USAAF Gliders without national markings in the CBI

[TBMflyer]

Maybe I'm missing something but except for the training gliders on the base, all the CG4A's look to have landed already. If there was no chance of recovery or 'snatching', why not paint out the US markings so as not to draw attention to Japanese aircraft of artillery observation? Mark

[Gregory]

Hi All,

 

Thank you very much for all your posts. I am glad to see that you find this thread interesting. We do have here unique case study in the US aviation and armed forces history so I count very much on all your opinions.

 

I think the reason is fairly straight forward. These were vulnerable aircraft operating close to the ground (relatively) that were toast if caught by Japanese fighters. Anything that would help them blend into the terrain better was done to increase survivability. Get rid of that big white and blue star on the wing and fuselage and you've got green flying over green.

Yes, theoretically it looks logically, but there is a problem of silver/light gray TG-5s. They do not fit this theory. In the ZI overall silver/gray TG-5s were unknown. They always had full national markings and many times other markings as serial number, tactical number etc. In Burma all those graphical elements were removed.

 

Why they were painted out is a good question.

It is unbelievable for me that the American historians or other historical researchers did not address this topic.

 

Hague 1923 states that all military aircraft must have markings that are visible top, bottom and sides. Also, no aircraft can possess more than one nationality. Gliders are aircraft, there's no way to get around that.

The USAAF has been unlucky with correctly marked cargo gliders operating overseas. There is at least one photograph from Normandy (bird's-eye view) where three US Horsa Mk Is can be seen and one of them has double national markings(!), also against the Hague Convention. On upper surface (left) there was white star with side bars painted on the British roundel, and right side was remained with British roundel. But this is other story not for this thread…

 

Many of the possible reasons already mentioned seem reasonable.

Even trying to protect the Karen people from reprisal is a possibility. Remember the Japanese in China massacred an unbelievable amount of people after the Doolitle raid (some reports of up to 250,000!).

That's the reason why I propose to rethink in this discussion also this possibility. The Kempeitai was composed of savage primitives ready to torture and murder everybody for nothing.

 

Maybe I'm missing something but except for the training gliders on the base, all the CG4A's look to have landed already. If there was no chance of recovery or 'snatching', why not paint out the US markings so as not to draw attention to Japanese aircraft of artillery observation?

To protect them from being strafed once on the ground.

Of course all is possible according to your opinions, none the less we have to avoid looking at the CBI glider operations through the prism of ETO glider operations. There were big differences between those two frontlines when it comes to glider warfare. The US air superiority over Burma gave the 1st ACG's gliders complete security. Attacking US gliders in the air or strafing them on ground were not the problems for the US glidermen in Burma and their passengers. The USAAF tugs and gliders have never been attacked in the air over Burma. By the way, in the ETO Allied gliders were not strafed as well due to powerful Allied air cover. Such a problem, as strafing of glider LZs, did not exist in Burma. The main enemies of the 1st ACG's gliders were:

• general own tactics and flying by night (crash landings due to lack of visibility);

• weather conditions;

• lack of consultation with meteorologists and glider experts before detaching gliders to Burma;

• incompetence of the decision-makers who directed cargo gliders to the turbulence conditions that even today would be extremely dangerous for sport composite gliders. Burma is good to gain Glider Gold Badge but not for cargo flying on tow low over forests and mountains where turbulence is the worst possible in the world and caused many accidents. More US gliderborne troops in Burma were killed and wounded by own military decision-makers than by the Japanese. Even the best tow ropes in the world, the Du Pont's nylon ropes, were not good enough to withstand Burmese turbulence. But it is other story not for this thread.

 

Remember also please about fundamental differences between ETO and CBI when it comes to payload of the CG-4As used in both fronts mentioned. When in the ETO basic payload of CG-4A were GIR troops, field guns, jeeps and their trailers -- then in the CBI basic cargo for CG-4A was Clarkair Crawler CA-1 Airborne Bulldozer and engineers, as well as other machines for airstrip building, mules, field hospitals etc., but CA-1s were most popular cargo. There was no big need to paint over national markings on the gliders to avoid aerial observation or strafing because: firstly -- Japanese fighters activity was not so high in that region; secondly -- the gliders after landing were disassembled and rolled by CA-1 bulldozers between trees where they were camouflaged. In the ETO nobody did such things and in the ETO CA-1 were unique as a cargo of CG-4As because nobody carried teams of engineers to build airstrips in the glider LZs.

