By: ian_
- 19th April 2012 at 10:40Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The cockpit shot and close up of the radio hatch surely can't be a model. The detail is perfect even down to correct screws. Fetch me my sun cream and Panama hat.
By: Augsburgeagle
- 19th April 2012 at 10:54Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Just to give a bit of Credence to the photo's. The last one cockpit photo shows that only the clock has been removed (and what ever is in the top left of the instrument panel), this was common practice when leaving force landed aircraft, the germans often removed the compasses too. I think you would have to be a very diligent modeler to get that detail correct!
I wonder what will become of it if it has not already been vandalised by now :(
By: John Aeroclub
- 19th April 2012 at 10:58Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I was in Libya in 1960/61 and there was a strong rumour that an italian aircraft had been found and nearby was an 'American fighter bomber' which had damaged each other.
The Italian later was found to be a SM79 in quite intact condition( I believe the one in the photos shown by Massimo on Hyperscale) but I recall hearing no other info ref the 'fighter bomber'.
When the P40 crashed, the area could have been totally sandy and the wreck covered and revealed many times over the years. As a modeller I think this is real but I would have expected this to be top news if the RAF have been asked for an ID and if the photos are recent and not digital copies.
By: spit1940
- 19th April 2012 at 11:03Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As others have said there is something wrong with the pictures.The close up of the roundal area for me is a little odd.The structure appears right but the paint work is in a condition i would not expect.Also surely the cockpit would have more sand in it if the canopy was left open for 70 odd years.Somebody prove me wrong!
By: Beaufighter VI
- 19th April 2012 at 11:23Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As others have said there is something wrong with the pictures.The close up of the roundal area for me is a little odd.The structure appears right but the paint work is in a condition i would not expect.Also surely the cockpit would have more sand in it if the canopy was left open for 70 odd years.Somebody prove me wrong!
The detail around the hatch in my mind is so accurate and reminds me of the P-40 recovered from Russia by TFC. Note angle of shadow of door and compare angle of sun in other shots.
On the aircraft recovered from Russia one side of the fuselage was very bleached but the other clearly showed markings, even pencil marks on the hatch.
Yes you do get sunshine in Russia and extremes of temperature.
By: Mark V
- 19th April 2012 at 13:39Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I do agree that the first two shots were slightly suspect looking - but the detailed shots - I am convinced its real too, an extraordinary discovery...
By: TempestNut
- 19th April 2012 at 13:56Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If the photos were taken with a compact digital camera as we suspect then they look real to me. Compacts often "over process" photo's, especially in strong or poor light. I have worked in the desert and immediately felt that the light and conditions looked right. But there are some clever people about when it comes to the use of Photoshop, so you can never tell.
By: brewerjerry
- 19th April 2012 at 15:48Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hi
quote from link
"The plane lay so many years is not bothered by anyone. The finder of the wreck told the RAF and were able to identify aircraft. We do not know why he was only at that particular place. It may puzzle some time find a solution. "
So the RAF in UK should know all about the history of this aircraft.
anyone in the UK going to call the AHB ?
It would be nice to be real but personally it looks like a very good fake.
cheers
Jerry
By: shepsair
- 19th April 2012 at 16:47Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
P40E
Jerry,
Assuming real to start with, going on the last two photos.
I am assuming it is a P40E either US serial or UK code.
I rang someone at AHB and they know nothing about it!?
So if the code is known, will be easy to find out if missing. (If any of us stumbled across this would take quite a few photos and anything to ID the airframe).
Trouble is that is looking at it not from a layperson point of view!?
Need to try and contact with 'AWOL' - seems no previous links to site or registration?
Posts: 1,990
By: ian_ - 19th April 2012 at 10:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The cockpit shot and close up of the radio hatch surely can't be a model. The detail is perfect even down to correct screws. Fetch me my sun cream and Panama hat.
Posts: 544
By: Augsburgeagle - 19th April 2012 at 10:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Just to give a bit of Credence to the photo's. The last one cockpit photo shows that only the clock has been removed (and what ever is in the top left of the instrument panel), this was common practice when leaving force landed aircraft, the germans often removed the compasses too. I think you would have to be a very diligent modeler to get that detail correct!
I wonder what will become of it if it has not already been vandalised by now :(
Posts: 2,766
By: John Aeroclub - 19th April 2012 at 10:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I was in Libya in 1960/61 and there was a strong rumour that an italian aircraft had been found and nearby was an 'American fighter bomber' which had damaged each other.
