Welcome to Britmodeller.com

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

  • Announcements

    • Mike

      Switched Identities   18/06/17

      If you are still having problems logging in and remaining under your own username following the DDoS attack last week, you need to log off, clear your browser's cache, and restart your browser to ensure you clear all the old files from your temporary area.  Then you should be sorted.

Dave Swindell

Gold Member
  • Content count

    990
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

425 Excellent

About Dave Swindell

  • Rank
    Culicidae
  • Birthday

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Cumbria

Recent Profile Visitors

2,755 profile views
  1. Yes, old sailing ship practice, helm would be standing to windward to get a better view forward and to better see the set of the sails. Depending on wind direction, the helm may be steering to keep the sails set correctly rather than on a compas bearing. The sailing master would have the sails set to achieve course made good.
  2. Has he tried contacting Camper & Nicholsons? If they have archives they may have something?
  3. You're welcome Ray. The model is coming on great.
  4. Teething problems with the two different versions (shop lite & subscription extra pages) of the mag?
  5. Hi Ray Have you got Vol 2 of British Ocean Tramps? There's a hint at whats going on if you look at Waterloo on the opposite page to Knight Templar in Vol 1. Both ships are very similar, sailing ships with steam engines (as opposed to later steam ships with auxilliary sail) and built using sailing ship practices and layouts, sail was a practical means of propulsion for these ships and no doubt would have been used in favourable winds. Anchor stowage and handling would have been akin to the larger sailing ships they were based on, the anchors stowed on deck and handled with a pair of davits each side, and raised and lowered with a manual winch as you say. The drawings don't show all details in all views (part of your problem), in the plan view immediately aft of the winch is a large H like object, the outer arms of the H are I believe upright spoked wheels with a cross axle between them that drives the winch when turned by hand, these aren't shown in the side profile (maybe removable?). You refer to anchor chain, but it may not have been chain, or may only have been partly chain. It may have been anchor cable (heavy "rope") or a short length of chain between the anchor and cable. If cable was used, it would most likely be disconnected from the anchor or anchor chain and all stowed below deck when on passage. The drawings of Waterloo show anchor davits on the focsle deck, and an anchor windlass on the well deck below the focsle deck. The side view shows no sign of hawse pipes, however, if you have vol 2 there is a colour waterline side view of Waterloo which shows the anchor stowed on deck as per the drawing of Knight Templar, with a chain running to a hawse pipe immediately behind the stem and below the well deck. The plan drawing of Waterloo's well deck area below the focsle shows the tops of two hawse pipes with what I interpret as cable stoppers on the outboard sides. There's no sign of spurling pipes or chain lockers, so if cable was used for the rest of the anchor "line" then it could be coiled and stowed on the well deck behind the windlass (or there is a cable locker and it just isn't shown) If we now look back at Knight Templar, she has two very similar items to Waterloo's hawse pipe/cable stoppers, one each side of the companionway house down into the focsle accommodation. In the lamp locker and Firemen's cabin each side of the companionway below these, is a small square hatch (or shaft). I'd interpret these as spurling pipes with cable stoppers on top leading to cable lockers below the focsle accommodation. The cable would have then come forward to the windlass and then forward from the windlass. The two rectangles with ovals in the middle I'd interpret as hawse pipes, with the cable leading down these and out of the ship before being lead back up and secured to the anchor stock. There's a pair of bollards on the centreline between the hawse pipes and windlass, and a line from the bollards to the fairleads in the bulwark at the stem passes over or immediately adjacent to the hawse pipes, so I can't see these being anything other than hawse pipes. They're not shown in the focsle accommodation drawing, but I'd put them angling forward and outboard by 30-45 degrees and down by 45-60 degrees, this would have them run forward of the forward 2 double bunks in the focsle locker, and exit the ships side just above or below the focsle accommodation deck level. That's my interpretation, I'm open to reasoned alternatives.
