Reply to post

B-17 "Mary Ann"

Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 2 of 8
Author
Alex Smart
Division Member
  • Total Posts : 1869
  • Reward points : 7099
  • Joined: 2002/09/07 16:00:52
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/29 10:45:01 (permalink)
0
Hello  Tony,

Is that number ficticious ?

I ask this question because could it be read as
0-5564 ?
And therefore a correct number ?

In the UK for a start  Aircraft that had outlived their lives were in some cases relegated for maintenance and training use and given numbers that ended with the letter "M" such as Hawker Hurricane L2101 that became 3582M from March of 1943.
While B17 40-2056 in RAF use serial number AN524 became 3355M  from September 1942.

What were the equivalent for aircraft in the US ? they too must have been given some new designation ?

Others in Europe, dont know about in the US , were given "WW" before or after number as "War Weary".

I know that old aircraft have been given the "0" before the number as per old aircraft.

As for the number "10" that I think is also a genuine number as other aircraft in the film are shown with IIRC number's "12" and "17" to name two. 
Just a little more

Alex
Anthony J. Mireles
B-17 Nut
  • Total Posts : 1207
  • Reward points : 4184
  • Joined: 2006/03/04 13:28:27
  • Location: Calumet City, Illinois USA
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/29 14:42:20 (permalink)
0
Alex,

Check my second post on this topic.  It is in reply to your post.  I address the 40-5564 issue.  Checked the Joe Baugher index; there is no B-17C or B-17D that has the 40-5564 serial number. 

The B-17C serials are as follows: 40-2042 through 40-2079.
The B-17D serials are as follows: 40-3059 through 40-3100

Punched in 40-5564 in the Joe Baugher index.  Nothing comes up.  Not one hit.  As far as I can tell, the number (40-5564) is wholly ficticious.  It belongs to no AAF airplane whatsoever.  That is as far as I can tell.  I could be wrong, and I'll be the first guy to step up and admit it if I am.  But 40-5564 is a dead end. The AAC (Army Air Corps in 1940) probably didn't even accept 5,000 airplanes for the whole 1940 fiscal year.  Maybe someone has the answer.  I don't.  I really appreciate all of your help though.  The same issues about this serial are on a similar "Mary Ann" post in the Heavy Bombers section of this forum.  If we keep putting our heads together, we will solve this one.

Checked the Joe Baugher, checked the master B-17 serial list in "B-17 In Detail and Scale" and checked The "B-17 Nose Art Directory"  No Dice.  Go back and read the third post in this series. 

Thanks for the help Alex, I really appreciate it and I am grateful that others share my interest in solving this one. 

Tony Mireles
post edited by Anthony J. Mireles - 2006/05/29 19:14:18
Mary Ann
Squadron Member
  • Total Posts : 35
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2006/05/28 07:58:19
  • Location: New York
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/29 22:30:27 (permalink)
0
Tony,

Just thinking here. Since the movie "Air Force" was made during WW2, it stands to reason that they would have never given out "Mary Ann's" true serial numbers.

While the AC in the movie is depicted as the "Mary Ann", I am not sure that the other numbers, such as the "10" on her tail would also be true to the real Mary Ann.

In my own humble opinion, I would glean what I can from the movie as far as the Mary Ann being real. The first version of the movie does indeed state this as fact.

I am also wondering at this point in time, If the possibilty exists that either she was lost while the film was being made, there was a B17 that was lost on in Oct. 1942. I believe she was a 17C or D however by her serial numbers. If this was the case, they would have never said so during war time, especially while trying to boost morale with the movie "Air Force".

Thats just one theory that I am looking into but I do hope it's not the case.

The other theory, such as the "Memphis Belle" which was restored, there are others that are being restored as well.
Still looking to find the answers if in fact the "Mary Ann" is one of those on the list.


Just my thoughts here.

