Soccer War War Birds

[Randy Haskin]

I know a guy who used to be part of the Mustang Pilots Club in the late 1960s, flying N511D. He mentioned some years back that he got an offer to fly in El Salvador at the time of the war, but declined that deal and kept on flying in the friendly skies of So. California instead. Anyone with a clue as to Paul Finefrock's status? He was alive a few years back. By the way, on a totally different subject, is Archie Baldocchi still around?

T J

Based on what I've heard talking to two of the three American mercenaries, that pilot was likely spinning a tall tale. Reminds me of the "The Mustang's Last Stand Over Honduras" article which was written not by someone who actually participated in the Soccer War, but certainly heard tales and was masquerading as one.

Archie is still alive, but elderly and in assisted living. I have attempted to interview him, but have only been able to pass questions to him through a friend.

[Obergrafeter]

On a different subject, but with so many experts on line, did any of the Mustangs come back from the Dominican Republic after the US mission (invasion or whatever you would call it) in the the sixties?

[Warbird Kid]

Thats the thing I cant get over about the Dominicans, having the last battle readt Mustangs around, all the way into the 80's!

The Warbirds International special issue about P-51's has a good article about them. One P-51 that they single out in the article is this one.

http://www.warbirdregistry.org/p51regis ... 72364.html

[Swiss Mustangs]

here's a 'before' pic....... one of the F-51D's delivered to the FAS during July 1969.... N103TL, former 44-73422..... seen here at Opa Locka, FL, in February 1967



Martin

[FG1D Pilot]

Jerry DeLarm's unpublished bio by Dan H has him quoting that he'd been contacted by Honduras. But, given DeLarm's penchant for outrageousness, who knows how true that claim is.

Jerry DeLarm flew the CAF P47N and claimed to have shot down a P51. I have been looking for the picture of the P47N with Jerry and his crew. I have it somewhere but havn't been able to find it.

Here's a site that has more about it. http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_162.shtml

[Jerry O'Neill]

On a different subject, but with so many experts on line, did any of the Mustangs come back from the Dominican Republic after the US mission (invasion or whatever you would call it) in the the sixties?

I think we actually sent them some after that! They had the Mustangs up until 1984, when most were imported back to the US. I know of one still in storage. Jeff Ethell wrote a great article about flying the last front line Mustangs.
Jerry

[AAF]

Randy wrote:
The FAS Cavalier Mustang IIs had no USAF serial numbers, as they were not part of the MAP (e.g., not purchased by the USAF then given to the FAS). They were only ever identified -- including while they were being built by Cavalier -- as their FAS IDs. I have a few photos from inside the Cavalier hanger while the airplanes are in differing states of construction, and each of them has their FAS number stenciled in black paint on the bare metal fuselage.

Before going any further, let me say that I don’t intend to dispute the findings of a subject that you and others have researched extensively.
I have been researching about the 100-Hour War since 1970, and had the good fortune to gain access to official FAH records as well as flight logbooks of those FAH pilots who flew combat sorties during the war. Information about FAS aircraft was basically a taboo until just a few years ago (and still very complicated) which lead me to investigate and research as best I could, anything related to the Mustangs El Salvador had acquired (purchased or whatever) before, during, and after the war. Not an easy task to say the least.

We all know that not everything that has been published may be credible, however, I have sought information from sources reputed to be credible, although some have been openly critical of the late Paul Coggan’s book, “Mustang Survivors”, ISBN 1-85780-135-0 . Painfully, I also discovered there are individuals who do not like to share information for whatever reasons, and I respect that; and those who will try to discredit or tarnish other people’s work and research, but that is their choice.

In my modest opinion, “Mustang Survivros” contains very good data, albeit a number of obvious mistakes, as the following (or so I believe): most have agreed that the FAS Mustang shot down on July 17th was FAS 404, however, the book (page 118) credits ex-44-73458 (122-39917) to be FAS 404, and said to be exhibited at Champlin Fighter Museum, in Mesa, Arizona (?).

