and NMUSAF in particular, like some sort of conspiracy theorist. I'm wondering, do you have the billions of dollars and tens of thousands of personel necessary to acquire, restore, maintain, and operate all these aircraft indefinately? If not, then please quit belittling the efforts of those who are doing their best to preserve them. It's getting old.

SN

spoken like a true non-pilot or FAA administrator, lets put them all in museums and then burn the museums down, that will take care of those pesky flying warbirds.

Spoken like someone that has his head up his ass.

Nathan · **Posted:** Fri Oct 31, 2008 6:24 pm

c'mon guys. Every thread anymore ends in bitch slapping
I am guilty of it too but geez! :roll:

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Fri Oct 31, 2008 6:30 pm

It's easy to insult people when you have nothing invested in what they are working on, or have an interest in what they do. So everyone against all of these poor static birds tell me where are you going to keep and fly the XC-99, B-36, C-141, Wright Model B, Memphis Belle, Swoose, Strawberry Bitch, and the other 400 aircraft on display in the NMUSAF alone. I understand I get worked up sometimes when I don't see eyey to eye. This is not seeing eye eye, it is an open insult an multiple threads to anyone that works to restore an airplane to static. If you feel it is cool to make the comment, I feel it is cool to comment back. It's not right for one person to spread his fertilizer over everyone and not be allowed to defend one's self.

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Fri Oct 31, 2008 6:36 pm

Tulsaboy, I appologize now for this thread going off topic. The P-61's are one of my fav's. As for the P-61 at the NMUSAF I don't think it ever had any real significant markins. I think it looked like the pic in the first post. She is actually a C model done up to B markings. I am not sure what the major difference is in the B and the C.

Steve Nelson · **Posted:** Fri Oct 31, 2008 7:22 pm

Being a "non-pilot," I'm not sure if I'm worthy to comment, but...

I think the major difference is the engines. The C-model had turbo-supercharchers, requiring a pair of "chin" intakes on the cowls, and a large intake underneath tbe nacelle. the Cs also had broader-chord paddle-blade props, and retractable dive brakes.

And for the record, I'm in no way against flying warbirds..It was a very sad day around here when the Air Zoo grounded their collection. Like Stangdriver, I believe both flying aircraft and static museums are important. It's the all-or-nothing arrogant extremism of certain individuals that annoys me.

SN

Warbird Information Exchange

P-61 photo

Who is online