Mary Ann

Edited to add one last thought.
The movie clearly depicted a B17C, I have no doubts about that. However, how do WE know that the real "Mary Ann" was in fact a 17C? She could have been updated to a D, E, F, and so on. No?
Mary Ann
Squadron Member
  • Total Posts : 35
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2006/05/28 07:58:19
  • Location: New York
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/29 23:05:45 (permalink)
0
Tony,

Not sure if you have ever seen this site, so I am posting it here.

B-17 Flying Fortress - Serien-Nummern (Serial Numbers)
Address:

http://www.b17database.de/ Changed:10:30 PM on Monday, May 29, 2006

The site is in German and English and has alot of invaluable information.

Forgive me folks, as I know we have a database here, however, when I cannot find something I will leave no stone unturned. No disrespect intended to this site.

Mary Ann
Ken a B24 Fan
Division Member
  • Total Posts : 1207
  • Reward points : 1684
  • Joined: 2006/03/19 20:39:00
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/29 23:21:59 (permalink)
0
Mary Ann,

The Internet Movie Data Base web site Mike W pointed us to, (another D'Oh! moment for me--with a slap to the forehead) said: "Actual newsreel footage was expertly inserted into the film, including scenes from the Battle of the Coral Sea."

Most likely, the art director & set designers painted the Mary Anne to emulate the markings of the aircraft in the newsreel footage. The serial number most likely wouldn't have been altered unless they painted the entire plane for the film. I would guess that the most expedient alteration would have been to paint the fictitious name and number on the plane and start shooting.

Films at that time were made as quickly and inexpensively as posible and that meant doing as little to alter the apearence of aircraft and vehicles.

I would also hazzard a guess that the plane carried the name "Mary Anne" for the rest of her service. The crews would have thought it pretty special to fly in a "movie star" and the ground crews honored to service her.

I would also be willing to bet that the nose number dissapeared shortly after filming ceased. (As soon as the studio and AAF were sure that retakes weren't going to be needed.)

Ken

Ken Alexander
Proud son of 1st Lt. Clair B. Alexander Jr.
Pilot, B-24s: 10/12/1944 - 04/24/1945
15th AF, 49th Wing, 461st BG, 764th BS
Torretta Airfield, Cerignola, Italy
Mary Ann
Squadron Member
  • Total Posts : 35
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2006/05/28 07:58:19
  • Location: New York
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/30 04:52:49 (permalink)
0
Ken,

I heard about the news footage inserted a long time ago. It was also mentioned in the original version of the movie. It's easy to spot if you take a look at the type of film used when the actual scene's were inserted. The news scene's never have the same clarity or definition as the movie film itself. It was nice of them to mention where some of the footage came from though.

I agree that the war time movie industry didn't have an elaborate amount of funds to repaint entire AC's for a movie. I do think though that adding a name such as Mary Ann, from one of the other AC's in the news footage, then adding the bogus serial numbers wouldn't be a tremendous task.

I also tend to agree that the crew of the original AC would not want to change the name, hense the popularity as you mentioned.

Oh, and no bets on the nose number disappearing after the filming. I don't doubt it.

I am baffled as to what happened to the famed "Mary Ann" since the movie originall did give credit to the real Mary Ann and her crew.

What they didn't say is that she was in fact a B17 as the AC in the movie itself. They inferred it, true, but didn't do so explicitly in the credits.
Don't get me wrong, I don't want to wander away from the subject at hand. I just want to keep my field of vision wide open, just in case a clue comes out of left field.

With movies, I have learned one thing, one has to do the research to find the difference between fact and fiction.
Hollywood has a tendancy to change truth into fiction, leaving many of us confused and bewildered when we try to find the truth.

Wonder what I would come up with if I did more research on the Battle of the Coral Sea? Surely there must be information on the AC's who participated.

Well, if you, or anyone else has any idea's I am surely open to suggestions.

Thanks for the input, much appreciated!

Oh, and by the way, don't beat yourself up over the "D'oh" incident.
Nothing could have been worse than my first post out here, as I made a blunder that would leave 'em laughing in the isles.

I never checked my copy and past job prior to posting the URL for the "other" AC by the same name of "Mary Ann". My browswer has a special key for that and I didn't look. So,in my feverish feeble attempt of posting what I thought was the "Mary Ann" in question, (couldn't see only two engines in the pics either LOL), I came out the laughing stock when I mixed Marauders with the Flying Fortress!
Imagine the expression on my face with that one! My first post out here!

Can't blame anyone for laughing either, as I had to laugh at my own mistake. :-)



Thank you for your help,
Mary Ann

PS: anyone know if they give out NTB awards around here periodically?
NTB=Not Too Bright! (prime candidate right here)





Mary Ann
Squadron Member
  • Total Posts : 35
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2006/05/28 07:58:19
  • Location: New York
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/30 06:20:01 (permalink)
0
Ken,

I stand corrected yet again.
I went over to the Heavy Bombers section and found this from another poster a while back:

"Jeffery L. Ethell's book Bombers of WWII on page 33 there is picture of the front of the Mary Ann. The caption claims that the Mary Ann was a B-17D and that it was pulled from the line of B-17 transition and then after the movie it was returned to its training base on 6 Apr 43."

I am getting the book. I want to see a pic of her.

I guess the "Mary Ann" did exsist as a B17. Though I noticed she's listed as a B17D. Whereas the movie depicted her a B17C.

I am sure, one way or the other, we will find out what became of her.
One way or another.



Mary Ann

Alex Smart
Division Member
  • Total Posts : 1869
  • Reward points : 7099
  • Joined: 2002/09/07 16:00:52
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/30 06:50:27 (permalink)
0
Hi Tony,
 
Read my mail again please.
 
I talk about 0-5564 NOT 40-5564.
 
Also I address the matter of training a/c and other serial numbers that were or may have been given to them.
 
Over here with the RAF and FAA both had different serial numbers for training and instructional a/c. And suggested that perhaps the US had a simular set up for the Training and instructional a/c in the USAAC . Hence my example of an RAF B17 .
 
I now give a USAAF B17 serial number, OK I know it is post WW2 but it shows what I mean, I hope.
 
B17G 44-83559.  wore the numbers "0-483559" on her tail . she was still 44-83559 but the "0" signifyed some other use.
 
So now, what about 0-5564 , from some unknown Training Unit within the US still useing these early B17's in 1943 for crew training or mechanical instruction or even ditching training. ALL were done somewhere.
 
Thanks for persevereing with this.
 
Alex
 
 
jpeters140
Moderator
  • Total Posts : 7363
  • Reward points : 20493
  • Joined: 2002/01/02 17:37:45
  • Location: Columbus, Indiana
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/30 07:35:11 (permalink)
0
Alex....On your statement that you are talking about 0-5564....versus 40-5564.....a suggestion if you will....Please check Joe Baugher's website for clarification.

http://home.att.net/~jbaugher/usafserials.html

He explains that the "4" was always dropped when the tail  number is used.  Thus 05564 displayed on the tail would be 40-5564.

The "0" in front of the tail number you show as an example  0- 44-83559  is to designate, that this aircraft number was 10 years old....to differentiate,from a  succeeding number of 54-83559, which coual  be a number for a completely different type of airccraft...the first being a B-17 and the second possibly a C-130.
I.E.  0-483559 tail number displayed on the B-17, and 483559 displayed on a C-130.

Joe Baugher explains this better.

Jim :-)

James S. Peters Sr. T/Sgt B-17 Flt Engr, 27 missions 99 BG, 348BS, 5th Wing, 15th AAF Tortorella, (Foggia#2), Italy My Tour was from 12/03/44-06/19/45 M/Sgt USAF (Retired)
Ken a B24 Fan
Division Member
  • Total Posts : 1207
  • Reward points : 1684
  • Joined: 2006/03/19 20:39:00
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/30 12:39:56 (permalink)
0
A comment regarding Joe Baugher's excellent serial number listings.

His serial number blocks seem to be right on the money. Serial number ranges are given for each aircraft's model number and manufacturer.

There are however many gaps in the listings of specific aircraft serial numbers and the occasional mistake in those that are shown.

I've been gathering info on 461st BG B-24s and have encountered gaps, errors and new info on Joe's site, I'll send copies to him when I'm done.

If you don't see a particular serial number listed it doesn't mean it didn't exist. If it fits in the range of numbers for that model, it may have been used, he just didn't have information regarding that particular aircraft.

It's a tremendous resource to have put together and make available to the public. I gotta send him a thank you letter....

Ken

Ken Alexander
Proud son of 1st Lt. Clair B. Alexander Jr.
Pilot, B-24s: 10/12/1944 - 04/24/1945
15th AF, 49th Wing, 461st BG, 764th BS
Torretta Airfield, Cerignola, Italy
Anthony J. Mireles
B-17 Nut
  • Total Posts : 1207
  • Reward points : 4184
  • Joined: 2006/03/04 13:28:27
  • Location: Calumet City, Illinois USA
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/30 23:05:51 (permalink)
0
     After two days of hard work, I have attempted to track the histories of the 38 B-17C airframes and their AAF serial numbers.  Out of the 38 B-17C airframes, three were involved in fatal accidents in the United States before the movie was shot; one was involved in a non-fatal accident in the United States before the movie was shot and was never repaired; eight were either shot down or crashed in combat at Pearl Harbor, Phillipines, Australia, Java, or India; 20 were given to the RAF 90th Squadron in 1941.  Eighteen of those RAF airframes can be accounted for and are definitely not the "Mary Ann."  Two were returned to the USAAF inventory and apparently used exclusively overseas.  One was known to have crashed overseas for sure.  One was returned to the AAF overseas and was converted to a VIP transport.  There is some controversy concerning the correct AAF serial number for this airplane.  It is either 40-2043 or 40-2066, depending on if you want to believe Joe Baugher serial numbers or author Roger Freeman.  The controversy stems from whether the airplane's original serial number was 2043 or 2066.  It was returned to USAAF inventory at Karachi, India, on 1 December 1942 (Karachi was part of India at the time and not Pakistan as it is today).  It probably remained in use overseas and is unlikely to be the famous "Mary Ann" from the movie "Air Force" because the movie was shot in late 1942 and this airplane was returned to the USAAF in December 1942 at Karachi.  That leaves at least six B-17C airframes that could be the "Mary Ann."  They are:

40-2043 (disputed--may have been overseas in late 1942)
40-2046
40-2054 (arrived at Pearl Harbor 12-7-41, fate unknown)
40-2058
40-2059
40-2063 (arrived at Pearl Harbor 12-7-41, known to be at Langley Field, Hampton, Virginia, on 5-29-43)
40-2066 (disputed--may have been overseas in late 1942)
40-2077

It is possible that neither 40-2043 or 40-2066 were in the United States during the filming of "Air Force."

That is what I have found.  I used the following reference materials:

*Joe Baugher Serial Numbers

*"Flying Forts" by Martin Caidin

*"Fortress of the Skies--The B-17 Flying Fortress in Combat"
  by Martin Bowman and William N. Hess

*"B-17 Fortress at War" by Roger A. Freeman

*"B-17 Flying Fortress in Detail and Scale" by Alwyn T. Lloyd

*"Fatal Army Air Forces Aviation Accidents in the United States
  1941-1945" by Anthony J. Mireles

I'm not saying that this is the final word on anything.  The serial numbers listed above are the results that I came up with using the above-mentioned reference materials.  I'm willing to listen to anybody who comes up with anything they can point to and prove.  There are disputed serial numbers of two airplanes by three very reliable sources (Baugher, Freeman and Caidin).  It is my educated guess that the "Mary Ann" was probably one of the above-mentioned eight airframes.  Tony Mireles. 
Ken a B24 Fan
Division Member
  • Total Posts : 1207
  • Reward points : 1684
  • Joined: 2006/03/19 20:39:00
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/31 00:02:27 (permalink)
0
Wow, a lot of work Tony.