 

Breaking this particular Hague Convention rule may not have seemed like such a big deal since already every major power in this war had already violated the one where you're not supposed to bomb civilians...

That's right, nobody was saint then and therefore I do not accuse USAAF. Not the Western World had a mental aberration in 1930s in order to cause war in the Far East. I guess that for the Americans it had to be a kind of state of necessity to paint out own national markings on the CG-4As and those TG-5s that had to be used for combat missions with a single medic, signaller, technician or other specialist on board. It is significant that it was done only in the case of the USAAF aerial crafts landing in occupied territory, where Japanese-held terrain was dangerous area both for Americans and the autochthons. We do not know today what was average knowledge of the Japanese cargo gliders in the midst of Japanese infantrymen and Kempeitai fanatics none the less when it comes to colors the American TG-5 in silver or light gray scheme was identical or almost identical as Japanese cargo gliders -- they also were painted very light, most likely light gray, as can be seen below (Maeda Ku-1-I cargo glider).

 

One more time thank you very much for your participation here.

 

Best regards

 

Gregory

[Gregory]

For better comparison -- below it can be seen how many things was painted on the TG-5s based in the ZI.

[Gregory]

Here is yet another example how the TG-5s were painted in normal circumstances in the ZI.

[gliderman1]

Gregory,

 

A reason the marking may be obscured is that the negative was altered. I have several images of early (X)CG-4A gliders that had the negative altered by the Wright Field photo shop to block and cover the markings or the features of the glider. Those photos of gliders that "violate the Geneva Convention" could very easily have had the negatives altered to obscure the detail. And at that time, the perpetrators were not concerned that someone 65 years later was going to accuse them of violating the Geneva Convention because the gliders did not carry markings or the marking were obscured.

 

Especially the image that clearly shows a star and bars were there, looks to me that it was touched up. Why would a crew member take the time to paint over only the bar outline and star rather than just slapping the paint over the whole area of the star and bar?

[Gregory]

Charles,

 

A reason the marking may be obscured is that the negative was altered. I have several images of early (X)CG-4A gliders that had the negative altered by the Wright Field photo shop to block and cover the markings or the features of the glider. Those photos of gliders that "violate the Geneva Convention" could very easily have had the negatives altered to obscure the detail.

I agree that the US Army American Glider Program was censored sometimes but sometimes only. The American aviation journalists protested against it and they wrote officially for their readers that sometimes they cannot have good access to glider-related information. But such cases were exceptions that proved the rule -- the rule where during WWII gliders photos were not altered or retouched. The US gliders never carried top secret weapon, equipment, avionics or whatever else with secret status. If the pictures of CG-4As armed with M1919 lmg were not altered/retouched/censored why would be altered/retouched/censored ordinary gliders without any modifications?

The TG-5 image I posted in the post #18 is not a scan of a scan or other copy of a copy. That photograph was privately taken and military censor has never had a contact with it. I am an owner of original of this photograph and other TG-5s in Burma. I assure you that nothing was altered there. Every detail of airframe structure is visible on that glider in the place where national markings ought to be painted -- why that marking disappeared when fuselage longerons are visible very well in the place where US National Star ought to be painted? In the 1940s photo retouching techniques were very simple and the details willy-nilly were deleted together with retouched element.

Below there is yet another CG-4A belonging to the 1st Air Commando Group. And one more time the glider has its national markings painted out. Nothing was retouched in this photo and longerons in a place of national markings can be seen very well.

EDIT: Picture is lost

 

And at that time, the perpetrators were not concerned that someone 65 years later was going to accuse them of violating the Geneva Convention because the gliders did not carry markings or the marking were obscured.

These are not accusations. These are law and historical facts we cannot discuss against today. In the state of war every aerial craft must have its national markings. During WWII even the US-built unmanned aerial crafts had full set of national markings -- why they disappeared in Burmese glider operations?

