Thx very much for your efforts and time! Much appreciated.

I have this book, and saw that paragraph. Like so many books on the subject, a quick review of primary historical data – if it’s available and accessible – can often call into question even basic “facts” set forth in books:

BL255 was the only aircraft that Gentile christened BUCKEYE-DON

This assertion, I’ll guess, assumes that Don was assigned one Spitfire only (wrong). I’ll bet the author doesn’t know that BL776 was definitely marked as MD-T, and Don definitely flew it quite regularly at the end of the 4th’s “Spitfire era”. The real question, in my mind, is: was the Buckeye Don art panel switched from BL255 to BL776?

. . . its P-47D replacement being called DONNIE BOY

Again, incomplete information . . . there were two P-47Ds (D-1 7884, then D-5 8659) with the Donnie Boy art panel.

All three aircraft were, however, adorned with the boxing eagle motif that eventually became the emblem of the 336th FS

Not true – the “boxing eagle” became the unofficial emblem (later, after the war, the official emblem) of the 334th FS, though this could be a simple typo. Gentile, it is assumed by me and others, carried it on his planes due to his Eagle Squadron connection. Other planes, certainly several P-47s in unpublished shots I have, carried a similar “Eagle” motif.

So, you see, even a single paragraph can be dissected with adequate facts. In this case, as I’ve outlined in my posts above, corrected basic information can be set forth with primary references – the real question for all of us here with like interests is in interpolating the hard facts. To that end, unless proved otherwise, my upcoming 4th FG Spitfire painting will show BL776 marked as Buckeye Don. I can prove he flew it regularly as MD-T, but I can’t prove if BL776 carried the art panel. I can make a good case that it probably did, though! :diablo:

Cheers, everyone!
Wade