Lucy/666 Picture

[jmkendall]

I have not seen this before. Has anyone else seen this wiki entry with a picture of Zeamers B-17?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_666

[Steve Birdsall]

That photo of 41-2666 in May 1943 comes from movie footage unearthed by Bobby Rocker. It’s been used on the Pacific Wrecks site and in Larry Hickey’s 43rd Bomb Group book.

The Wikipedia page is just another example of the disinformation surrounding this crew, plane and mission. For one thing, 41-2666 was named Lucy, a fact confirmed by Jay Zeamer himself.

All that stuff about “a skip-bombing run on a Japanese aircraft carrier, swooping within fifty feet of its decks" and “a night mission over Wewak” being flown in 41-2666 are rubbish.

The best and most accurate summary of the Zeamer story can be found at http://zeamerseagerbeavers.com/. I recommend it highly.

[jmkendall]

Thanks Steve I really appreciate you taking the time to respond.

The last I had heard there was a possible view of the r/h front nose with the Camera installation and also a picture of the crew in front of "Lucy".

I have a 1/32 B-17 kit that I was thinking about doing in Zeamer and his Crew's honor. Now I think it may be more interesting to do one of the Royce Missions B-17's. Much more interesting paint scheme.

[Steve Birdsall]

Happy to help, although I didn't help much.

Exactly what 41-2666 looked like at the time of the Zeamer mission remains a mystery. The name was painted on the nose, it was armed with 16 machine guns, but the exact setup of the guns and cameras in June 1943 is still unknown. When that plane first arrived in Australia about a year earlier, a 435th Squadron historian noted that it had "$50,000 worth of cameras" installed. It was always a pretty unique and valuable aircraft, which is one reason why those "dragged from the boneyard" stories are so silly. It certainly had been repaired with bits and pieces of other planes, but that was pretty common among the Pacific Theater B-17s.

Merry Christmas to Scott and everybody here, maybe we'll find out more in 2017.

[menards2]

The funny thing about history....after awhile it becomes nothing more than "his-story"...

[aerovin2]

The funny thing about history....after awhile it becomes nothing more than "his-story"...

Ever the more reason to thank the guys (like Steve) who work to get the story as correct and complete as possible.

[jmkendall]

This COULD be the end of Lucy. Photo from the Kirtland AFB archives. How many E's were at Kirtland at the end of the war?

[Chris Brame]

How many E's were at Kirtland at the end of the war?

Dave Osborne's list doesn't show any at Kirtland, but over forty E models did end up at RFC in Albuquerque. The big "41" on the nose indicates it was last at Hendricks, which 41-2666 was; so there's a small chance, at least.

[jmkendall]

From what I have read "Lucy" was last noted at Albuquerque, so there is a 1 in 40 Chance that it is Lucy. Factor in the ones that transferred there from Hendricks, and it becomes an even better chance. And lastly it has something painted that sure could be the name "Lucy". I guess I need to see how many "E"s were at Hendricks. And it looks like 10 went from Hendricks to Albquerque. Which would mean that there is a 10 percent chance this is "Lucy".

[Dan Johnson]

Don't forget this thread and the photo of the recce B-17E that is more than likely 666 after the Zeamer mission.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=4426

[Chris Brame]

Just need to find a higher-resolution copy of this image and look for the gun mount in the nose glass frame.
Until then...does anyone see a gun mount here?

One thing I'm noticing: It doesn't have an enlarged window on this side of the nose like the one in the photo on the other thread. The forward window on the other side, seen through the nose, doesn't seem enlarged, but it's hard to tell. I guess we should keep our eyes open for photos of Hendricks trainers and watch for #41.

[jmkendall]

I think that might be trainer 43, and if so, then no joy, as the following pic from 1942 show: