JackG

There are only four schemes to choose from and they are all illustrated in colour below I think you may be confusing scheme numbers with what is actually the unit company number? These are reflected on the turret decals with the first number representing the company. But there is also a typo where it illustrates turret number 332. In the description they have it as 524 but 524 is illustrated with another profile. So for example 5./ Pz.Rgt.SS-Panzergrenadier Div, Grossdeutschlan No 524 Winter 1942/3, Eastern Front, Krivoirog-Kirovograd - the number 5 is not a scheme number but the company number followed by platoon and lastly the vehicle number.

Am thinking that peculiar streak is fresh paint because it does match the tone of the rear three aircraft. That trio are presentation Hurricanes and were received by 94 Squadron on 19 September 1942. Any history known for BP389? All I can find is that it was taken on charge 1942-04-22, which fits with the unit returning to operating Hurricanes. It was Struck off Charge/Write Off Date : 1942-10-24. The previous two months the squadron had switched to flying Kittyhawks. So it appears to be a well worn scheme that has been touched up including all fuselage markings. Compare to the worn look of the top wing roundel. https://www.rafcommands.com/database/hurricanes/details.php?uniq=BP389 https://www.asisbiz.com/RAF/RAF-94Sqn.html

@Kingsman ... in 1944. There was apparently an instruction issued for all RAC units to adopt green over blue AOS - this is new to me. I believe the topic of issuing of green over blue AoS to the RAC was mentioned in the linked missinglynx thread, but apparently there were two amendments that followed. Note that the publication referred to markings on military vehicles as published in 1943. The 1944 publication was mentioned in the now three year old discussion, but apparently there was no reference of armoured units, or specifically Independent Armoured /Tank Brigades. page 5 page 6

Here is the link to the nine page thread discussing the AoS of 4th Armoured Brigade. I think there was agreement the colour was green over blue, but no explanation discovered as to why recce colours were utilized. https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/missinglynx/arm-of-service-marking-dilemma-t327113.html As for Sherman types and dozer blades, apparently there were two types of attachments to consider . . . https://www.theshermantank.com/sherman/dozers-the-m1-and-m1a1-dozer-blade-kit/

It seems initially three dozer blade attachments were available at Brigade HQ level. By April 1945, each Squadron HQ would be equipped with one dozer. In either case it is not clear if the Sherman dozer was in addition to the regular Shermans already allocated. http://ww2talk.com/index.php?threads/armoured-regiment-plus-armoured-brigade-headquarters-and-tank-brigade-headquarters.23761/#post-290158

There was this link posted on a Lavochkin topic which seems to confirm some examples of the zero placed in front of single digit number . . . https://www.planesinprofile.com/la5fn

Best image I can find is this one There is a review of the sheet giving physical description of each profile and comments about validity. http://vvs.hobbyvista.com/Markings/Decals/fighters_part01.html

Build review here could be of some interest . . https://www.track-link.com/forums/site_blogs/45160/flat

Has thee been any thoughts to have a WANT section for commission work?

So is it just photo quality that the light bulb is not always visible when the oval is present, or was a blank plate fixed in place when the formation-keeping lamps were not required and eventually discontinued from use altogether?

Basically yes. If your kit instructions have a properly scaled profile of top and sides - usually drawn up for the decal stage, then you could use that. If not then measure your built model. assuming it is near perfectly scaled. Then you have to make a copy of the required portion of the pdf and make a screen grab - unless you have software that can manipulate/crop the pdf file.

Scalemates has the pdf instructions available from Aviaeology and their decal set for RCAF Catalinas. So just a matter of scaling the drawings to 1/72 and measuring the markings. https://www.scalemates.com/fr/products/img/0/8/4/1287084-97-instructions.pdf

Yes the the auxiliary MG turret is on the same sprue as that particular mantlet that John requires.

Looking through the Airframe & Miniature 16 publication, there is only mention of the entire area with that oval opening as being an access panel. If you have the book see pages 227 and 228 for some photos. Two of the three photos featured are of Z3055 displayed in Malta. Could the oval just be an aid to hold the panel when removing and returning it back to the fuselage?