  6. Hi Wal The orange & yellow is laser printed, the black & white (with white undercoats for the orange & yellow) is printed on my Oki (Alps) printer. I use spot colour printing on the Oki, so the artwork is black whichever colour is being printed. The image I posted is a low res jpeg from coreldraw vector artwork, so the decal printout is much sharper than the image. I stick to modelling G- plate civil stuff in 1/144, but I do enjoy checking out your custom civil models when you post them.
  7. Well there's a coincidence Wally, I've just done a set of decals for a mate of mine for the same aircraft!
  8. That's a very handy tip there Nigel, filed in the memory banks. Watching with interest as I have both this and a CMK Sycamore to build some day.
  9. Hi there, nice to see another one of these being built, my attempt is here. Corrections 1) definately, I think the hull should taper less / be a little wider at the forward sponson as well. Didn't attempt correcting this on mine. 2) didn't really notice this one, you may be right, but it's quite subtle if it is there. 3 & 5 corrected on my build, plus a couple of other minor changes as well.
  10. On a whim after seeing clipper's post above, I ordered this one, just over £7 with free postage and it arrived today, seller was Speedyhen, and lived up to her name! Small A5 softback, 76 pages published 2015. A quick flick through shows a potted history of dazzle camouflage in WW1 and the people involved, well illustrated throughout with contemporary colour illustrations/paintings and B&W photos of personalities etc. Looks like interesting background reading, but isn't going to solve Ray S's puzzle or mine. Bedtime reading this week, will report back when finished.
  11. Hi Steve Just an educated guess. Don't know what damage was done during the accident, but it was more than deemed repairable on squadron. As they were looking for airframes for remanufacture into LF V's, this looks like it was a prime candidate. From accident to reissue to service was just over 3 months, which I'd say was a reasonable timeframe for assessment, remanufacture, and testing. I'd suggest the damaged airframe was trucked in bits to AST, and as mentioned above by others, the fuselage emerged with other reconditioned components attached as the next incarnation of W3834.
  12. From Morgan/Shacklady Spitfire the History Supermarine Aviation (Vickers) Ltd Contract No. B19713/39 Second order for 450 Spitfire F Mk I dated 22 March 1940, built as Mks VA, VB between April and October 1941 includes serial batch W3814-W3853 W3834 2033 EA Holt XII FF 2-9-41 38MU 5-9 266S 13-9 154S 23-2-42 FAAC 12-4 ASTE M45M install 5USA 6-8 421S 10-3-43 416S 23-5 401S 1-6 126S 10-8 HAL 12-11 1659CU 5-1-45 SOC 17-9 Translates as:- W3834 - RAF Serial No 2033 - Supermarine construction no EA - Manufactured at Eastleigh Holt XII - Presentation name, one of the fourteen Spitfires presented to the RAF by the Canadian Holt family FF 2-9-41 - First Flight 38MU 5-9-41 - to 38 Maintenance unit for checks/equipment installation 266S 13-9-41 - to 266 Squadron 154S 23-2-42 - to 154 Squadron FAAC 12-4-42 - Flying Accident category AC (repair on site by contractor) ASTE M45M install - Air Service Training Exeter, Merlin 45M (medium supercharged, low level engine similar to 45 with cropped supercharger) installation 5USA 6-8-42 - 5th Squadron of the 52nd Fighter Group, USAAF at Eglinton, Northern Ireland 421S 10-3-43 - to 421 Squadron 416S 23-5-43 - to 416 Squadron 401S 1-6-43 - to 401 Squadron 126S 10-8-43 - to 126 Squadron HAL 12-11-43 - to Heston Aircraft Ltd 1659CU 5-1-45 - to 1659 Conversion Unit SOC 17-9 - Struck off Charge 17-9-45 Re-engining at Exeter looks the most likely source of odd wings More here
  13. Ahh, I see what you're getting at now. Yes' I'd agree with most of what Troy said. Rather depends on how well they were stuck on in the first place (a used patch would generally have to be removed before a new one was fitted). Blown off by the blast from the guns - possible. Ripped off by the slipstream after bullets had punched through - highly likely. Came off in the belly landing - unlikely I think in this case, this looks like a very good controlled belly landing with minimal damage to the airframe, the badly worn paintwork appears to predate it's arrival in the field. Looking at the port outboard gun that has fired, there appears to still be a portion of the patch still attached in the lower outboard corner?
  14. Depending on how you're viewing the site, it isn't always immediately obvious which forum a post is in. As you don't mention any store by name in your post or subject line, I suspect Panzer Vor!!! missed that you'd posted in the Wonderland forum. As you're bigging them up anyway, an extra shoutout for them in the subject and post wouldn't do any harm :-)