Author Topic: Possible corsair request  (Read 5563 times)

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Possible corsair request
« Reply #15 on: March 12, 2008, 04:45:19 PM »
Looking at the two photos,

http://www.navsource.org/archives/03/0308107.jpg
http://www.navsource.org/archives/03/0308108.jpg

It doesn't look like it's using any tape on the fuselage, I don't think that's tape on the wings. It might be some sort of marking, something akin to this in-game skin:

http://www.netaces.org/skins/f4u1d/skin2.jpg

but different?

I agree it doesn't look like there are pylons, but I really couldn't be sure. The angle isn't good, and there is a shadow in that area. I can't say for sure that they're not simply "out of view" for that photo.

Good catch, though.

It's definitely not a -1, but it could be either a -1A or a -1D. What other distinguishing characteristics are there between these two models? How can you tell 2 apart, aside from the pylons?

Offline Puck

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2980
Re: Possible corsair request
« Reply #16 on: March 12, 2008, 05:02:57 PM »
I'd take her if it was a skin that made it into combat, but besides focusing on the 1A (just started work on a very famous aircraft that has a unique place in WWII aviation history. Screenshots to come) I'm sure Skuzzy's getting tired of seeing my name pop up on Corsair skins. :D

A unique 1A?  Hrm.  Would that be the only aircraft ever to receive a combat award?  Not the pilot, the AIRCRAFT...
//c coad  c coad run  run coad run
main (){char _[]={"S~||(iuv{nkx%K9Y$hzhhd\x0c"},__
,___=1;for(__=___>>___;__<((___<<___<<___<<___<<___
)+(___<<___<<___<<___)-___);__+=___)putchar((_[__
])+(__/((___<<___)+___))-((___&

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Possible corsair request
« Reply #17 on: March 12, 2008, 06:06:16 PM »
Krusty, Quick glance the pylons would be the quickest way. Unless the rocket tabs on the 1D are also permanent parts of the wing structure, in which case the angle makes it obvious those are missing. Regarding the wings, if you look closely at the white stripe on the port-side wing, you can see that it's intruding on the roundel. AFAIK, aircraft that had such ID stripes on the wings carried them on the opposite wing from the roundel (starboard upper, port lower) and never on the same side as the roundel, much less partially covering it (tape, however, WOULD). Also, the strip stops right where the trailing edge of the upper wing fuel tank panel would be, at the leading edge of the fabric portion of the wing.

Lastly, VERY few 1Ds, and of those only a handful of the earliest, had the framed canopy as this aircraft does. The overwhelming majority of Corsairs with the extra frames on the canopy would have been 1As. I'd like to hear Bodhi or WW's assessment, but those REALLY make it sound like a 1A in the overall semi-gloss sea blue scheme.

Puck,

You mean this?

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,229455.0.html

:D
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20385
Re: Possible corsair request
« Reply #18 on: March 12, 2008, 06:50:15 PM »
That it would be a 1A in that scheme also points to a training bird in my mind.  Possibly a Brewster F3A-1 or a Goodyear Built FG1-A. 

It's clear where the photographer was to take the photos, again which points to training or a stateside work up.  Not trying to talk you out of it btw, just want it to be clear whether it's a combat bird or not.
Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters

Offline Halo46

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1155
Re: Possible corsair request
« Reply #19 on: March 12, 2008, 08:55:53 PM »
Not sure how to post pics, but check out the folllowing web site I found on another post by Gaboon I believe. Go down to VMF 312 and you will find a similarly painted squadron. They are operating out of the Marrianas I believe. While the tail is not completely painted as in your example Krusty, it is similar, and only has numbers on fusalage.

http://www.web-birds.com/

Used to fly as Halo46, GRHalo, Hobo and Punk at the end.

