Jump to content
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. :)

ClaudioN

Members
  • Content count

    402
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

171 Excellent

About ClaudioN

  • Rank
    Established Member

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Here

Recent Profile Visitors

1,004 profile views
  1. 105 Sq Mosquito IVs in Day Fighter Scheme ?

    'Bombing Colours 1937-1973', by M.J.F. Bowyer includes the picture of crash-landed DK291. The yellow wing leading edge band is visible. The profile in the same book is for Mosquito IV Series II DK292 GB-B. Unlike DK291 in the picture, this one is drawn with 'C1 type' fuselage roundel and narrow white stripe on the fin flash. No underwing roundel. The caption says it served with No. 105 Sqn. from June to October 1942. Quoting from Bowyer: "Sky spinners and tail bands making the bombers look like fighters were therefore introduced, and some Mosquitoes even had the yellow wing leading edges. These features were only retained until July 1942. They were a nuisance on low-level operations, making the aircraft too easily visible". HTH Claudio
  2. Martlet Mk.I

    Thank you for the hint. So far, I've been able to find mention of decal markings in this thread: http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234973972-tomahawk-colour-question/&page=3 I'll look further. ...and sorry about stealing the joke, guess it comes natural to a modeller.
  3. Martlet Mk.I

    Thanks for the information, I didn't know such large decals were indeed possible. Er... how many gallons of MicroSet/MicroSol? Claudio
  4. Martlet Mk.I

    American aircraft for RAF HTH Claudio
  5. Martlet Mk.I

    I think Grummans used slightly glossier colours for the roundels.
  6. Still slightly unfamiliar with some facets of the English language. I'm under the impression that enjoy a privilege = get a service escaped me so far.
  7. Martlet Mk.I

    Just thinking... allowing more space for the pilot to enter/exit the cockpit (or bail out, in case of need)?
  8. Martlet Mk.I

