Movie "Air Force" Identity of "Mary Ann"

[Guest]

Wow!!

My humble, profuse, and abject apologies, gentlement!!

I'm going to take a look at that report.

Thank you for the data!

Regards,
Dan Katz
([Dennis L. Katz - though anyone in the hobby {and all my family members, since about 1960}know me as Dan)
AAHS #18301, 1990-2000.
IPMS-USA #2018, 1967-74/1990-91
SAFCH #1512, 1990-2000)
PS -Just took a look at that report. WOW!!! This confirms everything I've ever read about the war up there - that both we AND the Japanese had to fight the weather even more than each other!!
I HAVE a photo of this aircraft in the form in which she saw action!
I just can't seem to attach it to this post! The photo I have is on the ground, seen from the right side, almost even with the rear entry door. The right wing masks the cockpit. The waists are flush, but top and bottom positions are the blisters. The rear fuselage to just aft of the waists is orange, with prewar tail stripes, and a black "1" on the fin; the cowlings may also be orange. A prewar star-circle-center dot is seen under the right wing, and the rest of the aircraft is natural metal, near as I can tell. The wingtips outboard of the ailerons MAY be another color, it's hard to tell as this area is in shade.
Hope this helps.

-Dan K.

DanK,

More Cold Weather B-17B

Here is some additional information on that Cold Weather Detachment based at Ladd Field, Alaska. The orginal commander of the Cold Weather Detachment was Capt. Richard S. Freeman, Winnamac, Indiana. He was killed when his specially modified B-17B (38-216) crashed near Lovelock, Nevada, on Feb 6, 1941. Freeman Field, Seymour, Indiana, was named after him. The specially modified Ladd Field based B-17B 38-216 had taken off from Sacramento AAB, California, and was enroute to Wright Field, Ohio, via Denver, Colorado, when it suffered a catastrophic structural failure while flying in poor weather. The airplane broke up and crashed to earth. All on board were killed. A summary of this accident appears in Volume I of FATAL ARMY AIR FORCES AVIATION ACCIDENTS IN THE UNITED STATES, 1941-1945.

So there were two B-17B airplanes that were outfitted for the cold weather testing. There is a photo of the Ladd Field Cold Weather modified B-17B Number 1 on page 50 of Squadron/Signal Publication AIR FORCE COLORS VOL. I 1926-1942 by Dana Bell. The caption states that the photo was shot in June 1941, so this is likely to be B-17B # 38-215. From what I understand, some scattered wreckage of 38-216 still can be found at the wreck site near Ragged Top Mountain, Nevada. More on Freeman--he was a recipient of the Mackay Trophy, had been awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross and had been a pioneering Air Mail pilot.

C-47B Tony Mireles


.
.
.

[pokryshkin]

Dear Tony,
Thank you!
I'll see if there's some way I can email the !@#$%^&**())+?><":|}{?!? picture, otherwise if one of you computer photo savvy people can locate it and post it here, it will move the discussion and investigation forward.

Thanks Again.
Bill emailed me that if I can get it to him, he could post it. I can't even get the blankety-blank thing to email!!

Sorry about this, guys!
Dan K.

[pokryshkin]

Sorry, guys, no can seem to do....This photo was on some website or other, possibly even Boeing's.

Sadly,
Dan K.

[Dan Johnson]

Probably the photo in question. I've seen a few. Can't remember where I found this one

[pokryshkin]

Dear Dan,
Thanks yet again!!
Yup, That's the one, and, believe it or not, according to the Marks Report, THAT is the color scheme the aircraft went to war in, until, sometime in late June 1942, the crew begged to have the aircraft camouflaged, which was done!

Yet another fascinating story!!
That's the photo of 38-215, in all her combat-colored glory!!!

I am yet again in your debt!

Yours,
Dan Katz

PS - Notice the flush waists?

[pokryshkin]

Gentlemen:

I have another cat to put among the pigeons: DID the War Bond Tour aircraft STILL have the repainted Serial Number?
-AND WHAT WAS THAT SERIAL NUMBER??
I found, on that website forum where Tony Mireles first reported his findings that, yes indeed, Mary Ann WAS a B-17B, Army Air Forces, or similar, there is a BEAUTIFUL frontal view of the aircraft used on the War Bond Tour, clearly matching the side view of the front of the same aircraft, published with it, and matching the one on this forum.
I'd dearly like to get a better view of that aircraft's fin and rudder!

Another question: Was that repainted "68" ALSO on the fin/rudder during the War Bond Tour?

