Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Sign in to follow this  
Pat C

Tomahawk IIA Query

Recommended Posts

Chaps - grateful for your thoughts on interpreting this photo. Does this look like it may have had a replacement port wing fitted? The cammo pattern on the port wing looks to be more like that associated with the alternative pattern with the fuselage stripes going the other way, plus the roundel looks to be a different size to that on the stbd wing. Is the entire outer wing in Dark Earth or does the Dark Green just look faded out because of the lighting?

 

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205210195

 

Pat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for ease of reference

mid_000000.jpg?action=e&cat=photographs AMERICAN AIRCRAFT IN ROYAL AIR FORCE SERVICE 1939-1945: CURTIS HAWK 81A TOMAHAWK.. © IWM (CH 5860) IWM Non Commercial License

 

 

large_000000.jpg

37 minutes ago, Pat C said:

Does this look like it may have had a replacement port wing fitted? The cammo pattern on the port wing looks to be more like that associated with the alternative pattern with the fuselage stripes going the other way, plus the roundel looks to be a different size to that on the stbd wing. Is the entire outer wing in Dark Earth or does the Dark Green just look faded out because of the lighting?

 

Maybe partly repainted after damage?  the starbaord roundel is the correct proportions, the port isn't. 

good spot, interesting query.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the roundel on port wing was the roundel decal applied at curtiss factory which has 47" diameter for the blue and 15"3/4 for the red.

So if there was a replacement or repair, it was the starboard wing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BS_w said:

there was a replacement or repair, it was the starboard wing

But it is the port wing that has a cammo pattern that doesn’t match the fuselage pattern and also appears to have just one large dark green area and one large dark earth area. There is another pic of this aircraft on the IWM site with two other 26 sqd aircraft and I must say that it is still the port roundel red section that stands out to me as being slightly different in size and tone from the others.

 

pat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the mainplane is a single unit on the P-40, so you can’t replace the wing on one side only (as you could for a Spitfire). Presumably repair could involve replacement skins or ribs on one side though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks to me like the dark "painted" area of the port wing is actually a shadow from the fuselage.:tomato:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wondered that, but if you look at the root you can see that it the lighter colour in shadow on the fuselage is lighter than the dark colour on the wing, and the demarcation between the two follows the line of the wing root.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

14 minutes ago, Nachtwulf said:

It looks to me like the dark "painted" area of the port wing is actually a shadow from the fuselage.:tomato:

 

Looking at this, I wonder if that is in fact the answer - the light/ dark demarcation on the wing appears to be just inboard of the roundel. You can just make it out on the first pic but it appears to have less contrast.  I'm struggling to see the light/ dark demarcation by the MGs that shows on the first pic so perhaps it is shadow. Apologies as I cant figure out how to embed the larger pic as Troy did!!

 

mid_000000.jpg?action=e&cat=photographs AMERICAN AIRCRAFT IN ROYAL AIR FORCE SERVICE 1939-1945: CURTIS HAWK 81A TOMAHAWK.. © IWM (CH 5874) IWM Non Commercial License

Edited by Pat C

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Pat C said:

But it is the port wing that has a cammo pattern that doesn’t match the fuselage pattern and also appears to have just one large dark green area and one large dark earth area. There is another pic of this aircraft on the IWM site with two other 26 sqd aircraft and I must say that it is still the port roundel red section that stands out to me as being slightly different in size and tone from the others. 

 

pat

it's not easy to see the pattern on port wing because the incidence of lighting is bad

Below, the roundel applied by Curtiss on H81 and H87 allocated to british.

 

 

 

raf_ro10.jpg

 

comparison of ratio of red dia (white: Curtiss and red:RAF)

raf_ro11.jpg

9 minutes ago, malpaso said:

I think the mainplane is a single unit on the P-40, so you can’t replace t

he wing on one side only (as you could for a Spitfire). Presumably repair could involve replacement skins or ribs on one side though... 

the main plane is build from two wings which are bolted together in center line

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Pat C said:

 

 

Looking at this, I wonder if that is in fact the answer - the light/ dark demarcation on the wing appears to be just inboard of the roundel. You can just make it out on the first pic but it appears to have less contrast.  I'm struggling to see the light/ dark demarcation by the MGs that shows on the first pic so perhaps it is shadow. Apologies as I cant figure out how to embed the larger pic as Troy did!!