Having said that, I would like to point out the following statement found on page 168 of Mr. Coggan’s book: “… some of the aircraft reworked by Cavalier completely lost their original manufacture’s identity and USAF serial numbers and were allocated new FY 67 and 68 USAF serial numbers”.
The following aircraft, built, remanufactured, or whatever (as I don’t want to exaggerate) by Cavalier Corporation were sold, given, or whatever, to the Bolivian government (“Peace Condor” project): 67-14867 FAB 522, 67-14866 FAB 521, 67-22579 FAB 519, 67-22580 FAB 520, 67-22581 FAB 523.
68-15795 (Minnesota ANGB, Minneapolis, 1982-?), and 68-15796 (USAF Armament Museum ? – this data is not in the book).

Randy wrote:
Archie was a close "friend" of the FAS and the owner of YS-210P which became the second FAS 402. To say that the airplane was "confiscated" is probably an over-statement, as it implies that it was stolen or taken without the owner's consent. Archie was very closely involved with the operation and maintenance of the FAS Mustangs, and I have to believe that he likely willfully allowed his P-51 to be conscripted back into military service for his country.

This is absolutely true. Mr. Baldocchie is known to have also been a bright engineer involved in designing, building and installing reflector sights for some of the Mustangs (plus many other gadgets used by the FAS). But again, the word “confiscated” is not mine, but that found in a 1970 document published by a Salvadoran historian-writer, which I have misplaced.

Randy wrote:
They had Cavalier TF-51D FAS 400, plus Mustang IIs FAS 401, 403, 404, and 405, plus two stock Mustangs, FAS 402#2 (ex YS-210P) and FAS 406.

Indeed, FAS 402 (#2) identity is ex-44-73350 (122-39809).
About FAS 406: do you have evidence as to when this aircraft was actually received by the FAS? Can you confirm if the USAF serial number and NAA c/n are as follows?
According to some sources, FAS 406 (allegedly ex-44-73656, 122-40196, Cavalier 750), was acquired by the FAS in 1969, while others say in 1968.
Mr. Daniel Hagedorn’s book, “ Central American and Caribbean Air Forces”, states on page 88 that “As the threat of war with Honduras intensified,… not fewer than 12 additional stock P-51 Mustangs (gaining serials FAS 406 to at least 411 were acquired”. This leads me to believe that ‘406’ may have been acquired in July 69 rather than in ‘68.

Randy wrote:
The mercenaries didn't even arrive at Ilopango until the night of the 16th, so they would not have been there for the collision itself, having happened that morning. The fact that they never mentioned it simply means that it did not involve FAS 401, 403, or 405, as those were the only three aircraft they had close involvement with, starting the evening of the 16th. They were largely isolated from the rest of the FAS pilots and airplanes for that week, and did not fly with or interact with them until after the war was over. Unfortunately, that isolation then also means that the Americans today can't fill in some of the details about the war because they didn't see some if it.

I find the details about the “hired” pilots very interesting, but at the same token, strange, as they did not seem to be aware (or informed) of some very important developments that were affecting the overall Salvadoran air operations.

Randy wrote:
It's an overstatement to say that any of the Cavaliers were "based" at Madresal. One of the mercenaries recalls landing and re-arming there several times, but ultimately they always landed back at Ilopango at the end of the day.

Overstatement of not, those planes operated from Madresal, and one can understand why they preferred to overnight in San Salvador. But let us be aware that the information provided to you by the “hired” pilots has not yet been made public, and my information comes from the official FAS historian publication (credible or not). I mentioned earlier that “the Cornejo book is riddled with contradictory and inaccurate data, i.e., page 171 displays a photo of the remains of Cavalier II, FAS 402 (destroyed October 9, 1968), and incredibly on page 165, a photo shows FAS 402 seen at Ilopango on December 1968” (the tail number is also visible).

