Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Arrows on aircraft.
785 views
Skip to first unread message
Padraigh ProAmerica
Dec 30, 2012, 11:49:55 AM12/30/12
to
Looking at some color pictures of WWII aircraft, I noticed something
that I had never thought about before.
On every image I've seen of the German He-162 "Salamander" jet fighter,
there is a red arrow painted on the nose. Was there a reason behind
this?
Second- on a few US Navy aircraft, there is a white arrow pointing up on
the vertical stabilizer. What (if anything) does this designate? I've
seen them primarily on F4U Corsairs and F6F Hellcats.
--
"A man who can own a gun is a citizen. A man who cannot own a gun is a
subject."--
Unknown
that I had never thought about before.
On every image I've seen of the German He-162 "Salamander" jet fighter,
there is a red arrow painted on the nose. Was there a reason behind
this?
Second- on a few US Navy aircraft, there is a white arrow pointing up on
the vertical stabilizer. What (if anything) does this designate? I've
seen them primarily on F4U Corsairs and F6F Hellcats.
--
"A man who can own a gun is a citizen. A man who cannot own a gun is a
subject."--
Unknown
Michael Emrys
Dec 30, 2012, 12:22:55 PM12/30/12
to
On 12/30/12 8:49 AM, Padraigh ProAmerica wrote:
> ...on a few US Navy aircraft, there is a white arrow pointing up on
> the vertical stabilizer.
That designates which air group the plane belongs to and thus on which
carrier it is based.
Michael
> ...on a few US Navy aircraft, there is a white arrow pointing up on
> the vertical stabilizer.
That designates which air group the plane belongs to and thus on which
carrier it is based.
Michael
Mario
Dec 30, 2012, 2:42:34 PM12/30/12
to
Michael Emrys, 18:22, domenica 30 dicembre 2012:
How often an airplane unplannedly landed on a carrier it didn't
belong to?
--
H
belong to?
--
H
Michael Emrys
Dec 30, 2012, 6:05:50 PM12/30/12
to
On 12/30/12 11:42 AM, Mario wrote:
> How often an airplane unplannedly landed on a carrier it didn't
> belong to?
Probably not a lot, although it did happen occasionally. During the
> How often an airplane unplannedly landed on a carrier it didn't
> belong to?
Battle of the Philippine Sea, the strike aircraft returning after dark
and low on fuel put it down on the first deck they could find. This
sometimes resulted in over-crowding on some ships with the excess planes
pushed over the side to make room for more incoming. Some planes, not
able to find an empty deck, ditched in the sea. A lot of planes were
lost, but not too many airmen as most of the crews that had to ditch
were picked up by rescue vessels.
Michael
Mark Sieving
Dec 30, 2012, 9:19:07 PM12/30/12
to
Often enough, planes returning from strikes were so low on fuel they'd
land on the first deck they could find.
David Wilma
Dec 30, 2012, 9:19:24 PM12/30/12
to
On Sunday, December 30, 2012 11:42:34 AM UTC-8, Mario wrote:
\
The ocean is a big place. After the Battle off Samar the Navy pilots
ended up on Army bases on land.
\
> How often an airplane unplannedly landed on a carrier it didn't
>
> belong to?
>
It happened if the home carrier was damaged or if the pilot could not find it.
>
> belong to?
>
The ocean is a big place. After the Battle off Samar the Navy pilots
ended up on Army bases on land.
Bill Shatzer
Dec 30, 2012, 11:49:55 PM12/30/12
to
Padraigh ProAmerica wrote:
> Looking at some color pictures of WWII aircraft, I noticed something
> that I had never thought about before.
>
> On every image I've seen of the German He-162 "Salamander" jet fighter,
> there is a red arrow painted on the nose. Was there a reason behind
> this?
It seems to have been a unit marking.
> Looking at some color pictures of WWII aircraft, I noticed something
> that I had never thought about before.
>
> On every image I've seen of the German He-162 "Salamander" jet fighter,
> there is a red arrow painted on the nose. Was there a reason behind
> this?
Bill Shatzer
Dec 31, 2012, 12:19:03 AM12/31/12
to
stabilizer was used to designate aircraft operating off the USS Bunker
Hill (CV-17).
Example of Bunker Hill markings here:
http://static.desktopnexus.com/thumbnails/570237-bigthumbnail.jpg
A similar, smaller arrow on the rudder only, was used for aircraft from
the USS Bennington (CV-20)
Example of Bennington markings here:
http://tinyurl.com/BenningtonHellcats
The identification markings were repeated on the upper surface of the
starboard wing and the under surface of the port wing.
A variety of other geometric shapes and markings were used to designate
air groups on other carriers. This system was first adopted in late '44
and early '45 and discontinued shortly after VJ Day when a system using
single or double letters substituted.
Rich Rostrom
Dec 31, 2012, 8:20:27 PM12/31/12
to
David Wilma <David...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Sunday, December 30, 2012 11:42:34 AM UTC-8, Mario wrote:
> > How often an airplane unplannedly landed on a carrier it didn't
> > belong to?
>
> It happened if the home carrier was damaged...
> On Sunday, December 30, 2012 11:42:34 AM UTC-8, Mario wrote:
> > How often an airplane unplannedly landed on a carrier it didn't
> > belong to?