That certainly narrows it down. No MACRs for any of them I assume.

Although I have read that there were no MACRs early in the war. When did they start making and keeping MACRs?

The earliest I could get the MACR db on the AAF site to show was: #71 for 07/05/42 and 07/05/43!

Gettin' closer...

Ken


Ken Alexander
Proud son of 1st Lt. Clair B. Alexander Jr.
Pilot, B-24s: 10/12/1944 - 04/24/1945
15th AF, 49th Wing, 461st BG, 764th BS
Torretta Airfield, Cerignola, Italy
Mary Ann
Squadron Member
  • Total Posts : 35
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2006/05/28 07:58:19
  • Location: New York
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/31 00:13:47 (permalink)
0
Tony,

Give yourself a pat on the back for all your hard work!

I do appreciate, and applaud your effort in this mystery of the "Mary Ann".

I also realize, that I post things in drips and drabs, and by no comparison by any means to your hard work.

Just another tidbit I found which refers to the movie itself and the time frame. (paraphrased)


{{Military Aviation Movie List
Address:
http://www.coastcomp.com/av/fltline2/avmovie.htm Changed:10:25 AM on Friday, March 28, 2003
"Air Force
1943 *v
USAAF- J. Garfield; Story of single B-17 and its crew from Dec. 6 to Pearl to Australia. Very well done, and except for the obligatory "wipe out the Jap fleet" scene, realistic.

Shot at Drew Field, Florida in August 1942. Starring 10 Boeing B-17C/D from Hendrick Field (Sebring, Florida), P-40C's, Republic P-43A Lancer, Bell P-39D's, AT-6's (as "Zeros"), from Drew Field (Tampa) 6 McDill AAF 397 BG B-26C's ("Jap bombers")"I Wanted Wings" YB-17 mock-up. P-39, B-18 wrecks.
Stock footage, footage from "Dive Bomber", and "Captains of the Clouds". SB2U-1 cockpit section for close-ups. Models. Paul Mantz flew camera ships - Lockheed Orion, Stinson Model A, Boeing 100. Director Howard Hawks was a USAAC WWI vet. "}}


Ok, now according to all of the information I have found, the AC in question is from Hendrick's Field, Sebring Florida.

One account is obviously from a fellow on the Heavy Bombers who made claim to be the Son of one of the cast.

I do believe the time frame is of the essense in narrowing the field down.

I will copy and paste the AC's you have listed, including the two that are questionable, and will try my best to trace as many as I can.

By the looks of my recent postings, it appears as though my searches were only done in movie land, however, I have been researching Kendrick's Field during WWII, found some nice AC pics but so far nothing on the Mary Ann.

Will keep you posted if any new information comes up, glean from it what you can, and leave the rest.

Mary Ann


Mary Ann
Squadron Member
  • Total Posts : 35
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2006/05/28 07:58:19
  • Location: New York
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/31 02:01:50 (permalink)
0
Tony,

Not sure if this means anything or not, but the 40-2059 is updated in Baugher's listing as written off, with no other explanation.

Copied and pasted from his site:
{2059 w/o Aug 4, 1943.}



Mary Ann~ still digging.
Mary Ann
Squadron Member
  • Total Posts : 35
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2006/05/28 07:58:19
  • Location: New York
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/31 02:21:15 (permalink)
0
Ken,

Just thinking here. Haven't found any of the AC's on the MACR's. Yet.

But if one is written off, such as in the case of the 40-2059, with no other explanation, then what?