Randy wrote:
Remember that there were two FAS 402s, so that is not at all impossible.

Perhaps I should have been more specific. It is impossible because the photo on page 165 shows a Mustang with the classic Cavalier wingtip tanks, feature that Baldocchi’s aircraft didn’t have, besides, the photo legend states: “Avión F-51D Mustang Cavalier II FAS 402, Ilopango, diciembre de 1968.
The other photo, on page 171, shows a partially destroyed center section and tail section, obviously not Baldocchi’s Mustang, Photo legend states “Cavalier II, FAS 402, destroyed October 9, 1968”. Recap: not impossible, but clearly inaccurate data!
Unfortunately I am now unable to scan the photos and post them here, which I will do as soon as I can install my scanner.

Randy wrote:
Probably because they wanted more good pilots!

I don’t dispute their ability as pilots, but my question remains: did the FAS 401, 403 and 405 pilots have combat experience?
Combat experienced or not, I personally believe that none of the “hired” pilots took part in any air operation after the two FG-1Ds had been shot down (shortly after noontime) or thereafter until the end of hostilities on July 18th (pm). The Honduran pilots did not report sighting any enemy aircraft in any of the three combat theaters, neither did any of the ground command posts. Basically, on July 18th, the FAH was able to provide increased close support to our troops without the presence of enemy aircraft. It is no secret that after the ceasefire, the OAS ordered both air forces to refrain from flying near the common border. The FAH issued strict orders to this effect, however, FAS Mustangs and C-47s were frequently sighted and reported to the OAS military observers on the ground. But again, that is another story yet to be told … in the book I’m working on.

There is another situation which further complicates identification of what I like to call the “Salvadoran Mustang dilemma”: on July 17th one of the two Mustangs which “jumped” Captain Zepeda’s F4U-5, fled to nearby Salvadoran territory when Captain Soto appeared. None of the Mustangs got rid of the two-250 lbs. bombs each was carrying before or during the engagement. The name of the Salvadoran pilot (recently disclosed) was Captain Lobo, later to become FAS commander. Neither Captain Zepeda or Captain Soto remember if the Mustangs had wingtip tanks or not. So, with three of the "hired" pilots having a Cavalier each at their entire disposal, is it fair to say that the collision at Ilopango did not affect either aircraft, and that Captain Lobo may have been flying '402 (#2) on that fateful mission?

Cheers

[Randy Haskin]

In my modest opinion, “Mustang Survivros” contains very good data, albeit a number of obvious mistakes, as the following (or so I believe): most have agreed that the FAS Mustang shot down on July 17th was FAS 404, however, the book (page 118) credits ex-44-73458 (122-39917) to be FAS 404, and said to be exhibited at Champlin Fighter Museum, in Mesa, Arizona (?).

Yes, 44-73458 was also given the ID FAS 404, but later in 1969 and well after the Cavalier FAS 404 was shot down. Not the same airplane. It is now headed for the UK where, apparently, it will be restored. There was just a thread about this aircraft here on WIX recently.

On another note, there is no publication that has ever given a complete, correct picture of the Cavalier operation and the aircraft they sold/built/modified. You should take with a grain of salt any data on these aircraft, as I have yet to find one that is error-free. It seems that most have not bothered to actually research for themselves or cross-check facts with different sources. They appear to have simply re-printed information that was made previously available and added to it, which unfortunately means that mistakes have been printed and re-printed, to the point that the mistakes have become "fact" in the annals of Mustang history. Coggan's book, while beautiful and interesting, just happens to be one of them that continues to get some of the facts wrong when it comes to the Cavalier airplanes.

The Cavalier Mustangs are such a small sliver of the history of the P-51, and there can't be that many people who really care about the subject, so it's no wonder that nobody has really delved into the topic that deeply.