>
During the battle of Midway, planes from YORKTOWN
landed on HORNET and ENTERPRISE. These were SBDs
and TBFs returning from the strike on the Japanese
fleet.
Supposedly, during the landing operations on
ENTERPRISE, the weary LSO asked his assistant
"How many more planes to land?"
The answer was "Idunno - we got more than we're
supposed to already."
--
The real Velvet Revolution - and the would-be hijacker.
http://originalvelvetrevolution.com
Bill Shatzer
Jan 1, 2013, 12:24:53 AM1/1/13
to
Rich Rostrom wrote:
> David Wilma <David...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>>On Sunday, December 30, 2012 11:42:34 AM UTC-8, Mario wrote:
>>
>>>How often an airplane unplannedly landed on a carrier it didn't
>>>belong to?
>>
>>It happened if the home carrier was damaged...
>
>
> During the battle of Midway, planes from YORKTOWN
> landed on HORNET and ENTERPRISE. These were SBDs
> and TBFs returning from the strike on the Japanese
> fleet.
TBD Devastators, not TBF Avengers certainly?
> David Wilma <David...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>>On Sunday, December 30, 2012 11:42:34 AM UTC-8, Mario wrote:
>>
>>>How often an airplane unplannedly landed on a carrier it didn't
>>>belong to?
>>
>>It happened if the home carrier was damaged...
>
>
> During the battle of Midway, planes from YORKTOWN
> landed on HORNET and ENTERPRISE. These were SBDs
> and TBFs returning from the strike on the Japanese
> fleet.
The only TBFs at Midway were the six in the Torpedo 8 detachment on
Midway and all of those launched from and recovered at the island.
(Well, one TBF recovered; the other five were lost). None landed on the
carriers.
And, IIRC, only one of Yorktown's VT-3 TBDs made it back to the carriers
- and it was too badly damaged to land and had to ditch beside a
destroyer. None landed on the Hornet or any other carrier.
Emmanuel Gustin
Jan 1, 2013, 11:48:10 AM1/1/13
to
But that probably was not what the markings were designed to prevent.
To guide aircraft to the right carrier, it was more important for the pilot
to recognize the carrier...
More likely the markings were designed to allow a carrier's aircraft group
to join up in formation more quickly, after take-off or after the attack. In
a Task Group or Task Force with multiple carriers, any confusion would
cost time and fuel, and thus increase the danger of carrier operations.
To guide aircraft to the right carrier, it was more important for the pilot
to recognize the carrier...
More likely the markings were designed to allow a carrier's aircraft group
to join up in formation more quickly, after take-off or after the attack. In
a Task Group or Task Force with multiple carriers, any confusion would
cost time and fuel, and thus increase the danger of carrier operations.
Rich Rostrom
Jan 1, 2013, 2:52:51 PM1/1/13
to
Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
> > TBFs returning from the strike on the Japanese fleet.
>
> TBD Devastators, not TBF Avengers certainly?
Quite so. I was thinking "torpedo bombers"
> > TBFs returning from the strike on the Japanese fleet.
>
> TBD Devastators, not TBF Avengers certainly?
and used the wrong abbreviation or code.
R Leonard
Jan 2, 2013, 1:12:55 PM1/2/13
to
Geometric shaped identifiers for specific carriers, note: carriers,
not air groups, went away on 28 July 1945, though there were minor
instances of some retaining their markings. They were replaced by
one or two letter designators to appear on the vertical stabilizer
and on wings opposite the national insignia. Some carriers went so
far as to paint their letter designators on the fore and aft of their
flight decks vice the usual hull number, USS Shangri-La was a good
example.
This lettering only applied to CVs and CVLs; CVEs had their own system
of fuselage and wing bands.
Yorktown (CV-5) VF-3 F4Fs also roosted aboard Enterprise and Hornet
after Yorktown was knocked out, most aboard Enterprise. All but one
ended up on Hornet after a morning CAP mission on the 5th to make up
the losses in VF-8. Thach, CO of VF-3, ended up in command of what
was laughingly referred to as VF-3-42-8.
Two Yorktown VT-3 TBDs made it back to the task force, but both
ditched from damage, unable to wait out the Japanese dive bomber
attack. Two pilots and one gunner survived; the other gunner died
of wounds while in his raft.
not air groups, went away on 28 July 1945, though there were minor
instances of some retaining their markings. They were replaced by
one or two letter designators to appear on the vertical stabilizer
and on wings opposite the national insignia. Some carriers went so
far as to paint their letter designators on the fore and aft of their
flight decks vice the usual hull number, USS Shangri-La was a good
example.
This lettering only applied to CVs and CVLs; CVEs had their own system
of fuselage and wing bands.
Yorktown (CV-5) VF-3 F4Fs also roosted aboard Enterprise and Hornet
after Yorktown was knocked out, most aboard Enterprise. All but one
ended up on Hornet after a morning CAP mission on the 5th to make up
the losses in VF-8. Thach, CO of VF-3, ended up in command of what
was laughingly referred to as VF-3-42-8.
Two Yorktown VT-3 TBDs made it back to the task force, but both
ditched from damage, unable to wait out the Japanese dive bomber
attack. Two pilots and one gunner survived; the other gunner died
of wounds while in his raft.
0 new messages