IF what Baugher's site claims is true, then what happened to her? Most sites will say scrapped or disassembled and stored at so-and-so's, etc.

Don't get me wrong, I don't want to limit myself to one AC which may or may not be the famed "Mary Ann", but that one little sentence in Baugher's site perplexed me. The site didn't even mention where she last was.

Ok, going back for more digging.
Meanwhile if anyone else has anything to add on that particular AC, could you please let us know? (40-2059)



Mary Ann


Alex Smart
Division Member
  • Total Posts : 1869
  • Reward points : 7099
  • Joined: 2002/09/07 16:00:52
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/31 08:45:24 (permalink)
0
Hi Tony,

Great list you have come up with. Many thanks.

This is what I have on them.
a) from Air Britain Book "The British Air Commission & Lend-Lease"
Fortress I (B17C) Contract A-5077
20 a/c arrived in the UK: AN518-AN537. Matching AAC serials in irregular sequence.
AN518-40-2043
AN530-40-2066
The remaining 18 are all matched.

b) From Air Britain "AA100-AZ999"
AN518 - 90/220 - Ex 40-2043; to USAAF 1.12.42 as 40-2066.
AN530 - 90/220/CCDU/206 - Ex 40-2066; SOC 11.9.43.

c) From "the B17 Flying Fortress Story" RA Freeman
40-2043 - Del RAF 90 sq Polebrook UK 5/41.
40-2066 - Del RAF 90 sq [AN532 WP-J] Polebrook 9/8/41; tran 220sq (MB-J); Egypt & India. Ret USAAF 1/12/42; Burnt out.

So even with these there is a small problem. Because -

40-2066 Del RAF 90 sq [AN532 WP-J] Polebrook 9/8/41; tran 220 sq (MB-J); Egypt & India. Ret USAAF 1/12/42; Burnt out.

40-2069 Del RAF as AN524, damaged on delivery ret US Sebring Fl. 1/12/42 Cr Hendricks 3/1/43 Sal.

40-2079 Del RAF 90 sq (AN518 WP-B) Polebrook 13/5/41; tran 220 sq Egypt; India; ret USAAF; to USA 26.9/43; WO 1/9/44.

As  Air Britain gives

AN530 as 40-2066
AN518 as 40-2043 and 40-2066
AN532 as 40-2069 and 40-2079

Freeman gives
40-2066 as AN532
40-2079 as AN518

To add 40-2079 and AN532.

Air Britain AA100 - AZ999
40-2079 is given as AN537
AN537 SOC 1.9.44

AN532 is given as 40-2069
returned to USAAF 1.12.42 as 40-2079
 
AN524 is given as 40-2056 to 3355M 9.42.

Confused?

Alex
Mary Ann
Squadron Member
  • Total Posts : 35
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2006/05/28 07:58:19
  • Location: New York
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/31 09:29:04 (permalink)
0
Alex,

That's an interesting compilation you have there!

Ok, In my humble opinion, at first glance it looks a bit confusing, however, I am sure some of those AC's can be discounted because of either the time frame (stateside,as compared to when the movie was filmed) or the salvage/damage issue.

Wonder where the mixup lies with some of the AC's regarding the transposing of serial numbers?

I am very interested to see what Tony has to say about this.

Thanks for your input Alex, your mutual concerns are appreciated.


Mary Ann~ still digging.






Ken a B24 Fan
Division Member
  • Total Posts : 1207
  • Reward points : 1684
  • Joined: 2006/03/19 20:39:00
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/31 10:28:38 (permalink)
0
But if one is written off, such as in the case of the 40-2059, with no other explanation, then what?


Hi Mary Ann,

Joe Baugher will often use the information supplied to him without editing.

If the BG has written off in a mission report or in la listing of aircraft he pretty much uses it verbatim.

In the A/C I've been researching for the 461st terms like: Written Off, Washed Out(!?), Salvaged Due to Battle Damage, War-Weary, Salvaged, Damaged Beyond Repair, Condemned, etc. were all used.

