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 Wed Mar 25, 2026 6:16 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  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Apr 04, 2013 4:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:23 am
Posts: 700
I assume the reason that WWII Navy aircraft were relatively monotone and devoid of personalization while the AAF allowed everything short of outright nudes on the nose was that there was Navy reg forbidding anything beyond basic unit identification?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 04, 2013 5:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 5:01 pm
Posts: 406
Location: Round Rock, Texas
Most carrier-based aircraft were void of nose art but not land-based units, especially patrol squadrons. Here's some samples:

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 04, 2013 5:17 pm 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 1:48 pm
Posts: 7909
Rare for carrier based aircraft but a few here and there ...

Image
TBM Avenger of VT-83 nicknamed 'Santas Helper' from the USS Essex CV-9 1945

Image
TBM Avenger of VT-83 nicknamed 'Georgia Peach' form the USS Essex CV-9 1945

Image
TBM-3E Avengers with Torpedo Squadron Thirty-Four VT-34 from the USS Monterey CVL-26 1945


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 04, 2013 5:49 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:11 pm
Posts: 1559
Location: Damascus, MD
Bill Tate gives a VERY detailed answer on this question in a previous thread:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=48832&hilit=Navy+Nose+Art


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 04, 2013 6:16 pm 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 1:48 pm
Posts: 7909
The most dominant factor being that very few carrier based Navy pilots ever flew the same airplane on a regular basis and the fact that Navy air wings were rotated and replaced in a matter of a few months at a time. There were very few personal mounts for the Navy guys to get personal with. Not to say there weren't exceptions at times though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 04, 2013 8:20 pm 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member

Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:36 am
Posts: 7961
Location: Mt. Vernon, WA.
Mark Allen M wrote:
The most dominant factor being that very few carrier based Navy pilots ever flew the same airplane on a regular basis and the fact that Navy air wings were rotated and replaced in a matter of a few months at a time. There were very few personal mounts for the Navy guys to get personal with. Not to say there weren't exceptions at times though.



TBM 417 is Satans Helper not santas Helper, Ho3

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


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 86 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:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group