P-47 Thunderbolts - Second Generation

[Don Boose]

Dave - I very much enjoyed reading your historical ruminations, as I always do. I think Niki's idea is sound. If you want to continue the search, and if you have not already done so, I would recommend contacting the U.S. Air Force Historical Support Division (Air Force Historical Studies Division - Home). I do not currently have a point of contact there, but can certainly find one if you want to pursue this. The AFHSO Tuskegee Airmen Fact Sheet provides some leads for additional research (Factsheets : Tuskegee Airmen).

The other resource I would try (if you haven't already) is the Tuskegee Airmen Association (Tuskegee Airmen Inc. - The legacy of The Tuskegee Airmen). They have posted an abridged chronology developed by Dr. Daniel L. Haulman, who was the Chief of the Organizational Histories Branch of the Air Force Historical Research Agency (the repository of the USAF archives and the equivalent of our Military History Institute at the U.S. Army war College).

Although it is not documented, the abridged chronology appears to be very well researched, and I am sure that Dr. Haulman or his successor at the AFHRA would be glad to identify his sources, which I presume are set forth in the unabridged chronology.

According to the abridged chronology (http://newsite.tuskegeeairmen.org/wp...y_abridged.pdf), the 332nd (which was flying P-39s until that time) was issued six P-47s on 25 April 1944:

"April 25, 1944: The 332nd Fighter Group received its first six P-47 airplanes, two of which were assigned to each of its three fighter squadrons, the 100th, 301st, and 302nd."


"May 1, 1944: The 99th Fighter Squadron, which was flying P-40 airplanes, was assigned to the 332nd Fighter Group, which was converting from P-39s to P-47s, but the 99th remained attached to other groups for combat missions until July."

In May, the 332nd was transferred from the Twelfth Air Force to the Fifteenth Air Force, and its mission thus changed from tactical operations to escort of strategic bomber operations. The Chronology continues:

"June 7, 1944: The 332nd Fighter Group flew its first mission with the Fifteenth Air Force. The mission was a fighter sweep."

"June 8, 1944: The 332nd Fighter Group flew its first heavy bomber escort mission, protecting B-17s of the 5th Bombardment Wing on a mission to Pola, Italy."

"June 9, 1944: The 332nd Fighter Group flew its first bomber escort mission over Germany, on a mission to Munich. During this mission, four Tuskegee Airmen shot down five enemy fighters. These were the first aerial victories of the 332d Fighter Group."

The chronology doesn't say what aircraft they were flying, but surely they were not conducting deep penetration escort missions into Germany with P-39s. Since the P-51s had not yet been issued, they must have been flying P-47s. Indeed, as I read the chronology and William Alexander Percy's Journal of Military History article, "Jim Crow and Uncle Sam: The Tuskegee Flying Units and the U.S. Army Air Forces in Europe During World War II" (JMH, Vol. 67, No. 3, July 2003: 773-810), the reason the 332nd was issued the P-47s was to enable them to conduct the strategic escort missions. This is what the chronology says about the ship attack and the end of the P-47s with the 332nd:

"June 25, 1944: Eight P-47 pilots of the 332nd Fighter Group, including 2nd Lt. Gwynne W. Pierson of the 302nd Fighter Squadron, strafed a German warship in the Adriatic Sea near Trieste. Although they claimed they sank a German destroyer that day, German naval records indicate the ship did not sink and was scuttled the next year."

"July 4, 1944: The 332nd Fighter Group flew its first mission in the P-51 Mustang aircraft, which replaced the P-47s the group had been flying."

None of this sheds any light on the colors and markings of the aircraft, but it does address the use by the 332nd of the P-47 in combat and, I hope, provides some leads for further research.

I sure hope that this does not totally duplicate your own research, Dave. The Haulman chronology tracks very well with your conclusion to date, except that it indicates the 332nd did use the P-47 in combat, including deep penetration escort missions into German

I very much look forward to following your future work on the history, the colors and markings, and the superb model.

Keep 'em flying!

Don

[airdave]

Those missions, that you are assuming were in P-47s
could just as easily have been in P-40s (if they didn't have Mustangs by then).

I read that they only had those first P-47s for four weeks.
Bubbletops did come later (and again after the War)
But they would still have had plenty of P-40s.

