Smithy

That is the one I recommend for a first book on the air war over the Western Front in WWI and especially that edition which has a wonderful amount of photos and illustrations.

Without doubt "Winged Victory". There's a damn good reason why copies of it were changing hands within the RAF at the start of WWII for astronomical sums. Regarded then as the most accurate recounting of what it was like to be a scout/fighter pilot at the time and it still is one of the most truthful and honest today.

Very late to the party here. I have one and yes they are sought after. A fair price for one which is untouched (so not started) is around $US1,200 to $US1,500 depending on box condition. They are a magnificent kit, one of the best of its kind. I think as a modeller you'll really regret it if you sell it. These are real Holy Grail kits so it might be worth forgetting everything else you have in the stash and building it.

Haven't been on here in years so apologies for the tardy response. Here we go with Al's Spits during 1940... The first Kiwi was just named "Kiwi" not "Kiwi I" and was N3180, coded KL-B The next was "Kiwi II" (P9390), coded KL-B. The third and last was "Kiwi III" (R6981), coded KL-B. For further information, the best reference for Al's Kiwis is Gerard Morris' "Spitfire: The New Zealand Story". HTH, Tim

Ah I see. However it's usually better to go to the owner or holder of the original (in this case the IWM) to get the correct information regarding an image.

Don't know where you got that information from. The image is in the IWM's collection and with the caption: "Spitfire Mk Is of 'A' Flight, No. 602 Squadron running up their engines at Drem in Scotland, March 1940. The foreground aircraft has the name 'Bogus' painted beneath the cockpit." It's been reproduced in quite a number of books too and comes from a series of images which were made during a press visit to 602 when they were stationed at Drem. Very possibly!

Spot on Peter. One could also be "a Bogus" so a person/thing who had been caught out as a sham or a dodgy fellow or thing.

Bogus was common RAF slang used at the time and the reason for naming the aircraft such is most likely typical RAF self-deprecation. Sorry can't help with the pilot, although it was an A Flight machine and the flight commander at this time at Drem was Marcus Robinson so there's a reasonable chance he flew this machine at some point.

Me too, although I can't promise when that will be. I have several that have been on the go for an interminably long time that I really should finish first, although knowing me I can't promise that either!

His memoir of his wartime experiences, "The Flying Greek" is excellent and if you haven't read it I'd recommend getting hold of a copy.

The one I'll do is a very "standard" late Battle of Britain period one of his from 64 Sqn. No real oddities at all. Sounds like it will be making the codes and serial masks myself and in truth this is probably better as I can hopefully make them more accurate than using one of the generic decal squadron code fonts. The more I think about this, the more I really am looking forward to getting this kit, it'll make a nice diversion from the usual 1/72 and 1/48 I tend to play around with. Thanks for the suggestions and advice.

Hi Troy, If you haven't got Paul Lucas' "Battle for Britain" booklet, one of the most fascinating things about it is how he demonstrated from surviving aircraft parts that there were various shades of Sky used. I don't entirely agree with all his ideas that these were other specific paints obtained by the RAF. The period we are talking about was very hectic, the AM even sent a missive out on the introduction of Sky that White and Night undersides could be used by squadrons without access to the the new Sky. However necessity breeds innovation, and there had already been attempts to use improvised "sky" coloured undersides in France, most famously Paul Richey's "G". I really do think you might be onto something with your idea about the mixes of existing to specification paints, and especially roundel blue and yellow. Your mixes really do mimic many of the colours that seem to have been used before Sky was universally available. I think it might be worth starting a topic on this in the WWII Aircraft section.

I've decided to splash out on one as well. It's a kit I've thought about making for years (I've actually never made a 1/24 anything) and I'm looking forward to the change of scale. One of my family was one of the Few and I had planned to do one of his aircraft with the Tamiya 1/48 kit but I suppose it might be worth going to town with this big kit and doing it as his. Does anybody do decent squadron codes and serials in 1/24 or am I going to have to try and make masks of the bally things?

Sorry Troy, I'd completely forgotten to scan those photos for you - thanks for reminding me! I'm been very busy with work and it totally slipped my mind. BTW I think you might very well be onto something with the mixing stock paint to make Sky "approximations". Paul Lucas in his Battle for Britain booklet (which is excellent) does show that there were differing shades of Sky but Paul seems to approach it from the angle that they'd try and obtain another existing colour which was close to Sky in the correct spec, when you make an excellent and compelling point that mixing stock colours with your experiments. Those differing ratios that you have used to experiment pretty much cover everything from Sky Blue to Eau-de-Nil and everything in between. You've pretty much hit every colour that gets touted around for Sky substitutes with those simple mixes. Probably needs more exploration but I think you might be onto something quite important there, and an angle I haven't seen practically experimented upon. Well done Troy!

It could be very dark. For example the Hurricanes IIbs of 331 Sqn in service from August to November were a particularly dark version of Mixed Grey.

I agree with the others, almost certainly the Mixed Grey which was probably more common during the first several months of the change over than has possibly been thought.

