Warbird Information Exchange

So while moving recently I stumbled on a copy of Martin Caidin's "Black Thursday" which I hadn't read in 30 years. I know Caidin's work is scrutinized/criticized on this forum, but as many a poster has said, "...when I was 12 it didn't matter." I am in that camp as I again read through the pages.

But I have some questions that perhaps some WIXers can help with. First it deals with paint schemes. This is a paragraph out of the chapter 'How The Germans Fought'.

"the enemy fighters were marked with a dazzling variety of colors and stripes. Me-109's were distinctive with gleaming paint surfaces that featured an orange-colored nose and underside of the cowling, with the rest of the airplane black. Several FW-190's were completely yellow, and polished to a high gloss. Me-110's had a large yellow patch on the center underside of the airplanes, and many Ju-88's were seen with all-white bellies and multicolored striped tops"

I remember reading in Closterman's "The Big Show" him talking about 'all-yellow' aircraft and such...which really seemed out of place in a sky full of camoflaged airplanes.

Does anyone (and by 'anyone', I guess I point the finger at Jack, since he seems to have pictures of everything) have photos of these black 109's and yellow 190's? Were they special squadrons? Were they 'personal' aircraft of squadron leaders? I know that in war-time some interesting paint schemes are tried out, and I know the Allies had plenty of weirdly painted 'form-up' bombers and such, but.....thoughts?

The other question has to do with the gunners on the B-17's. I realize in combat when you've got several hundred guys all shooting at the same thing during the chaos of a swirling dogfight, it's gonna get confusing. But I am reading accounts (apparently verified) of, say a cheek gunner with a single .50, taking down a JU-88, or the radio operator being able to put a short burst into a FW-190 and have it explode. All it takes is one shot in the right place, but when you read other accounts of Fighter v. Fighter engagements and how many 6-8 gun bursts it took for a P-47 or P-51 to down another aircraft, it just seems amazing (I'll stop short of unbelievable) that single or twin .50 cal's could have that kind of effect for the amount of time that a gunner would have to aim, train, lead, and put out a long-enough burst to do any good.

I understand that with the defensive guns you're essentially bore-sighting with your hand/body or the turret, whereas with fixed guns in a fighter you have to maneuver the whole platform to fire at the adversary....so I was just curious if anyone had any thoughts or experience with such a thing?

_________________
Offer me solutions, offer me alternatives, and I decline......

Good question -- I haven't seen photos of those types of schemes, either.

Gentile and Godfrey painted the red-and-white checkerboard patches on the noses of their Mustangs as a recognition tool; they could more easily pick each other out of 'the crowd' during fights.

Perhaps it was a way to visually recognize a particular member of the flight?

_________________

Would the head-on nature of the bomber's defensive fire explain the difference? The nose of the fighter would have some more vulnerable areas than the tail would. Also, you are typically only reading one account of the fight. Another gunner could very well have claimed that it was his hits that took out the plane.

Well, that's the thing though...from what I have gleened by reading the book, when Caidin wrote it he compiled the official reports from the various crew de-briefs, and it includes having cross-referenced the claims of one bomber versus the claims of others in the same formation, as well as confirmation as to damage or whatever. Some of them are pretty specific.

But the point you bring up is exactly what/why I am asking.

_________________
Offer me solutions, offer me alternatives, and I decline......

I've saw a picture (years ago in AIR PROGRESS) of a glass nosed B-24 that had 'shadow' outlines of the nacelles and fuselage painted on it, sort of like 4 airplanes all packed together in a tight group, bet that would throw off you sight picture in a firing pass. I know the Austrians (at least) painted their national markings off center on the wings during WW1 to throw opponents off.
Perhaps the aircraft in question were sent to fly @ the bomber stream altitudes for the flak guns and distinctively marked so they wouldn't get blasted by the flak gunners.

_________________
Don't make me go get my flying monkeys-

I would assume the same. If you imagine a unit operating together with several others, it might be difficult to find your own unit after several dogfights, even if one says on the radio: "North of XY...". So it would be useful not only to make out friendlies,but to have the possibility to see if it is one of your unit, one from the same airfield, or a completely unknown one. Pilots who are new to the front would be quite relieved to find someone helping to find back to their homebase. Especially as German fighter pilots were not trained in instrumental flying like multiengine pilots were.

Michael

Funny, I just saw that ariticle and photo a couple weeks ago. It was Air Classics, though. I had a laugh about whomever came up with that paint idea.

_________________
Offer me solutions, offer me alternatives, and I decline......

http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=929

talk of an 'all yellow' FW-190

_________________
S.

SPEEDY,
Just proves that MO will take the pennies off a dead mans eyes-
You've got to admit the guys was using his noodle!

_________________
Don't make me go get my flying monkeys-