Warbirds and fuel

Tulio · **Joined:** Mon May 03, 2004 1:05 am **Posts:** 3236

Prediction: this thread will be deleted or locked real fast :drink3:

[just in case, the posting is in jest]

Are warbird restorations incorrect, and the veterans dishonored, if the engines on those airplanes are not running on the same type of fuel
they used during the war? Different fuel octanage, means different power settings, and so on... :roll:

Tulio

warbirddriver · **Posted:** Wed Sep 14, 2011 10:57 pm

Don't forget the oils and other fluids as well. While we are mentioning it, the rubber compounds used in the tires and hoses. Wires! Don't forget the wires. And the radios and GPS's and nice comfy Butler parachutes in place of the old butt busters. SO what exactly is your point? I currently pump 100 octane into the planes I fly and the manuals call for 100 octane. I fail to see the difference and more importantly how this in any way can be disrespectful to anyone.

Glenn

Tulio · **Joined:** Mon May 03, 2004 1:05 am **Posts:** 3236

I guess I am trying to take to the limit of possibilities, this tired issue of markings. I am one of those who think that it is important that the airplane flies, and that there are people out there, with the money -and the interest- to keep them flying. The simple fact, that these machines survive after so many years, is amazing to say the least. They were not thought nor designed to last forever.

Whatever markings they carried, were exact and correct at the moment when the surviving image was shot. Weathering, time, and so many factors, mean that the markings and or / colors could never remain the same after that particular moment in time.

I was as glad to see the pink P-40 [I understand that a similar pattern was applied to those for use in N.Africa, but weather rendered them a very light sand color; don't know if that is a fact or not.] as I was glad to see them in any Flying Tigers markings, whether the markings were placed exactly to the inch, where they were supposed to go.

My fist flight ever on a T-6, was in 1986 when Fred Thompson [RIP] of the West Houston Squadron, CAF [When it meant Confederate] kindly took me flying on his Harvard mark something or another. His initials "F - T" surrounded the Canadian roundel. Historically correct or not, that was my first T-6 flight, and one that I will remember until the day I die

So, to simply say it: I was trying to make light of an issue that tends -and will continue- to re-appear here at WIX and that in my opinion, is not as important as keeping them flying.

Saludos,

Tulio

Invader26 · **Joined:** Wed Aug 11, 2010 7:56 am **Posts:** 843

Tulio, well put.

There is a place for all discussion here and as far as I'm concerned no "wrong" answers if the intent is positive.

PS: I'm older than all the 19+year old original WW2 warbird pilots, I guess I'm not original either so can't fly one..... :drinkers:

PPS: Speaking of colours, I'm looking for a cool scheme for my M151A2 MUTT - with an aviation theme to be used in our hangar...

cwmc · **Joined:** Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:43 am **Posts:** 322

My first warbird ride was with dad in our friends T-6 when I was 2 years. It had been painted in a beautiful four color scheme of salmon, brown, orange and cream. Back then warbirds weren't exactly welcomed everywhere and when they were surplussed the marking had to be obliterated. Most guys tried to make them fit the civilian role. Our T-28A never was painted but had large black and sliver blocks painted on it, they covered the AF markings. Our GB-2 was painted in the usual Beech bird paint job in yellow and black, with red pinstripes. It ran on 80/87, BTW!
Chris...

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Thu Sep 15, 2011 7:19 am

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mustangdriver/6036591730/

Tell this family that markings don't matter. Also I have seen just as many veterans honored with static aircraft as I have flying ones. And to them, it never mattered that the aircraft was static only. What mattered was that it looked just like theirs did. Something to think about.

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Thu Sep 15, 2011 7:25 am

And just to follow up, I don't think there is anyone that should tell anyone else what to do with their airplane. I don't think that Karen should be concerned about her markings, and without a doubt should put engine work infront of anything in the way of paint. I think that a warbird or aircraft owner in general has the right to do whatever they want with their aircraft. It is theirs. But I don't think it is right to say that markings and paint scheme do not matter.

John Dupre · **Posted:** Thu Sep 15, 2011 7:39 am

Tulio wrote:

I was as glad to see the pink P-40 [I understand that a similar pattern was applied to those for use in N.Africa, but weather rendered them a very light sand color; don't know if that is a fact or not.] as I was glad to see them in any Flying Tigers markings, whether the markings were placed exactly to the inch, where they were supposed to go.Tulio

People are upset over Sue Parrish' pink P-40? Have they seen the pink B-25 in "Catch 22"? I remember when the Parrish P-40 came out, as it were. There was a lot of comment about it and they explained it this way. During the war there was a Desert Tan or Desert Sand paint that many North Africa based aircraft were painted in. After weathering and fading the color turned pink. Sue Parrish was often told by genuine VETERANS of North Africa that her color scheme was entirely accurate as to the pink color. Probably the high gloss of the paint wasn't accurate but even during the war aircraft were occasionally polished......so there.