Can somebody advise us on this?

Regards,
Dan Katz[/i]

[pokryshkin]

Watching Air Force again, the last 10 minutes provides interesting information:

at 1:51:16 and 1:51:37-39, a B-17B/C/D is seen dropping bombs, but the camera frame precludes positive ID except that the aircraft HAS a belly "bathtub."

at 1:54:46-48, an aircraft that is clearly a B-17B (belly "bathtub", early outer engine air intakes) drops bombs.

at 1:55:19 and 1:55:42-44, a "Sharktail" B-17, "16," with the late outer intakes, which MAY have been a refit or repair - and which MIGHT also have cowl flaps! - is seen dropping bombs.

Can anyone add anything to this?


Sincerely,

Dennis L. "Dan" Katz

[Dan Johnson]

Two of the birds in question.

No number


16. Don't think it has cowl flaps, but I can see how it might look that way. Agreed it looks like the later intake outboard on #1

[pokryshkin]

Dear Dan,

I woke up about 10 minutes ago, and it hit me: Could that 2-day stay at Boeing in June by 38-584 have been for the belly bathtub?

By the way, BEAUTIFUL shots of the two, although if you waited a sec, you'd see the "B" intakes on that top aircraft.

I just got an email from Reg Auckland of Aviation News, who wants to see the article.

I shall send it to him.

Air and Space Smithsonian , which HAD been my first choice, seems to not take emails anymore that I know of, and I cannot presently afford the postage until after the 3rd of the month - not knowing whether they'd take the thing anyway!

Will keep you informed on the B-17B rebuild studies.

Tony Mireles is going to send me some of his photos and data to check out, against which aircraft had what "plastic surgery" done, bless him!

I'll let you know how THAT goes, as well.

I'm collecting, a few at a time, (as USAFHRO charges for anything over -I forget how many -10?-pages at a time) the various B-17B Individual Aircraft Record Cards to check against my hypotheses.

It just hit me, as I said: 38-211 WAS the first B-17B, and now it seems very possibly was also the very first B-17B to be completely upgraded - but all it needed was the bathtub, as all the rest had already been done at Wright Field or else at Boeing at Materiel Development Command's request!

COULD 38-584 have gotten done at Boeing that quickly?

What might have happened between June and December, 1941, to 38-584?

Thanks again!!

Dan

[pokryshkin]

Dear Aviation Detective Posse Commitatus:

Another cartoon candle lit over my head in a little cartoon baloon!

That "White Stripe" on the leading edge of the vertical fin, is a missing vertical fin de-icer boot, exposing the metal underneath, or maybe even temporarily replaced by a natural metal piece!

This DOES NOT negate the ID of Mary Ann, not just in those scenes, but throughout the film.

Reference the article: The editor of Aviation News will be back in touch with me on Tuesday.

Regards,
Dan Katz

PS - Work is continuing on the B-17B pieces - article and book.

[pokryshkin]

Dear, Esteemed, Aviation Detective Posse Comitatus:

I had just received (May 4, 2009) a copy of 38-584's IARC, and, with the assistance and guidance of an authority like Dik Shepherd, I now can conclude:
(1)The date for Boeing 8-9-41 and 8-11-41 is a a case of the aircraft being brought to Boeing twice: maybe Boeing was not ready, or the aircraft was needed back at Westover for another day or two, but the stay WAS from 8-11-41 through 8-25-41, enough time for Boeing to complete the work. This is an exception to the timeline that Peter Bowers gave in the September 1974 Airpower, and reprinted in Fortress In The Sky, of redelivery between August 2, and August 21, 1941, after "modernization."

It is interesting that the aircraft WITH that "MODERNIZED" stamp, or with that "modernized" entry, in their IARCs, are less clearly completely modernized than those that simply have the entries indicating their stay at Boeing.

38-584 was returned to Westover on 8-25-41, according to my interpretation of the IARC entries; this now does not differ from that of Dik Shepherd, whom I respectfully but regrettfully contradicted originally in this matter, and who has shown me the light.

(2) During this 2-week period, in my humble opinion, 38-584 was fully modernized, and brought up to B-17C/D Standard.
I reached this conclusion by referring back to the IARC of 38-584, and the IARC of 38-261, also just received, along with the IARC of 38-270, all 3 of which aircraft can be seen to have been brought up to B-17C/D Standard, on the basis of video of the first two aircraft in Air Force," and a photograph from the Hendricks 1942 Yearbook, showing the relevant areas of the third aircraft (3/4 left rear view showing clearly radio, waists, and belly "bathtub).