The Italian later was found to be a SM79 in quite intact condition( I believe the one in the photos shown by Massimo on Hyperscale) but I recall hearing no other info ref the 'fighter bomber'.
When the P40 crashed, the area could have been totally sandy and the wreck covered and revealed many times over the years. As a modeller I think this is real but I would have expected this to be top news if the RAF have been asked for an ID and if the photos are recent and not digital copies.
John
Posts: 252
By: spit1940 - 19th April 2012 at 11:03 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As others have said there is something wrong with the pictures.The close up of the roundal area for me is a little odd.The structure appears right but the paint work is in a condition i would not expect.Also surely the cockpit would have more sand in it if the canopy was left open for 70 odd years.Somebody prove me wrong!
Posts: 250
By: Discendo Duces - 19th April 2012 at 11:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Looks like a model to me.
DD
Posts: 554
By: Beaufighter VI - 19th April 2012 at 11:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The detail around the hatch in my mind is so accurate and reminds me of the P-40 recovered from Russia by TFC. Note angle of shadow of door and compare angle of sun in other shots.
On the aircraft recovered from Russia one side of the fuselage was very bleached but the other clearly showed markings, even pencil marks on the hatch.
Yes you do get sunshine in Russia and extremes of temperature.
Posts: 62
By: MancFrank - 19th April 2012 at 12:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No - one here got a background in P.I. then??
It's real.
Regards,
Frank
Posts: 2,820
By: Whitley_Project - 19th April 2012 at 13:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Looks real to me
Posts: 2,982
By: Mark V - 19th April 2012 at 13:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I do agree that the first two shots were slightly suspect looking - but the detailed shots - I am convinced its real too, an extraordinary discovery...
Posts: 474
By: TempestNut - 19th April 2012 at 13:56 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If the photos were taken with a compact digital camera as we suspect then they look real to me. Compacts often "over process" photo's, especially in strong or poor light. I have worked in the desert and immediately felt that the light and conditions looked right. But there are some clever people about when it comes to the use of Photoshop, so you can never tell.
Posts: 442
By: Dobbins - 19th April 2012 at 14:06 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The first 3 photos do look like they're straight out of Thunderbirds...
Posts: 10,042
By: Peter - 19th April 2012 at 14:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think its real.. it was probably buried for years under the shifting sand...
Posts: 8,431
By: Bruce - 19th April 2012 at 14:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If pictures 1-3 were a little better, it would be wholly convincing.
Pictures 4 and 5 are very, very compelling.
The 190 picture was poor in comparison.
Bruce
Posts: 18,309
By: DazDaMan - 19th April 2012 at 14:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I reckon it's the real McCoy. However, if it's a diorama, then holy crap!
Posts: 178
By: jimbob1194 - 19th April 2012 at 15:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I also think it's real. What an amazing find. If not then wow incredible work! :eek:
James
Posts: 315
By: MK959 - 19th April 2012 at 15:25 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I'm convinced it's true.
It must be recovered by all means.
Posts: 490
By: James D - 19th April 2012 at 15:41 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think it´s real - and I can 3d model and photoshop, so I have some idea.
Posts: 915
By: brewerjerry - 19th April 2012 at 15:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hi
quote from link
"The plane lay so many years is not bothered by anyone. The finder of the wreck told the RAF and were able to identify aircraft. We do not know why he was only at that particular place. It may puzzle some time find a solution. "
So the RAF in UK should know all about the history of this aircraft.
anyone in the UK going to call the AHB ?
It would be nice to be real but personally it looks like a very good fake.
cheers
Jerry
Posts: 282
By: shepsair - 19th April 2012 at 16:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
P40E
Jerry,
Assuming real to start with, going on the last two photos.
I am assuming it is a P40E either US serial or UK code.
I rang someone at AHB and they know nothing about it!?
So if the code is known, will be easy to find out if missing. (If any of us stumbled across this would take quite a few photos and anything to ID the airframe).
Trouble is that is looking at it not from a layperson point of view!?
Need to try and contact with 'AWOL' - seems no previous links to site or registration?
regards
Mark
Posts: 1,062
By: 8674planes - 19th April 2012 at 17:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
20 spitfires and RAF P-40 in the same month? Seems like it's going to be a good year!