Dave Hadfield · **Joined:** Sun Sep 17, 2006 10:31 pm **Posts:** 1672

My P-40 manual has 2 sets of power charts, one for the 100 octane (100/130) sent to the fronts, and the other for the 93 octane burned on the continental US.

No one has 100/130 any more, but 100LL, which we can still burn, is pretty darn close.

My Fairchild has a Warner engine with a minimum requirement of 73 octane, and wasn't designed for lead at all.

Dave

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Thu Sep 15, 2011 8:21 am

I think that Sue Parish's P-40 would almost fall into that group of warbirds that even if the markings are not 100% it created a history all of it's own the way it is.
My biggest question in all of this is,"Are there enough warbirds out there that fit all of our interests so that we don't have to say it is this way or nothing". I think there are. There are the ultra correct examples, then there are the "fun" ones. Either way when one flies into my airport, I am thrilled to see it. When we are talking gloss over flat I get that the gloss holds up better and think nothing of it.
I am thankful to all of the owners and museums, both flying and static, that allow me to enjoy the aircraft.

Dudley Henriques · **Posted:** Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:36 pm

mustangdriver wrote:

I think that Sue Parish's P-40 would almost fall into that group of warbirds that even if the markings are not 100% it created a history all of it's own the way it is.
My biggest question in all of this is,"Are there enough warbirds out there that fit all of our interests so that we don't have to say it is this way or nothing". I think there are. There are the ultra correct examples, then there are the "fun" ones. Either way when one flies into my airport, I am thrilled to see it. When we are talking gloss over flat I get that the gloss holds up better and think nothing of it.
I am thankful to all of the owners and museums, both flying and static, that allow me to enjoy the aircraft.

The word we got on Sue's P40 basically said that the exact theme was carefully chosen to reflect both the power of the aircraft and the fact that a VERY competent female pilot was flying it.
If one looks carefully, the feminine eye and the exact shape and presentation of the shark teeth tell the entire story.
The glossy pink was chosen for the same reason. In a very pleasant, thoughtful, and non-threatening way, Sue was making a bold statement for women in aviation by presenting her P40 this way.
It was imaginative and creative and I believe achieved perfectly the statement Sue intended.
A great plane flown by a great pilot................and a great lady
Dudley Henriques

Tulio · **Joined:** Mon May 03, 2004 1:05 am **Posts:** 3236

mustangdriver wrote:

But I don't think it is right to say that markings and paint scheme do not matter.

Do not -actually, IMHO, should not- matter as much.

Do you want a snapshot of the airplane, "as it was" in the day? I am sure that a picture can be found.

OTOH, and in this case I am talking about P-51s, very few of the surviving examples, actually saw combat in the ETO or PTO.

Many of them served in Latin American air forces, Israeli, Philippine and Indonesian AFs; to be true to the real historical markings, these aircraft
should instead, be painted in the markings of any of those countries, where they served longer in many cases, than in the USAAF.

For example, the first F-51 joined the Guatemalan Air Force in July of 1954, the last few flying examples were sold in the early 1970s.
The Dominican Republic AF Mustangs saw service for an even longer period of time.

These airplanes saw distinguished service and they saw their share of combat, too, mostly air-to ground.

But, wait! Historical accuracy does not matter then, am I correct? It is not if the airplane had a longer service record in any other air arm, but we tend to concentrate on snapshot during it's service time.

I will say it again: As long as they are flying, or well preserved, all is well as far as I am concerned. Invasion stripes width, milimetric marking location, shade of blue or yellow or red, I do not care that much [unless you mangle a sign, as in the LSFM's AT-11] but I am sure that the Testor's Brigade

will continue doing what they have been doing thus far.

Saludos,

Tulio

Scott Rose · **Posted:** Fri Sep 16, 2011 4:45 am

This is of course a touchy subject with people. Keep it civil and it stays. If it gets into a fight then myself or the mods will pull it.

kalamazookid · **Posted:** Fri Sep 16, 2011 9:16 am

Don't like the paint scheme on the real one? Build a model. That's what I do. Then I can have my own collection of stuff painted exactly the way I like. If I want a Tigercat with markings placed exactly where they're supposed to be and no grotesque nose art, I'll build one that way. You can also have all the armor plating, armament, gunsights, correct radios, etc. in your model that the real ones often ignore/can't find to install. You can have as many exact little replicas as you want.

I'd rather just appreciate that the real ones are there for us to gripe about. Seeing the Air Zoo Tigercat fly is one of my most cherished memories from my childhood. If it were painted bright green with orange polka-dots, that wouldn't change a thing.

I'll just end it here before I get really cynical.

Warbird Information Exchange

Warbirds and fuel

Who is online