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Possible corsair request
« Reply #20 on: March 12, 2008, 10:20:04 PM »
I disagree, Corky. I recently submitted a 1A from VMO-251 in overall semi-gloss sea blue that most definitely saw combat.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20385
Re: Possible corsair request
« Reply #21 on: March 12, 2008, 11:23:31 PM »
I disagree, Corky. I recently submitted a 1A from VMO-251 in overall semi-gloss sea blue that most definitely saw combat.

Not saying for sure, just suggesting it points that way.  You know more about Corsairs then I do.  Does that look like any combat bird you've seen?  I'd love to see it proven to be one.
Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Possible corsair request
« Reply #22 on: March 12, 2008, 11:49:44 PM »
That's more difficult to say without knowing what unit she was assigned to, or at least the aircraft's BuNo. Her gun ports are taped, and she shows some pretty typical Corsair field weathering to the inner wing's paint, especially on the first wing panel aft of the front oil cooler facing. One would think that a training squadron closer to home would have had the resources available to keep the pain fresh and not see that sort of weathering.

It's hard to tell, but the number may have been blasted or worn off the port side front gear door. It doesn't appear to be "motion" smudge, as the rest of the aircraft is pretty clear in that part of the frame. That would be pretty consistent with an abrasive like coral dust being blown back over the inner parts of the wings and airframe. Oddly, the landing gear doors (main and tail) look somewhat lighter than the upper surfaces that is NOT consistent with the lighting and shadows. You can ESPECIALLY see it in the tailwheel doors in the front-quarter view, and if you look at the rear view and compare the bottom of the rudder to the fuselage IMMEDIATELY below it, the spaces between the white checks looks significantly lighter. It doesn't appear, however, that she's in tricolor, as she's not showing the same lightening of the fuselage sides and cowling I'd expect but because of the lighting I can't entirely rule it out.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: Possible corsair request
« Reply #23 on: March 13, 2008, 03:06:11 AM »
I'd say, given the photos on Halo's link, that's probably a bad profile of a VMF-312 aircraft.  Plenty of good pics of the Checkertails on that website that would be good skins for some D-Hogs...  If it is VMF-312, it would definitely be a D-Hog, as the sea-based only VMF's flew D's or -4's exclusively, IIRC.  I tried looking at the same site Fencer did, and still get the error message.  If that comes back up, we'll know for sure.
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Possible corsair request
« Reply #24 on: March 13, 2008, 07:32:55 AM »
Definitely not VMF-312. The photos show clearly that she has the framed canopy, and the checker pattern is MUCH larger than VMF-312's.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Possible corsair request
« Reply #25 on: March 13, 2008, 09:55:44 AM »
On that note, then, would it be possible to request a VMF-312 skin for the D hog, while we figure out which -1A this other plane is?

Offline rogerdee

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2286
      • http://rogerdee.co.uk
Re: Possible corsair request
« Reply #26 on: March 13, 2008, 12:02:53 PM »
the d hog skin is already in the process of being done
490th battling bulldogs
www.rogerdee.co.uk

it does what it says on the tin

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Possible corsair request
« Reply #27 on: March 13, 2008, 12:30:20 PM »
Screens? Can't remember having seen one
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Possible corsair request
« Reply #28 on: March 13, 2008, 01:58:24 PM »
^-- ditto

Usually folks are supposed to post progress threads, so we know what's being done and what is not.

Offline Fencer51

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4677
Re: Possible corsair request
« Reply #29 on: March 13, 2008, 04:19:50 PM »
^-- ditto

Usually folks are supposed to post progress threads, so we know what's being done and what is not.

Really?  Notice the 109s and Spits that got added?  When is the last time you saw an A6M or a N1K1?  Probably over half the skins just appear without being posted here.  And I am not talking about the updates that some people (me and Machnix for two) did to a few skins this time.
Fencer
The names of the irrelevant have been changed to protect their irrelevance.
The names of the innocent and the guilty have not been changed.
As for the innocent, everyone needs to know they are innocent –
As for the guilty… they can suck it.