I admit this is an incomplete and infinitesimal sampling to try to generate date from, but it is all I have at present.

Please feel free to correct me and clarify where I have gone wrong, as Dik Shepherd has done.

Humbly,

Dan Katz

[pokryshkin]

Dear, Esteemed, Aviation Detective Posse Comitatus:

I had just received (May 4, 2009) a copy of 38-584's IARC, and, with the assistance and guidance of an authority like Dik Shepherd, I now can conclude:
(1)The date for Boeing 8-9-41 and 8-11-41 is a a case of the aircraft being brought to Boeing twice: maybe Boeing was not ready, or the aircraft was needed back at Westover for another day or two, but the stay WAS from 8-11-41 through 8-25-41, enough time for Boeing to complete the work. This is an exception to the timeline that Peter Bowers gave in the September 1974 Airpower, and reprinted in Fortress In The Sky, of redelivery between August 2, and August 21, 1941, after "modernization."

It is interesting that the aircraft WITH that "MODERNIZED" stamp, or with that "modernized" entry, in their IARCs, are less clearly completely modernized than those that simply have the entries indicating their stay at Boeing.

38-584 was returned to Westover on 8-25-41, according to my interpretation of the IARC entries; this now does not differ from that of Dik Shepherd, whom I respectfully but regrettfully - and wrongly! - contradicted originally in this matter, and who has shown me the light.

(2) During this 2-week period, in my humble opinion, 38-584 was fully modernized, and brought up to B-17C/D Standard.
I reached this conclusion by referring back to the IARC of 38-584, and the IARC of 38-261, also just received, along with the IARC of 38-270, all 3 of which aircraft can be seen to have been brought up to B-17C/D Standard, on the basis of video of the first two aircraft in Air Force," and a photograph from the Hendricks 1942 Yearbook, showing the relevant areas of the third aircraft (3/4 left rear view showing clearly radio, waists, and belly "bathtub).

I admit this is an incomplete and infinitesimal sampling to try to generate date from, but it is all I have at present.

Please feel free to correct me and clarify where I have gone wrong, as Dik Shepherd has done.

Humbly,

Dan Katz

In the light of the above information, evidence, and data clarified by Dik Shepherd, it would SEEM that the aircraft with the stamp may NOT have been completely upgraded to B-17C Standard, but only partially.
It would then also SEEM that aircraft which had the stay at Boeing did not need the entry , as they were completely (except perhaps for engines) to B-17C Standard, including radio equipment and belly "bathtub."

Again, this my best uneducated inpert guess based on the evidence now clarified and revealed.
(Expert=Dr.Samuel Pierpont Langley, aerodynamics and flight specialist ["off the houseboat into the Potomac"]; Inpert=Wilbur and Orville, bicycle mechanics, BUT WILLLING TO LEARN ANYTHING FROM ANYONE)

Respectfully,

"Dan" Katz

[pokryshkin]

Esteemed Reader:
Please feel free to go back and double-check all my posts ,as, when new data arrives, someone straightens me out, getting me back on the "straight and narrow," or that candle lights in the little cartoon balloon over my head, I update and modify my posts.

ALSO: 38-584 was first delivered to Hamilton Field, home of the 7th Bomb Group. NOW, the question is which squadron was she delivered to:
9th Bomb Squadron? 11th Bomb Squadron? 88th Reconnaissance Squadron?

How do we find this out?

Puzzled,

Dan Katz

[C-47B]

ALSO: 38-584 was first delivered to Hamilton Field, home of the 7th Bomb Group. NOW, the question is which squadron was she delivered to:
9th Bomb Squadron? 11th Bomb Squadron? 88th Reconnaissance Squadron?

How do we find this out?

Puzzled,

Dan Katz

Perhaps looking at the unit histories on film at Maxwell Field could shed some light on what airplanes the individual units had at that time.

C-47B

[pokryshkin]

ALSO: 38-584 was first delivered to Hamilton Field, home of the 7th Bomb Group. NOW, the question is which squadron was she delivered to:
9th Bomb Squadron? 11th Bomb Squadron? 88th Reconnaissance Squadron?

How do we find this out?

Puzzled,

Dan Katz

Perhaps looking at the unit histories on film at Maxwell Field could shed some light on what airplanes the individual units had at that time.

C-47B

That's a great idea!

Anyone able to afford to go there and do it?

Dan Katz