How can I be so self-righteous that I can declare so many publications in error? I am writing a book on the topic of the Cavalier Mustangs, and have done extensive research for it over the last 6 years. People who have been reading WIX for a while have seen snapshots of me going through the process of educating myself on the topic.

In researching for my book -- which didn't actually start out as a book but rather just a quest for more information for my own gratification -- I actually went to the SOURCES THEMSELVES to get the information. It's been a long, but enlightening, process that has showed these numerous mistakes. For a taste of some of that research, check out the article "Peace Ponies" in Warbird Digest #9, which talks about the heretofore untold story of the Cavalier aircraft made for and sent to Indonesia in the early 1970s. Although books like Coggan's have briefly talked about these aircraft (for example, in Coggan's book, if you read the caption under the photo of 44-72777, it incorrectly says that the airplane was re-made into 72-1537 by Cavalier and sent to Indonesia), none of them bothered to actually contact people who were involved in the Peace Pony operation and get firsthand information. Coggan has part of the picture, but not all of it, and thus makes some incorrect assumptions with the data. Not an accusation or implication that he had sloppy research or anything, but he simply didn't have all the information.

I was fortunate to be introduced to Irwin Whittemore, who actually formed the company that built the Cavaliers for Indonesia (this was after Cavalier Aircraft Corporation had officially gone out of business) and then went to Indonesia to teach the AURI pilots. His photographs, logbook, and other datapoints were very valuable in my research.

So, apologies for that massive detour, but it was intended to point out that there are lots and lots of crossed wires and poor pieces of data pertaining to the Cavalier Mustangs which need to be un-tangled. I am cetain that my book will ruffle the feathers of some "Mustang historians" with these 'corrections' to the record!

I do not claim to know it all or to be the single-source expert on the topic. I do, however, take pride in being a thorough, fair researcher and an accurate reporter of my findings.

Having said that, I would like to point out the following statement found on page 168 of Mr. Coggan’s book: “… some of the aircraft reworked by Cavalier completely lost their original manufacture’s identity and USAF serial numbers and were allocated new FY 67 and 68 USAF serial numbers”.

Yes, other Cavaliers were given '67 USAF numbers (the Peace Condor aircraft), '68 USAF numbers (the two Army aircraft), and even a '69 USAF number (a Peace Hawk aircraft). The FAS Cavaliers, as I posted earlier, had no such USAF serial numbers.

About FAS 406: do you have evidence as to when this aircraft was actually received by the FAS?

I have one source that says 1 December 1968 (Hagedorn) and another two sources that say 15 July 1969 or 17 July 1969. I don't currently have any other independant evidence that supports any of those dates.

Can you confirm if the USAF serial number and NAA c/n are as follows? (allegedly ex-44-73656, 122-40196, Cavalier 750)

Yes, it was definitely a Cavalier 750, "rebuilt" in 1962 by Trans Florida for Dunbar-Stanley Studios of Charlotte, NC. The SN and NAA number are correct. It was NOT specially-built as a Cavalier for the FAS. It just happened to be one of the aircraft that Archie's people purchased in the US for conscription into service with the FAS.

I find the details about the “hired” pilots very interesting, but at the same token, strange, as they did not seem to be aware (or informed) of some very important developments that were affecting the overall Salvadoran air operations.

There was secrecy for protection of both parties. The FAS did not want it known that they hired mercenaries, and it was best for the mercenaries that they not see too much of what was going on. After hostilities were over, one of the three Americans, having made close friends with some of the other FAS personnel, spent considerable time in El Salvador recreationally, and even helped the FAS a little by smuggling parts and equipment to El Salvador while there was still an OAS and US State Department embargo.

I don’t dispute their ability as pilots, but my question remains: did the FAS 401, 403 and 405 pilots have combat experience?

One was a well known USAF jet ace from the Korean war, another was a former USAF fighter pilot, and the third had no military experience but a lot of high performance flying in the P-51 (and other warbirds) including unlimited air racing. All of them had lots of P-51 time and were airshow pilots.

