Stonar

The colour photograph of 'Red 1' posted above pretty much ended the debate about the colours. They were clearly red and white. There are plenty of images of these aircraft to work with when working out the stripes (there is one each of Red 3, Red 13, and Red 1 in B+W posted in this thread). I've always masked and sprayed these markings and have intentionally not made the stripes identical. Cheers Steve

Off the top of my head I think that a Ju 88 should have a 650mm swastika. That would be a shade over 20mm each side at 1/32 scale. I can't double check at the moment, hopefully someone can confirm. Cheers Steve

You certainly can go wrong painting cockpits thus. Somewhere between 1938, when 02 and/or 01 (silver, which everyone forgets about) were stipulated for interiors and 1941 when, "the interior colour is in shade 02 in principle. Shade 01 may not be used here. Only the interior walls of glazed cockpits and canopies will be protected against dazzle with shade 66" some companies had already started finishing interiors in 66. There is irrefutable evidence, extant today, which you can see if you fancy a trip to Norway, that both Junkers and Heinkel were painting the cockpits of some of their aircraft in RLM 66 from early production. This is certainly in 1940 for both companies, and, more debatably, before the war for Heinkel. Tango 98 has already mentioned Messeschmitt production and certainly some aircraft which were damaged and subsequently repaired and returned to service also had the cockpits, or parts of them, refinished in RLM 66 in 1940. That too probably depends on where the repair was carried out. RLM 66 was specified for instrument panels in 1938, so it was certainly available ("Shade 66, i.e. aviation lacquer 7107.66, will be used for instrument panels." There really is no hard and fast rule that can be given and certainly no sort of cut off date between the two different finishes. Cheers Steve

I agree. My figures are crap and don't bear close inspection. From a couple of metres away they look okay and give a sense of scale, which is important to me. Most people looking at models of WW2 aircraft have no real concept of the size of the full size subject, but they do have a pretty good idea of the size of a full size man (or woman). Cheers Steve

And thin black outer border Cheers Steve

The choice is yours. I rarely put a pilot in an aircraft which is not posed flying (where he is a rather obvious necessity) pretty much for the reasons you mention. Why have him obscure all that hard work? I sometimes make little vignettes of models, and this is when I might pop a suitable pilot in place. Most cockpit hoods can be made to open and close with a bit of work. Cheers Steve

I have the second line as 'Place Order(s) so Wing'........Third line is illegible. SWMBO thinks the long word on the third line might be 'replenish' but I can't see that at all. It wouldn't be the first time we've seen the same thing in completely different ways Cheers Steve

Did Bowater not explain what went on with P6967 in his book on the two Whirlwind squadrons? According to him, it had absolutely nothing to do with Merlins but rather, initially, a failure to maintain rated boost during climbs. Whilst at Hucknall the aircraft was fitted with external air intakes and oil coolers and Morris low drag radiators. These changes actually increased speed and FTH by 1,200 feet but were never incorporated into production aircraft. Cheers Steve

If it's supposed to be August 1940, then 6G would be II./St.G.1.....I think Cheers Steve

I didn't find it very good or illuminating. It did argue for a rehabilitation of the RAF's perceived role in operations around 'Dynamo' but still pandered to many of the usual myths including that of the Spitfire. Simon Parry did inject a smidgen of balance and objectivity in an all too brief appearance. Cheers Steve

Lots of pictures here http://forums.airshows.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=74081 Steve

I've got my mojo and I've got an enforced break from work. Unfortunately that break is due to a rather nasty shoulder injury and a Special Hobby He 113, which has only a very approximate fit so far and requires quite a bit of fettling which I won't be doing one handed and under the influence of a cocktail of drugs which certainly don't help with concentration or coordination, is going to languish on the bench for a bit longer. Good luck with your Spitfire, however you decide to do it Cheers Steve

Well yes, Dark Mediterranean Blue it is certainly an option. Again, with all the usual caveats I would suggest Sky generally appears lighter than Azure Blue in B+W photographs, and both appear much lighter than the colour on the undersides of some Malta Spitfires. I've seen it suggested that this underside colour was the aforementioned Dark Mediterranean Blue or even Night! I still reckon that I'd do the subject in question in EDSG over Sky, but I expect the original poster is now as confused as everybody else who has attempted to nail down a Malta Spitfire Cheers Steve

The three Ju 87 photographs in question are part of a series and, given the consecutive numbers, taken at the same time and place. The pictures were taken in or immediately outside a hangar, factory or other facility (obvious in the one numbered 78949). I have tried to decipher the writing visible on a wall or door in the background but without success. They look like they might have been taken for a manual or handbook, but that's conjecture on my part. Cheers Steve