Popular RCAF photo has that oval too on the starboard side

Nicely executed and looks quite convincing. Based on weights found online, the combo would need to lose 660 lbs just to match the max payload of the Krupp Protze. Only additional detail that could have been added is a pair folding seats at either end of the flatbed so the crew travels together.

A couple more images with that oval detail

Was just thinking the same about the contradicting description. Usual finish chart in NA though for house paint. Matte is sometimes included with Flat, can appear between Eggshell and Flat, or as in this example not included.

My problem when first starting the hobby was building too fast. When reaching the 400 kit mark my interest was still there but I had to do something to slow down not just my build time but also the general accumulation of kits. That was when I decided accuracy should be included when considering/working on a subject. It did work for a while but eventually has gone a bit too far as I have not completed a model in a good four years now. Anyhow back to the topic, yes a lot of Dragon kits as they suit my requirements. Their instructions can be tricky but experience combined with research can solve things most of the time. Speaking of research that is another element that can slow things down and can often take longer than actual build time. The Academy kit no.13531 Pz. III Ausf J was one I have been looking at after having read decent remarks about it. There are some details that can be replaced but the major one is the tracks since the guide horns should be hollow.

Theme wise my stash of 1/35 German vehicles is mainly built around those used in the desert. My stash consists of the following all of which are waiting to be built Panzer III All Dragon kits 6394, 6632, 6642, 6773, 6957, Panzer IV Dragon 6736 Stug III Have only the one kit Sturmgeschütz III Ausf D from Border models. This one I should of researched more because the brand did some incorrect detail on the road wheels and swing arms. May still enjoy building this one as I have bought some after market items for the corrections. ------------------ Not sure if accuracy falls on your radar, but there are a few other kits in the stash that do not make the favourite lists because am aware, again after they were purchased, that they are not the best in terms of detail or accuracy. Dragon 9011 and 9032, both have their origins back to 1986 when they were produced under the Gunze Sanyo banner. Overall dimension are ok but details may be simplified and molding is not as crisp. 6264 was a 3 in 1 kit of the panzer IV ausf E but has a lot of shape issues with the turret. Takom 8002 Pz.Kpfw. III Ausf. M has some really tight fitting pieces. Unfortunately all their kits based on the panzer III chassis (including stugs) have an incorrect angle on the front hull plate. Road wheel placement is also off and not spaced properly.

Did a bit of a test whether MSG codes are viable . . . Using Casey`s RGB values and a crop of the original photo with colours laid over top though may have flubbed the camou shapes. To simulate the lighting on the applied colours, have decreased lightness by 33 per cent. A further decrease of brightness by 10, while contrast, and intensity increased by 10. Then the b/w emulation software for panchromatic film A more direct comparison of the resulting study - top half of which is pasted directly over the photo . . .

John since you are located in France did you try Passion132 hobby shop? The PanzerArt item is listed for €6.80 but may have better shipping since it is in your backyard so to speak. https://www.passion132.com/gb/jolisearch?s=crusader+mantlet

The fully enclosed mantlet was not exclusive to just the Crusader II, so Italeri has the builder limited to a very early production model mark I. Were they not aware of this or was just a marketing ploy who knows . . . Scalemates shows two aftermarket mantlets. Tiger Model Design has a resin cast with metal barrel. PanzerArt offers 3D printed product.

Well to add zimmerit or not, it really depends on the individuals tolerance about accuracy. To some a panzer IV is a panzer IV, while to others the zimmerit makes it more specific to a time frame. It is an interesting detail in itself but, it would also be interesting if it lacked zimmerit too because of the historical period being portrayed. Choose what appeals to you since you are ultimately building for your enjoyment.

Not familiar with the kits and how they build up, but do note both your choices are without zimmerit coating. This would be rare for the Normandy time frame but they did exist. It does step aside your intention of keeping the subject in how it appeared in general. Linked discussion with some photos . . . https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/missinglynx/panzer-iv-without-zimmerit-in-normandy-any-known-p-t326620.html Another good link here discussing zimmerit https://www.track-link.com/forums/research_ww2/26231/flat