Combat experienced or not, I personally believe that none of the “hired” pilots took part in any air operation after the two FG-1Ds had been shot down (shortly after noontime) or thereafter until the end of hostilities on July 18th (pm). The Honduran pilots did not report sighting any enemy aircraft in any of the three combat theaters, neither did any of the ground command posts

Just because they were not seen over Honduras doesn't mean they did not take part in any combat air operation. Quite the contrary -- they showed up the 16th, and flew combat sorties for four days (yes, after the cease fire because apparently nobody believed that either side was going to honor it!). According to the two I interviewed, they primarily flew up and down the border area -- they were paid best for shooting down FAH aircraft, and they were ONLY paid if it was shot down in Salvadorian territory, so they were trying to make sure that's where any wreckage landed. They apparently even used the FAS B-26 as a "decoy" to try and lure FAH Corsairs across the border so they could shoot them down there. They were mercenaries -- although they were there to help out a friend, Archie, they were also there to make money. More money was to be made flying multiple sorties and attempting to shoot down FAH aircraft than flying into Honduras and dropping bombs.

Neither Captain Zepeda or Captain Soto remember if the Mustangs had wingtip tanks or not. So, with three of the "hired" pilots having a Cavalier each at their entire disposal, is it fair to say that the collision at Ilopango did not affect either aircraft, and that Captain Lobo may have been flying'402 (#2) on that fateful mission?

I'm pretty certain it was FAS 404 that Soto shot down. I still have doubts about who was involved in the ground collision. Hagedorn says it was two Cavaliers. I say it might have been two, might have been one, or might have been none. It still all depends on how serious the crash was.

The tiptanks were removed from all the Cavaliers the evening of the 16th, so that's not a good ID feature.

We know that FAS 402#2 survived the war (it is a flyable warbird today, called 'Archie'), and it would have been VERY obvious if FAS 404 had survived the war due to the extent of the Cavalier mods. I don't have the information in front of me, as I'm currently deployed in Afghanistan, but Marco Lavignino has further evidence from the wreckage that it was FAS 404. I seem to remember that it was the dataplate from the landing gear door, but I might be wrong.

[JDK]

In my modest opinion, “Mustang Survivros” contains very good data, albeit a number of obvious mistakes, as the following (or so I believe): most have agreed that the FAS Mustang shot down on July 17th was FAS 404, however, the book (page 118) credits ex-44-73458 (122-39917) to be FAS 404, and said to be exhibited at Champlin Fighter Museum, in Mesa, Arizona (?).

On another note, there is no publication that has ever given a complete, correct picture of the Cavalier operation and the aircraft they sold/built/modified. You should take with a grain of salt any data on these aircraft, as I have yet to find one that is error-free. It seems that most have not bothered to actually research for themselves or cross-check facts with different sources. They appear to have simply re-printed information that was made previously available and added to it, which unfortunately means that mistakes have been printed and re-printed, to the point that the mistakes have become "fact" in the annals of Mustang history. Coggan's book, while beautiful and interesting, just happens to be one of them that continues to get some of the facts wrong when it comes to the Cavalier airplanes.

The Cavalier Mustangs are such a small sliver of the history of the P-51, and there can't be that many people who really care about the subject, so it's no wonder that nobody has really delved into the topic that deeply.

How can I be so self-righteous that I can declare so many publications in error? I am writing a book on the topic of the Cavalier Mustangs, and have done extensive research for it over the last 6 years. People who have been reading WIX for a while have seen snapshots of me going through the process of educating myself on the topic.