The idea that P47s did not do any "combat" missions doesn't make sense to me (I admit).

I can imagine with only six P47s spread thin, they didn't see much action.
And the P-40s were still reliable fighters...they were just worn out aircraft.
Delivery of six worn out P47s would have been an interim attempt to stem complaints
by delivering some "new" aircraft...lol
I'm sure the Mustangs didn't come soon enough.

Thanks Don...I will be reading all the references you have just posted.
Its fun to learn this stuff.

But I'll be honest...I'll have two Tuskegee models done before I get any more info!
I'm just too impatient.
I'm going to do the bare metal I described earlier...and a version like the one in that profile artwork I posted.
I'm happy that they will represent adequately.

So, please don't spend any more time than you want to on this.

My thought...I believe the Internet has opened up the world's largest encyclopedia for everyone
...its wonderful, to give such unlimited access to so much information
...and yet, at the same time, it has bred the most misinformation, myths and non-facts that we could ever have imagined.
I feel like I spend more time disproving things to myself, than I do finding new facts.


...
In the Tuskegee Airmen interviews (when that Red Tails movie came out) they talked about switching
from P-40s to P-51s. Thats the story that is told in both Tuskegee motion pictures too.
I know we are talking about about old men with failing memories, but they wouldn't forget
the difference between a P-40, a P-47, or a P-51.?

I guess it just means the P-47 had minimal history within the 332nd.

[Don Boose]

Dave -

I claim no expertise on the Tuskegee Airmen, and am only parroting the sources, but since those sources originate with the USAF historians, I would give them a degree of credibility. Based on those sources, the 332nd did not fly P-40s operationally. They were issued P-39s when they arrived in Italy according to the Haulman chronology and flew them until they transitioned to P-47s. The 99th flew the P-40s in combat. The chronology seems to indicate that the 99th transitioned to P-47s along with the 332nd to which they were assigned at about the same time as the switch to P-47s.

It seems unlikely to me that P-40s would have been used on the Fifteenth Air Force escort missions, but again, I stress that I am not an authority on this.

I look forward to learning from you as you continue the quest. I don't plan to do original research on this topic, but have shared our correspondence with aviation historian colleagues and one of them may have some authoritative info (logbooks, unit war diaries and command reports, message traffic, and the light) that might narrow down the possibilities.

Hope we can discuss this over a beer in November.

Don

[airdave]

Yeah...I must clarify...also not being any sort of expert, just being lazy
...when I use the name 332nd I am generally referring to the Tuskegee Airmen
...its just shorter to type.
And I can't keep track...I'm still wondering where the 900 part articulated Track goes on this model?!

Obviously the 332nd is originally the combined 100th, 301st and 302nd FS
and later combined with the 99th....and still called the 332nd

Quote from wiki "Individual pilots of the 332nd Fighter Group earned 96 Distinguished Flying Crosses. Their missions took them over Italy and enemy occupied parts of central and southern Europe. Their operational aircraft were, in succession: Curtiss P-40 Warhawk, Bell P-39 Airacobra, Republic P-47 Thunderbolt and North American P-51 Mustang fighter aircraft." (referring to the 332nd as a whole)

[airdave]

Reading the history thingy at the Tuskegee site...

The 332nd had received six P-47s (from the 325th) and must have received more
before May 22 (1944)...8 pilots are referenced on the "destroyer sinking" flight.

Beginning of May(1944) the 99th had joined the 332nd
but they didn't actually show up until July?

I read that P47s did not conduct any combat missions.
Exactly what that means, I am unsure.
But it could mean only flight training, recon, patrol, etc
Maybe not those Bomber support missions at the beginning of June?
They might have still had P39s...I thought P39s were fast attack?
Good for Bomber support wouldn't they be?

That boat sinking (I have read) was aircraft on some sort of patrol
or exercise mission...and they came upon that ship (not a Destroyer).
And only one plane attacked the ship.
That makes me think it was a training flight or maybe they weren't properly armed?

I'll admit, I am a little confused and very skeptical of so much I read now.
I thought I knew something about the 332nd, but I realize I don't.
I have abook on the Tuskegee airmen too, but I've only ever looked at the pictures.
LOL maybe I should it read it one day.

Now I see why everyone ignores everything before the Mustang...it gets a lot simpler after they arrived!