Might be a bit late here but if that's the 1/48 kit don't use part K15, it's the bomb fusing switches which wouldn't be carried on a BoB Mk.I. Probably not a biggie if the canopy is going to be buttoned up but thought I'd mention it just in case. One thing to watch the underside fuselage to wing join. Someone at Hasegawa must have had a brain fart moment because low and behold the join is right in the middle on the fabric. It's not difficult to tidy up with filler but is a bit of a faff because of the "corrugations". Tim

Great work Troy! I think it's not silly to interpret the spinner as a dull red. A friend of mine Søren wrote a self published book on Zulu Lewis and he managed to obtain high quality copies of the photos of R when Lewis was tasked to use the aircraft for the benefit of the press visit. I'll check with Søren and if he doesn't mind I'll scan the photos from his book and send them to you. I think it's almost certainly a section leader thing. 85 had started playing around flight designation colours and whatnot on spinners towards the end of the Sitzkrieg and this carried over to leader markings during the Battle of Britain proper. Great work so far my friend, and I'll be watching this intently! Tim

I think one could even get away with applying the normal late German cross decals, the Croatian wing insignia and some light pastel weathering. They don't appear to be significantly overpainted as just weathered. Not saying your method isn't good but just pointing out for those who perhaps don't feel or want to try overspraying or even those who are brush painters , the pastels method is another option. It's a very attractive scheme and I'd be tempted to do it for a Gustav project.

Troy, one of the things I love about visiting BM is your exhaustive knowledge and passion for the Hurricane, one of my favourite aircraft, so I love your highly detailed explanatory posts and photos exploring the minutiae about all things Hurricane. Such knowledge and information is invaluable to modellers and especially those really skilled modellers who can utilise this information and translate it to their builds. For that reason your information and continued pursuit of all the little bits and pieces about Hurricanes is priceless. As I mentioned above, for a less skilled modeller such as myself I've come to terms with the fact that striving for ultimate down to the rivet accuracy is a pointless undertaking because my deficiencies in modelling skill will always be more obvious than any tiny inaccuracies in the kit itself. Saying that, I love all these discussions about detail and find it fascinating, even if it's beyond what I'm going to put into my model making.

Hi Troy, My comment above wasn't meant to mean that the old mould is better than the new, rather that the old mould is quite lovely in shape and its rendering of the fabric effect, at least to my eyes. I have the new mould planned for down the line as a 32 Sqn one and the kit looks beautiful, but in the meantime I've been enjoying the old mould. Part of that is probably nostalgia but also, I'm no longer obsessed with 110% accuracy anymore. I'm hardly a master modeller at the best of times so my foibles and lack of ability will always be more noticeable than slight inaccuracies of the kit concerned!

I made the 1/48 Hasegawa Hurricane back in 2006ish ( https://www.arcair.com/Gal7/6801-6900/gal6812-Hurricane-Smith/00.shtm ) and although it builds nicely and in typical "good" Hasegawa kit fashion the fuselage effect is grossly overdone. They also for some utterly ridiculous reason decided to make the lower wing to fuselage join right smack bang in the middle of the fabric effect! I've currently got the old mould Airfix 1/48 Hurri on the go at the moment and even though it's a 40+ year old kit it's blatantly obvious how much better the fabric effect is on this older kit. I've got the new mould Airfix kit in the stash but TBH I'm quite smitten with the old Airfix kit, shape-wise it appears spot on too.

The Spitfire and Hurricane ones are brilliant. WingLeader are doing a fantastic job with what they've been releasing. The Battle of Britain Combat Archive is thoroughly worth it if you have more than a passing interest in the subject. I say more than a passing interest as it's already cost me £200 and it's roughly only half way through or a little over that, so it's a fairly serious investment for the series. Saying that, I love it and think it's more than worth the investment.

I have the Mk.II notes (July 1940) if that's any help. I imagine it's the same or similar: DE-ICING EQUIPMENT 42. Windscreen de-icing a) A tank containing the de-icing solution is mounted on the left-hand side of the cockpit directly above the bottom longeron. A cock is mounted above the tank, and a pump and needle valve to control the flow of the liquid are mounted below the undercarriage emergency lowering control. Liquid is pumped from the tank to a spray at the base of the windscreen , from which it is sprayed upwards over the front panel of the screen. b) The flow of liquid is governed by the needle valve, after turning ON the cock and pushing down the pump plunger to its full extent. The plunger will return to the extended position on its own, and if required it can be pushed down again. When de-icing is no longer required the cock should be turned to the OFF position. HTH, Tim

Hi Brian, As Bob mentioned codes were reused as aircraft were lost, transferred or struck off service. Both L6977 and L7013 were coded U. As well as the photo of L6977 crashed in the meadow beside the Rijsdijk dyke, there is also a photo taken later that summer of German engineers clearing away the debris of the crash, and the aircraft is suspended from a crane and the U code is very clear. L6960 was definitely M. Although it exploded in mid-air, the rear fuselage landed in a creek west of Mordplaat. A photo exists of three local village officials (one, the the local policeman) sitting on the top of the fuselage with the M plainly visible (this section landed upside down). Several photos of L6969 in the Donge River exist and whilst the rear fuselage is out of the water, damage to the aircraft and photo quality make it difficult to tell the code. Just be aware that other sources list this aircraft as R (and even T) rather than B. The other Defiants that you mention from the 13th May have not been matched to codes as far as I am aware. McLeod and Cox almost certainly set fire to the aircraft after force landing as the photo that exists of it appears to show this. When L6958 was recovered in 1994, only the engine and some other parts were recovered none of which including the coding. HTH, Tim