Quote:
Originally Posted by RSwank
I think post #21 is the same plane as #4 (i.e. X AG661). Look carefully at the exhaust pipes.
The first pipe seems to be gone in both photos, then next one seem to be battered or twisted so that it opens toward the front. Only the remaining 4 pipes are in the correct position.
That seems to be the same in both photos and the damage to the 2nd pipe seems identical (at least to me) in both pictures.
The other item to observe is the 3 trees (on the horizon) that appear just in front of the cockpit in picture 4 and just over the outer machine gun port on the right wing of picture 21. From left to right there is the lowest tree with a flat top that steps down to the right. Then a space to the middle tree which is the tallest of the group. It has a pointed top, but with a wider point then the last tree on the right. This last tree is also shorter than the middle three but it is taller than the first tree.
Look closely and you can see that the middle tree has a small bulge toward the left, about even with the level of the right side step of the left most tree. If you study the two views of these 3 trees in picture 4 and 21, I would claim you are looking at the same three trees.
|
A neat puzzle and well solved, good eyes, Swank
but to make it more complicate as it still is, one question:
In John Rawlings book "Fighter Squadrons of the RAF and their aircraft" neither No. 400 SQ nor No. 268 SQ shows up.
In Norman L. R. Franks "Fighter Command Losses of the Second World War", Vol. 2, the loss of MUSTANG I, s/n AP212 (No. 268 SQ on December 7th, 1942), is not mentioned, but the loss of MUSTANG I, s/n AG661 (No. 400 SQ on June 2nd, 1943) shows up in the book.
What could be the reason ?
Best wishes !
Horst Weber