In researching for my book -- which didn't actually start out as a book but rather just a quest for more information for my own gratification -- I actually went to the SOURCES THEMSELVES to get the information. It's been a long, but enlightening, process that has showed these numerous mistakes. For a taste of some of that research, check out the article "Peace Ponies" in Warbird Digest #9, which talks about the heretofore untold story of the Cavalier aircraft made for and sent to Indonesia in the early 1970s. Although books like Coggan's have briefly talked about these aircraft (for example, in Coggan's book, if you read the caption under the photo of 44-72777, it incorrectly says that the airplane was re-made into 72-1537 by Cavalier and sent to Indonesia), none of them bothered to actually contact people who were involved in the Peace Pony operation and get firsthand information. Coggan has part of the picture, but not all of it, and thus makes some incorrect assumptions with the data. Not an accusation or implication that he had sloppy research or anything, but he simply didn't have all the information.

Hi Randy,
You've posted a good number of very solid responses here, and I just thought I might add a couple of general glosses to some of the remarks above. I worked with, and knew Paul Coggan very well at Warbirds Worldwide - before we met, he set up 'Mustangs International' out of which Warbirds grew - some of us know there's more to life than Mustangs! Without Paul's work, there would be a lot less in the public domain on Mustangs, although he would always credit the excellent work of many others.

Paul died suddenly and unexpectedly last year, and as a result of that he never put his Mustang material together one final time, and he is also not able to give his version of his work today. Sadly, due to the bankruptcy of Warbirds Worldwide, much of the office contents went into the hands of the receivers and vanished; including boxes of Mustang data, and photos, as well as personal material belonging to Paul, myself and others.

I'm sorry I can't add much - my 'antipathy' to Mustangs is well known; actually it's a myth, and is based more of the pointlessness of having two people focus on Mustangs on one Journal. He did the Mustangs, I did everything else. As a result, and because of the loss of the WW papers, I'm sorry I can't add anything specific to the discussion, but I can add some background.

To take a view that Paul simply took other's statements and work at face value and republished them is simply wrong; for a start, when he was working, no-one else would have been relaying more first-hand information into print from current owners and operators; again there are many doing excellent work then, but Paul was the only one publishing a journal and in regular contact with most owners and operators. Randy's point about Paul relaying errors on Cavalier Mustangs is, I'm sure, a fair one; and Paul was moire interested than most in the Cavalier story, but it was never a central Warbird drive, as Randy also points out.

Incidentally, we are all able to be here because Scott picked up the wreck of the Vintage Aviator forum with WIX and VA had grown out of Warbirds Worldwide - Paul's organisation.

Randy, at this stage your manuscript's in great form, and I'm sure will be a work of solid scholarship; but I guarantee you, when you open the first copy, within half-an-hour you'd be smacked between the eyes by an error - that's just what happens. I'm sure were Paul around today, or if either of us had access to his archive, he'd be delighted to help and would point out a number of errors he'd made, and acknowledge others - more useful still, he'd be able to challenge some theories as a knowledgeable writer, to the greater benefit of your work. This is the kind of thing we've all lost by Paul's death.

Unlike the implications posted above (I'm sure with honest intent) Paul travelled to South America, visited several people (I don't have the details, as I've mentioned above) and built his work around original research as well.

I will say one other thing. Paul knew a lot more than he wrote. Like anyone in his position, he gathered some facts about Mustangs that do not match what's published. Anyone who believes every warbird flying today is flying with the correct history, dataplate and paperwork is living in a fool's paradise, as has been illustrated indirectly in this thread. Some editors published what was easiest, or what they were told. Paul was too much of a gentleman (and not an aggressive or hard-nosed enough journalist) to put the story ahead of the trust he'd built up with a lot of people. Warbirds was regularly 'scooped' by other magazines, as he'd keep his mouth shut as requested. Likewise there were stories he could (perhaps should) have published in Mustang Survivors and Warbirds Worldwide that he chose not to. He was also certainly lied to and misled by participants - as anyone trying to untangle these stories is aware happens. I'm sure Randy's smart enough to be aware of this, but it's a caveat to bear in mind. Anyone who puts a book in front of me proporting to tell 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but' might be in for a torrid time if I have to fault it - because that's easy. The real test, as Randy's working towards, is to improve on what's gone before.