 

mid_000000.jpg?action=e&cat=photographs AMERICAN AIRCRAFT IN ROYAL AIR FORCE SERVICE 1939-1945: CURTIS HAWK 81A TOMAHAWK.. © IWM (CH 5874) IWM Non Commercial License

Nice picture! The two background aircraft have a different pattern to the aircraft in the foreground. Was there different factory camo patterns?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main plane of the Tomahawk was actually two pieces bolted together to give a continuous wing, so wing replacement could be undertaken. 

 

That said the aircraft is AH896 RM-Y of 26 SQN. This aircraft had previously served with 403 SQN however there is no reported accidents to her before going to 26 SQN (403 were good at writing the accidents they had up). I can only find one accident that has no serial numbers associated with it, however if AH896 was involved then it must have been light damage as the aircraft was flying 12 days later. A wing replacement could be done in that timeframe however I would have expect if that was the level of damage it would have been trucked to an MU or Civilian company and there is no mention of that on its record card. There is a 14 day gap between leaving 403 (they were re-equipped with Spitfires) and appearing in 26SQN.

 

Buz 

Edited by Buz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear, my mistake.  I think I’ve only ever seen photos of the P-40 wing pair bolted together as for transport or painting.  Even so, separation of a single wing would seem to involve more effort than on a Spitfire, say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

the starbaord roundel is the correct proportions, the port isn't. 

Just got back on the website after solving some internet access issues...this might be just a guess, but it appears to me  the roundels on both wings are the same diameter, but from a quick measurement of the photo, it appears to me that the roundel on the port wing has been painted further inboard than the one on the starboard wing; due to the greater chord at that point, it gives the appearance that the roundel is smaller in diameter than the one on the starboard wing. . On the camouflage pattern, I do agree that the difference is not due to being in the shadow of the fuselage, for the same reason/s submitted by  Graham.  I'm just spitballin' here, as we say in Texas! BTW, BS_w, thanks for the great factory photos and diagrams! (I will now sit quietly and catch up on everything that has transpired during the week I couldn't login!)

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pat C said:

Apologies as I cant figure out how to embed the larger pic as Troy did!!

 

has to be manually, find the actual image address,  it will read with 'mid' near the end, edit that to read 'large'

https://media.iwm.org.uk/ciim5/22/927/large_000000.jpg?

 

paste that in a new window,  copy and paste that, it's a faff, but they exist as larger images on the IWM server,  and 

 

large_000000.jpg

 

perhaps just a repaint due to damage?  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nachtwulf said:

Nice picture! The two background aircraft have a different pattern to the aircraft in the foreground. Was there different factory camo patterns?

Looks like the usual mirror image that was intended to be on alternate serials.  But the wing pattern is lacking some Dark Green.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the IWM site is a treasure trove. Here is AH896 nearest the camera with 403 squadron as mentioned by Buz. Cammo pattern is clearly visible on outer port wing. Something has definitely gone on between the two pictures!!

 

Pat

 

mid_000000.jpg?action=e&cat=photographs ROYAL AIR FORCE FIGHTER COMMAND, 1939-1945.. © IWM (CH 2573) IWM Non Commercial License

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Troy Smith said:

 

has to be manually, find the actual image address,  it will read with 'mid' near the end, edit that to read 'large'

https://media.iwm.org.uk/ciim5/22/927/large_000000.jpg?

 

paste that in a new window,  copy and paste that, it's a faff, but they exist as larger images on the IWM server,  and 

 

large_000000.jpg

 

perhaps just a repaint due to damage?  

 

 

 

Aircraft in the foreground seems to have a left aileron with the camo pattern shared by the other two aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...