    Great catch, Brian! ...and it had been there for anybody to look at, but it's true one needs to look really carefully to see something that is plainly there. I'll try to write down my thoughts as neatly as possible, but I'd really need an engine expert to comment. 1) bulge - Bert Kinzey (D&S no. 65 - F4F Wildcat) says it first appeared on Bu. No. 3905, that is, the first US Navy F4F-3A. We know ex-Greek Martlets had it too. The F4F-3 at the Naval Aviation Museum, Pensacola FL, also has it, and it is the original Bu. No. 3872. Bu. No. 2525, that appears in LIFE colour photos, had no bulge. We might possibly say the bulge was introduced on F4Fs of the first large (243 aircraft) US Navy contract, in preparation for fitting the R-1830-86? 2) engine - the first F4F-3s had the R-1830-76 and no bulge. From the R1830-76 to the R-1830-86 something in the engine must have changed, as the bulge was meant to accommodate the latter. In between, F4F-3As had the R-1830-90, that required no bulge, although it was kept there on F4F-3A airframes. It sounds odd that Grummans randomly picked whatever engine variant was available. Purely out of logical reasoning, I'd rather think the R-1830-76 was fitted up to Bu. No. 3874, then the R-1830-90 on 95 aircraft, at last the R-1830-86. The airframes could accept any of the three. 3) external air intake - the table at the end of Bruce Archer's article gives known correspondences between British serials and US Navy Bu. Nos. From this, it turns out that AX744:D was Bu. No. 3900 and AX736:X was Bu. No. 3903, both having no external air intake on the engine cowling. I do not assume strict ordering by Bu. No., but I think it is likely that higher Bu. Nos. were, roughly, later machines. In this regard, British serial assignments are more random. For instance, AX746:H was Bu. No. 3876 and it did have the external air intake at the top of the cowling. Could we think the external air intake was deleted somewhere before Bu. No. 3900? As a whole, seemingly the three aspects were independent. The Martlet is a fascinating topic, isn't it?
  9. Agreed. My full thought was, "given that I do not trust a caption unless I can check it", then knowing who the photo is originally credited to can be useful. Particularly with the FAA, sometimes personnel and aircraft can have been together aboard a given carrier only within a limited period of time, and this may help check a date. Unfortunately, photo captions often receive too little attention from authors.
  10. As I see it, if the hook breaks away from your 'V' type hook frame, you are left with two unconnected braces freely hanging down the rear fuselage. Of course, it will definitely not work. I agree it is a pity the accident went unrecorded (or the records went missing). I'd be really interested to know in what period HMS Eagle had aboard a fighter unit whose codes reached up to '6-H', that usually would imply 6 aircraft in two sections (i.e., 6-A, 6-B, 6-C and 6-F, 6-G, 6-H).
  11. I have seen the pictures mentioned in the posts above. If it may help, this is what I noticed: Brian's explanation of 6-H's "twin hook" sounds most convincing. I've been looking at that picture several times and this is the simplest way of thinking at it. BTW, I first saw the picture in "Fleet Air Arm at War", Ian Allan, 1982, picture credit: Capt. C.L. Keighly-Peach, Commander Flying HMS Eagle in 1940; in the image blow-up of frame 183 posted by Grey Beema it is interesting that tailplanes appear to be Sky Grey, NOT black and white. I'm not convinced it has underwing roundels. I can see what appears to be a circle shape on the starboard wing underside, but I think it is just an optical trick in the image. A roundel that size would have covered also the ailerons, which is rather odd and usually avoided to preserve aileron balance; the picture of '6-A' in Stuart Llloyd's book, p. 143 (and in "Royal Navy Aces of WW 2") is not very clear. A much better version appears in "Eagle's War" by Peter C. Smith, Crecy, 1995. The picture clearly shows pre-war roundels above the wings. I think A/A1-type roundels in all 6 positions is what was meant in the book, although I have no idea about the undersides. The caption in Smith's book states 'Battle of Calabria, 9th July 1940', so if the date is right this aircraft was indeed coded rather early. Picture credit: Surgeon Lt. E.B. Mackenzie of HMS Eagle; '6-C' in Brown, "Carrier Operations in WW II" vol. 1, Ian Allan, 1968 (and in "Carrier Air Groups - HMS Eagle", Hylton Lacy, 1972), note this has no black/white undersides and the fin flash is the same style as '6-A'. No date, photo credited to Lt. J. Wellham (824 Sqn., HMS Eagle); N5567:6-C is not the same as '6-C' above. This aircraft was shipped out to Egypt from Britain and was not part of the original 18 Sea Gladiators sent to the Med in 1939. It has full-fin red-white-blue stripes, which might have been applied in Britain. Same as '6-H' of item 1. above; unknown with two-bladed propeller on p. 79 of Stuart Lloyd's book: the same (presumably) aircraft appears in a different picture on p. 62 of Brown, "Carrier Operations", more clearly showing that this aircraft also had pre-war overwing roundels. Light undersides seemingly point to a repaint in Sky... when? Note fin flash style is the same as '6-A' and '6-C' of item 4. above. Photo credited to Lt. J. Wellham (824 Sqn., HMS Eagle). Later publications do not report the original photo credits as, for instance, some collections have since been donated to the FAA Museum. This is a pity because useful historical information is thus lost. I also use to take captions with care and double check when possible. Unless the picture was captioned right after taking it, memory can play tricks. HTH Claudio
  12. Hello Grey, the closest I can find for you is this: http://www.britishpathe.com/video/stills/narvik-material-aka-narvek-material go to video still no. 183. It is a Sea Gladiator in the take-off attitude you wished to see. Difference is, it is flying off Glorious in April-May 1940, so either 802 or 804 Sqn. Aircraft of Eagle's Fighter Flight were left behind by 802 Sqn., so they might have been finished similarly. A number of photos suggest that the Mediterranean Fleet did use black white ID markings throughout 1940, so my own guess (repeat, own guess) for N5517 is black/white undersides, and no unit codes. I think 6oX codes came later, around the beginning of 1941. Just my two pence, and... yes, I know I'm disagreeing with the Osprey publication. Claudio
  13. Exceptionally detailed effort. I love 72nd scale, and a Lynx helicopter plus refueller is a really inspiring build. Bravo! The "special fit" is for playing Quidditch, right? I can see a ball on the port side...
  14. abandoned damaged wrecked planes WWII Pacific theatre pic needed

    Japanese aircraft. Note the yellow inner wing leading edge.
  15. Blackburn Roc Floatplane Target Tug

    I agree. I think we shouldn't forget that the Blackburn and the Bison both were, in first place, flying nautical charting tables... and you woudn't spread your precious charts in the slipstream, would you? Let's look at them from the inside out, comfortably seated in the enclosed observer cockpit. Those large portholes are a really nice touch by Blackburns, IMHO. The shop-window style in the Bison has a more pedestrian look. Lack of a crow's nest is perhaps the greatest shortcoming in the original naval requirement. Claudio
×