Having done a couple of major research projects myself, resulting in books on the Walrus and Lysander, I'm very wary of seeing my work as 'superior' or 'better' than those that have gone before. GWR Nicholl's book on the Walrus contains errors - but it remains one of the best books on the type, and I'd tip my hat to him, and certainly thank him. Likewise Bruce Robinson wrote an apparently superficial book on the Lysander called 'Lysander Special'. In Bruce's case, the more I found, the more I discovered how solid his research was, and what an excellent job he'd done. Of course there were other books which were a waste of trees. It's (relatively) easy to find and show error. I'd hope it's a better person who is prepared to acknowledge their debt for the good work around those (one hopes) few errors, by those who broke a path before you, usually in more difficult conditions.

My apologies for going on, but it's intended to be generally useful, and to place on record the role Paul Coggan played in modern Mustang research, which seemed (inadvertently) to be getting a short hearing. For those who are curious about Paul, see my obituary post: http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/p ... php?t=8736

Randy, best of luck with the book, and I only wish I could be of more direct help.

Regards,

[Randy Haskin]

Not my intent to slander Paul or his work in any way. I corresponded with him regularly, asked him questions about his published work and research, and offered him my work for criticism and correction.

My assertion is simply that Paul did not have the complete picture. I'm sure he published the best work that he could given the information he had at the time. I'd like to think that my work simply builds off his, and corrects where errors have been noted. There is lots of new information that has come to light since he performed his initial research on the subject and published it in FlyPast in the early 80s. Unfortunately, many OTHER authors have used that initial work as the basis of THEIR writing, and have re-printed and perpetuated errors that were in that work. Not a spear at Paul, as he did the best he could with what he had. More of a spear at every other writer who simply took the research as gospel instead of critically thinking about it. I'd expect nothing less of anyone looking at my material, too.

I agree with you, completely, and as I said -- I don't profess to be an 'expert' or more knowledgeable than anyone else. Apologies if I came off that way. I merely am anal about performing detailed research and reporting that as accurately as possible. You're right that my work will likely have errors as well, and I'm aware of it. I'm simply giving it my best.

Last edited by Randy Haskin on Fri Jul 20, 2007 10:26 am, edited 2 times in total.

[Randy Haskin]

FWIW, there is another 'giant' of civilian Mustang research that nobody seems to know about -- Malcom Gougon. Mal spent lots of time and money througout the 1970s and early 80s chasing down individual airframe histories from FAA microfilm and interviews with owners. Then, on typewriter he compiled detailed multi-page profiles of each aircraft, including ownership changes, 337 modifications, registrations, and other maintenance.

The summary of that work, a massive un-published volume called the "Warbird Location Guide" forms the basis of the reference for a few current-day well known Mustang historians whom he passed his work on to before he died.

Unfortunately Mal's work will never be published in his name, but you no doubt see the fruits of his work all the time.

[JDK]

Hi Randy,

Thanks for the responses - no argument there, and again, I wish you the best with your work, and who knows, may make an exception and buy a (Cavalier) Mustang book!

I have to admit to not having heard of Malcom Gougon - thanks for the note.

Regards,

[jaldo]

They apparently even used the FAS B-26 as a "decoy" to try and lure FAH Corsairs across the border so they could shoot them down there.

The B-26 (FAS-600) was acquired well after the conflict was over.This aircraf though,when adquired,had malfunctions in various systems including the bomb bay door and it couldn't had flown bombing missions even if it could've made in time for action.That's why they used the C-47s for bomb runs!

Here's a rare picture of the mercenary pilots in front of a FAS Cavalier
L to R: Red Gray,Chuck Lyford and Jerry DeLarm

[Glen]

Once Again the Wixers have come through again with outstanding responces to my ?'s Thank you one and all .

[Randy Haskin]

Jaldo, where did you get that photograph from?