 

Especially the image that clearly shows a star and bars were there, looks to me that it was touched up. Why would a crew member take the time to paint over only the bar outline and star rather than just slapping the paint over the whole area of the star and bar?

Sometimes on the USAAF Horsa Mk Is the US markings were also painted without bars outline. There is many strange things related to the US WWII era gliders.

Regards

Gregory

[Gregory]

Re: possible strafing, Japanese aerial observation and looking for US gliders (as discussed between us above).

 

For those of you interested in this subject I quote glider pilot Terence O'Brien's memoirs of Burma when he took part in the same glider night mission as Jackie Coogan:

 

"During this period the Gurkhas had gone back out into the moonlit clearing to start hauling gliders into cover under the trees, the plan being to get them hidden before daybreak in case a Japanese patrol or passing plane happened to sight them. Apart from the fatal crash we had three others, including ours, damaged beyond repair, but all had to be moved under cover."*

 

* Terence O'Brien

Out of the Blue. A Pilot with the Chindits

William Collins, Sons & Co. Ltd., London 1984

ISBN 0 00 217 198 8

page 70

[Gregory]

Here is one more CG-4A without US national markings. This photo was published in the "CBI Roundup", Vol. II No. 37, May 25th, 1944. Description of the photo was as follows:

 

Local inhabitants flock onto the airfield to help the Yanks unload the gliders. Smoke of Japanese mortar fire can be seen in background.

[gliderman1]

Gregory,

 

Can you give me more information on O'Brien? I don't have his book.

His serial #?

His glider training class base and number?

 

He is not included in a list of over 7,000 trained U.S. glider pilots and was not in graduating class with J.L.Coogan.

 

IMHO, that last photo is so terrible and there is no way you can tell if there were or were not markings on the fuselage. Also the entire fuselage aft of the dark shadow all is on same plane and should have reflected the sun the same, yet there distinctly are two different shades of gray that sharply change rather than a gradual change.

 

Also, how do you know who and where a negative was developed and printed? I have heard that many times this was done by the "local" Army photography lab, if available, and he would have been operating under whatever censorship rules that were in place at the time.

[Cobrahistorian]

If you look at the fuselage, I'm almost positive that the star & bar is visible, but the quality of this shot is pretty poor.

 

Here is one more CG-4A without US national markings. This photo was published in the "CBI Roundup", Vol. II No. 37, May 25th, 1944. Description of the photo was as follows:

 

Local inhabitants flock onto the airfield to help the Yanks unload the gliders. Smoke of Japanese mortar fire can be seen in background.

[Cobrahistorian]

guess it is just another example of those evil merkins.

 

I think you're talkin about evil "'murricans", otherwise you're waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off topic!

[posse]

Hi Gregory,

 

Check your inbox, it is full! Can't send you a PM!

 

rgds

Bart P

[Gregory]

Try now

[kfields]

Interesting thread.

I have a photo album of a soldier who served at a field in the CBI. I've not researched the album enough to know precisely which base but I probably could back into it based on the unit designations shown on the various airplanes and at the airfield.

Anyway, there are a couple of glider photos included which I show here. They still retain the insignia on the sides:

[Gregory]

I am preparing larger post in this thread with various replies for earlier posts, but in the meantime let's take a look at one more interesting photo related to below Jon's post.

 

To further prove the tactical merit to the idea of removing the insignia on just the gliders, the 1st Air Commando Group's airplanes all had 5 diagonal white stripes painted surrounding the rear fuselage of all of their airplanes in addition to full color national insignia. Hardly a marking you'd want if you were trying to remain unseen, let alone 'stateless'.

Yes, those five diagonal stripes on the 1st ACG's airplanes are well known. There is also unique photo of glider parking at Myitkyina, Burma, (after glider assault at that airfield), where CG-4A with diagonal stripes can be seen. That's the only one CG-4A photo I know from Burma where unknown number of diagonal stripes was painted as an element of quick identification but... one more time somebody painted those stripes out and hard to say what it was and composed of how many stripes. See below.

 

Does anybody know USAAF CBI-based gliders with five stripes typical for quick identification of the 1st Air Commando Group?

 

Regards

 

Gregory