I have noticed that "Written Off" usually referred to an aircraft that crash-landed and was damaged beyond repair. Almost always they were salvaged for parts--but not every time.

There were ships in the 461st that were declared slavaged or condemned and were modified or two or more planes cobbled together to fly as a squadron 'hack' aircraft. Things get pretty murky.

Ken

Ken Alexander
Proud son of 1st Lt. Clair B. Alexander Jr.
Pilot, B-24s: 10/12/1944 - 04/24/1945
15th AF, 49th Wing, 461st BG, 764th BS
Torretta Airfield, Cerignola, Italy
Alex Smart
Division Member
  • Total Posts : 1869
  • Reward points : 7099
  • Joined: 2002/09/07 16:00:52
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/31 12:26:35 (permalink)
0
Hi Mary Ann,
 
Thank you for your responce.
 
Just thought this may be of interest to you.
 
"Mary Ann"
 
P51D, 44-13345
357FG, 364FS
Pilot: 1Lt. C.E.Burtner
Pilot and aircraft interned in Sweden 25th August 1944
Landed at Lomma
the P51 became a J26 numbered 26003 on 3rd March 1945 with the Swedish AF.
This a/c was lost in what was possibly an attempt to rescue a pilot from another P51 that was down in the same area, 1Lt. W. Baron in
"Peabody's Pet"
42-106854
also from the same unit.
 
"Mary Ann" had the name of the US Air Attache painted below the cockpit Col. Felix M. Hardison. He may have used her in flights over Sweden, but I cannot confirm that.
 
Alex
 
Anthony J. Mireles
B-17 Nut
  • Total Posts : 1207
  • Reward points : 4184
  • Joined: 2006/03/04 13:28:27
  • Location: Calumet City, Illinois USA
  • Status: offline
RE: B-17 "Mary Ann" 2006/05/31 12:58:43 (permalink)
0
Alex,

Yep, that RAF AN number situation is all goofed up; that is why I stayed away from it.  They are not really relevant for the 18 airframes we know are not the Mary Ann.  The two that you list are the ones that are a matter of contention (40-2043 and 40-2066).  And the 1.12.42 date is really 1 December 1942, as far as I can tell.  And since those two airplanes were returned to the AAF in Karachi on 1 December 1942, it is likely (but not impossible) that they are not the airplane we are looking for.

The way we can check the eight airframes I narrowed it down to is not by checking MACRs, but by checking individual Aircraft History Cards.  My friend in California has a ton of Aircraft History Card microfilm reels at his home and I'll ask him to check it out for us.  He might have them and it will be a lot faster than waiting for the Maxwell staff to push them out to me.  Also, the airplane (40-2059) that was written off on 8-4-43 apparently was not involved in an aircraft accident.  I can't find it on my microfilm reels of Form # 14 Aircraft Accident Reports for that date and the airplane does not show up on Craig Fuller's magnificent AAIR AAF aircraft accident index.  Why it was written off, who knows.  The AAF Accident Report could be missing off of the micofilm record.  But if it were written off on 4 August 1943, it still has a chance of being the "Mary Ann" because the film was already completed.  Also, the "lore" is that the "Mary Ann" was destroyed shortly after the film was completed.  The B-17C that was written off on 4 August 1943 fits that profile sort of.  The B-17C was lost during that time period (just after the release of the film "Air Force" in early 1943 and the write off date of 4 August 1943).  Not sure about 40-2063, going to have to go back and check what happened at Langley 5-29-43.  The Aircraft History Cards might provide the answer.  A couple of the eight B-17C airplanes on the list actually survived the war.  We'll see where we end up with the Aircraft History Cards. 

This is great, we are going to solve this.  I am going to send off for the Aircraft History Cards and call my friend too.  Cheers, Tony Mireles
Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 2 of 8
Jump to:
© 2014 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.0