...
on a side note:

From armytimes.com...

HIGHLAND, Calif. — Col. Paul L. Green, one of the Tuskegee Airmen
— the legendary black pilots who escorted U.S. aircraft during World War II —
has died in a Southern California senior care home. He was 91.

Green died Monday morning at Brightwater Senior Living with Angel Green, his wife of 68 years, at his side.
Green flew 25 combat missions with the 99th Fighter Squadron in Italy, escorting bombers.
Full story: Col. Paul Green, member of Tuskegee Airmen, dies at 91

[Don Boose]

Dave -

The P-39s were designed as interceptor fighters, but by the time the United States got into the war they weren't up to the mark and were mostly used as ground attack aircraft in the South and Southwest Pacific.

I was surprised to read that they were still being used operationally as late as 1944 in the MTO and speculate that they were handed over to the 332nd as interim operational training aircraft.

It will be interesting to learn more.

Honor to Colonel Green and his service.

Don

[airdave]

sorry Don...didn't really know much about the P39.
I appreciate the info.

I've run into a small problem with my razorback...can't get the spine parts to fit.
I must have resized something...somewhere...at some point.
I'll have to take some measurements and see what has to be done.

Once that is sorted I can get back to another testbuild.

[mbauer]

Hi Dave,

The P39 was a lend-lease aircraft to the Russians. They used it extensively for ground attack. Engine was behind the pilot, a driveshaft ran from the engine to the prop. Said driveshaft ran under the pilot seat.

It was not a great airplane to dog fight with, this from what I've read about it.

Good luck with the Razorback!

Mike

[airdave]

I have an Aerocobra in War Thunder.
With its big forward cannon and six wing guns.
other than being slow, its a formidable aircraft....at least in that video game.

what? you mean thats not real life?


...
yeah, I think you are right Don.
Other than a few vague facts...the "chronology" on the Tuskegee Airmen site
is a good read and fairly concise history. I never read that before and never really
paid enough attention to the formation of the various Groups and Squadrons.
A quick read through gives you the basics.

I've tried looking up a few planes by their serial numbers to see if there are
records, but the info is very limted. Joe Baugher's site is extremely helpful ,
as are the MACR reports. But so much stuff was not properly documented.

I wish there were more photos taken...it would help answer so many of my questions.
But it seems cameras weren't invented until the 332nd received Mustangs. lol

Then theres the issue of painting over tail numbers...red tails made it very difficult
to track the specific Mustangs. I'm sure transferring aircraft, stripping paint and
painting over things causes similar issues with other aircraft.


...
Razorback issue...very odd.
Obviously I did a razorback already (in paper model).
Basically, I designed a spine part (and internals) to fit on the back of the existing fuselage.
I built one, it worked great!
Now that I have updated the P-47 kit...but have not altered the back of the fuselage in any way,
its a simple job to update the artwork on the spine parts and give them a try.

But I can't seem to remember the exact placement or how to make the parts fit correctly.
The spine part seems too long for this fuselage.
The internal supports don't want to fit properly.
And I never had to fit around a cockpit before.
Now the cockpit opening and rear cockpit wall have to fit to a precise location
and I need to determine exactly where that is.
I also need to create assembly diagrams that indicate that location and any
other reference points for the assembly.

Anyway, I designed some new spine parts this morning, and I'll give them a try today.

[Don Boose]

Yes. Tail numbers are soooo helpful, and it is so frustrating when they are painted over or invisible in photographs. It is to be hoped that more images come to light. But pending that, I am increasingly persuaded that your proposed OD/gray color scheme for the Tuskegee P-47 is defensible.

The current issue of Naval History has a "Historic Aircraft" article on the Curtiss R5C-1 (C-46A) Commando. They did their best to provide historically accurate illustrations, and include an undated photographic image of a natural metal post-1947 (judging from the national insignia with red bars) R5C-1 tail code AC (so probably belonging to VMR-153?), nose number 573 and an illustration of an OD/Gray R5C-1 with white 14 on the tail. The caption says, "Possibly of VMJ (later VMR)-252 in mid-1944, it is virtually impossible to accurately identify the aircraft because of the lack of unit markings and the small size of the bureau numbers."

So endeavor to persevere on this project.

Don