rwright142

I know this has been asked before, but does anyone have the definitive answer or references?

Here is a snippet from a website I found that leans one way:

On November 26, at Turtle Bay on Espiritu Santu, Boyington posed in the cockpit of plane #86, decorated with 20 little Rising Sun flags, and painted Lu**belle.

The bystander's arm obscures two letters of the word, which was either Lucybelle or Lulubelle.

At the time, Boyington was involved with Mrs. Lucy Malcolmson, and Frank Walton recalled the name on the plane as Lucybelle. Makes sense, at the time. But after their messy break-up, Lucy kept $15,000 of Boyington's money that he had entrusted to her.

In later years, Pappy stated that the name on the plane was Lulubelle. As Bruce Gamble put it, "He had about fifteen thousand reasons to forget Lucy, each one worth a dollar."

TLH101

My Feedback: (90)

Well that is a pretty interesting observation. I assume this is the pic you are referring to, and to me , it sure looks like the letter before the "b" is a "y" as in "Lucybelle". I guess it could be argued that it's a "u", but I don't know.[sm=confused_smile.gif]

rwright142

Yes, that's the picture and I tend to agree it's Lucybelle.
Funny thing is that there are websites that say it is lulubelle:
http://www.acepilots.com/usmc_boyington3.html

I found an old RCU post where someone said they found 1 picture where you can see "Lucybelle" so I asked if they would send it to me. If I get it I'll post it here.

ecmiller

It is Lulubelle.

TLH101

My Feedback: (90)

Yeah, that what it say's on the internet, so it must be true.
Or do you have more concrete info?

rwright142

I'm looking for sources please. How do you know it's Lulubelle?

Pictures of models, artist renderings, etc do not count in my opinion.

Since the plane had the kill markings and pilot name added in haste (reason why some of the suns were backwards). I would have thought that pictures would have been taken that show Boyington in the plane from the side with everything showing in the picture. Wasn't the whole purpose of adding them for publicity reasons?

ecmiller

I can see I am wasting my time here....good luck with your search.

rwright142

ecmiller,

My response may have been taken wrong so I apologize if it sounded harsh. All I meant was that you sounded confident it was Lulubelle. I'm just curious as to why you feel that way. Did you find a picture, was it word of mouth, did you read is somewhere? I'm still trying to find a picture that shows either but so far no luck.

fledermaus

It appears that Boyington never actually flew Corsair 18086 and the photo in question was purely a posed publicity shot. There are a few web links that may or may not be reliable that state that the plane was called "Lucybelle" but that Boyington later put it about that it was "Lulubelle" for the reasons already stated.

It is also stated that VMF214 did not assign individual aircraft - pilots simply flew what was available at the time. In fact, this was more common than is generally believed, in both the ETO and PTO. My uncle flew B-24s from England and I had the chance to correspond with the last surviving member of his crew who told me that although crews stayed together, it was quite rare for them to have a specific aircraft. The records from their unit confirm this.

I can't find anything to confirm the Boyington question further than this but the following link claims to be based on direct information. Judge for yourself.

[link]http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/NARG/boyington.html[/link]

rwright142

Thanks for the link. At the bottom it says:
-----
*Major Boyington's famous Corsair #86 has been widely accepted as have been used for "publicity photos" only. It is not known if this aircraft was ever flown by anyone in combat or if it was sent to a forward area at all - The 20 victory "flags" displayed on #86 were applied "slapdash" and they vary in size, position, attitude and alignment. What has come to light recently is that Boyington had given #86 the temporary name of "Lucybelle" not "Lulubelle"as it has been accepted. Boyington later gave this false information, regarding "Lulubelle", himself as he refused to acknowledge a certain "Lucy"...

Many thanks to Bruce Gamble, author of "The Black Sheep: The Definitive Account of Marine Fighting Squaron 214 in World War II" for his valuable concern and assistance in compiling this entry for "Pappy" Boyington."
-----

I haven't yet read the book because I have many others that I am reading but I am looking forward to reading it.

ecmiller

rwright142,

I wasn't annoyed with you. 101 gets the credit for that.

rwright142

I know this is an old thread, but I have labored long and hard and found definitive photo proof!It is Lucybelle!

The first picture is the one we have seen many times. The 2nd picture is Pappy in the plane without the person blocking the name. Granted, all you can see is the cybell but that's enough for me. The 3rd picture shows Jim Hill in the same plane! I can sleep nights now that I know the truth...

LesUyeda

"The 20 victory "flags" displayed on #86 were applied "slapdash" and they vary in size, position, attitude and alignment. "

If what I have seen and read about this kind of thing being applied in the field, that is more or less what I would have expected the results to be. I have read that our models are much too "organized"; clean; and neat, as compared to the real thing.

Les

macdona

My Feedback: (3)

I have said for a long time our models are to slick. Go take a look at any warbird and look at the wrinkles.

Tall Paul

The first P-80 was named Lulu-belle.

da Rock

There is a mystery? One reason is the humorous comparison to be made between the 1st picture in post #12 above and the 2nd and 3rd pictures to the right of it.

Look closely at the kill markings in the 1st post. Some are placed "backward" and they're all slightly out of line. But they're all lined up and pointing the right way in the next two pictures. Since they are assumed to have been taken at the same time, of the same plane, then we've got doctored picture(s) for sure.

rwright142

The last 2 pictures I submitted were not taken at the same time as the first for the reasons you pointed out. Sorry, I should have made that clear. I read somewhere that they fixed the decals after the photo shoot but I'm not sure exactly when or about the source. I'll have to go and research that.
The one with Jim Hill came from his website here: http://www.bsheep.com and definitely not edited.

da Rock

OK, still a mystery remains. On Jim Hill's website there is a collection of Black Sheep photos. One of them is a clear shot of Boyington in that Corsair. Middle of the page of thumbnails. Guess it was taken later when they took Jim Hills picture too, since it has the neat set of kill flags. Wonder when the two photo sessions were?

rwright142

The one with the flags slapped on in a hurry was Nov 26 1943. I'll see what I can find out about the other.

Avaiojet

What information do you have to draw this conclusion?

rwright142

The picture came from Jim Hill - from his personal photo album. I've asked for dates when they were taken so I'll let you all know what Jim says.

Avaiojet

I'm not a betting man, and facts are important when making decisions.

My best guess is the two photos are tuched up.

That small dark photo with the flags in misalignment, could be genuine. That would be my pick.

Remember, and with all due respect, there is now a commercial business. The signing of photos and the like. Well, why not the signing of doctored/polished photos.

HOLLYWOOD glitter? A much better sell.

rwright142

You have a valid point and anything is possible. However, I believe the pictures are from Jim's personal photo album and scanned in for reproduction on his website. It may not be until July or August before I get to see the actual pictures for myself but I trust they are accurate. I mean why fake them? What's the point? He has nothing to gain saying he sat in the same plane a Pappy. He was there - he served with Pappy, so why fake those pictures? I'm guessing a mechanic fixed the flags after the photo shoot session just because they were not right. But again this is just my personal opinion and I could be totally wrong.