Mosquito Questions

[Keith Primrose]

Here we go - this is the FB6 manual, which will help with some references. I don't have a bomber one handy, but this will help with a lot of what builders need:

http://www.filedropper.com/ap2019e

I don't know how long the link will last, so get it while you can!

Bruce

Bruce

I notice that ap2019e.pdf does not appear to include sections 10 and 11 of the original document. Do you have access to those sections by any chance?

TIA for any pointers

Keith

[BruceG]

It may be that those sections weren't applicable to the aircraft, but I will have a look.

[Bengt]

Sorry for the late entry. Below is a photo of Mosquito FB Mk. VI RS562/DM-K of 248 Sqn taken at Saatenes airfield in Sweden. It force landed on 9 April 1945 after a strike on U-boats in the Skagerak and Kattegat. As we can see, the leding edge landing light was in use at that time.

Regarding Mosquitos equipped with the ASH-radar, they did not exist in October 1944. At least not in squadron service. Nos. 23, 141 and 515 Squadrons started training with ASH- radars in December 1944, and they entered service at the end of the month. Ref. AIR 27/ 288 (ORB 23 Sqn.), AIR 27/1981 (ORB 515 Sqn.) and numerous AIR 24 catalouges (Bomber Command appendiches).

Bengt

[Graham Boak]

The Typhoons had the landing light removed and were fitted with an aluminium patch in its place, because of damage caused by the rocket blast. It seems no-one told Coastal Command.

[Bengt]

Oh yes! Beaufighters equipped with RP's had their landing lights faired over.

[Graham Boak]

It's a good view of the double-decker rails, outboard of the tank mount.

[BruceG]

I had a look for the 'missing' sections of the AP. It appears that those subjects are adequately covered elsewhere in the book, so they don't feature.

[Mark Proulx]

With regards to the fuselage strake, a close examination of photos reveal 105 Squadron Mosquito Mk IV's in operational service without the strake fitted.

Mark Proulx

[avro683]

This isn't a great scan, but should be pretty useful for builders of Airfix, Tamiya, or HK. It is a Swedish Mk XIX parts manual, and is fully illustrated. I managed to get a copy made a few years ago, and a number of restorers have been using it! Bob at the Mosquito Museum even translated it - big job!

Here it is:

http://www.filedropper.com/swedishparts

Unable to see it Bruce.

[BruceG]

Looks like it has been deleted. I'll try and upload it again.

Mark, I'd be very surprised if 105 sqn aircraft didn't have the strake - and it isn't always easy to see. It was after all fitted from the second fuselage onwards, as evidenced by W4050.

All of the well known publicity shots of 105 sqn are of BIV series 2, with long nacelles, long tailplanes, and production cowlings.

[Mark Proulx]

Thirsk Vol 2 page 63 and 65 for examples of Series II Mosquitos from 105 Sqn w/o strake. I quote from the photo caption on page 63, confirmed in the photos:

"DZ379 has yet to be fitted with a longitudinal strake above the rear fuselage stiffening hatch"

The strake is easy to spot on the Mosquito as it disrupts the fuselage markings...

Mark Proulx

[avro683]

Thanks Bruce.

[Anthony in NZ]

Hi guys

Sorry for being late to the party, life has been SUPER busy and then got crook on top of that. Plus I usually hang out at LSP when on the 'net'

The leading edge lamp was introduced during British production (I think late 44 but more likely early 45) but I don't have a specific date for that and has been hard to nail it down. I need to look into it more. It wasn't a Mod to be added later). Not much help sorry

Cheers guys

Anthony

[Pete M.]

Here we go - this is the FB6 manual, which will help with some references. I don't have a bomber one handy, but this will help with a lot of what builders need:

http://www.filedropper.com/ap2019e

I don't know how long the link will last, so get it while you can!

Bruce

Hi Bruce. Any chance of re-posting the file? Just get the sign-on link at Filedropper!

Cheers,

Pete M.

[BruceG]

Mark, I stand corrected then. I will ask Ian if he knows when the mod came in. It should be listed in the mod leaflets.

[Basilisk]

Is there a conclusion when the strengthening strake was introduced?

On 17/05/2015 at 4:39 AM, Mark Proulx said:

Given that we have new Mosquitos arriving soon in 1/32nd, I thought this a good time to start posing some questions about the aircraft. Given the valuable information shared here (Spitfire, for example), perhaps the same holds true for the Mosquito. So...

1) At what s/n or production block were the PR windows deleted from the fuselage bottom of the B IV?

2) Same question for the reinforcing strake on the right side of the fuselage aft of the wing. Early aircraft seem not to have this feature. Was at retrofitted to earlier versions after it became standard? When was it first fitted?

3) When was the trailing aerial tube deleted? I do see it fitted to early B Mk IV and FB Mk VI.

I am sure as time goes by, more questions will come up...

In the meantime, thanks for any replies.

Mark Proulx

 

On 27/05/2015 at 6:27 PM, BruceG said:

Fuselage strake should be on all aircraft except for the prototype with its original fuselage. The fuselage was changed in its entirety after the taxying incident at Boscombe Down.

Bruce

 

On 05/06/2015 at 11:11 AM, Mark Proulx said:

With regards to the fuselage strake, a close examination of photos reveal 105 Squadron Mosquito Mk IV's in operational service without the strake fitted.

Mark Proulx

 

On 05/06/2015 at 6:33 PM, BruceG said:

Mark, I'd be very surprised if 105 sqn aircraft didn't have the strake - and it isn't always easy to see. It was after all fitted from the second fuselage onwards, as evidenced by W4050.

All of the well known publicity shots of 105 sqn are of BIV series 2, with long nacelles, long tailplanes, and production cowlings.

 

On 05/06/2015 at 9:24 PM, Mark Proulx said:

Thirsk Vol 2 page 63 and 65 for examples of Series II Mosquitos from 105 Sqn w/o strake. I quote from the photo caption on page 63, confirmed in the photos:

"DZ379 has yet to be fitted with a longitudinal strake above the rear fuselage stiffening hatch"

The strake is easy to spot on the Mosquito as it disrupts the fuselage markings...

Mark Proulx

 

On 07/06/2015 at 5:42 AM, BruceG said:

Mark, I stand corrected then. I will ask Ian if he knows when the mod came in. It should be listed in the mod leaflets.

 

I am planing a build of Mosquito PR IV DK310 which was built under Contract #555/C.23 as a B Mk IV Series II at Hatfield as part of the first batch of 50 aircraft between 11 April and 13 August 1942.

 

DK338 below was the second last aircraft of the first batch and as can be seen on the picture below, doesn't have the strengthening strake implemented.

The pictures (captioned as DK339) and above information is from Valiant's Airframe & Miniature No.8.

 

So would it be safe to say that the strengthening strake was at the earliest introduced after the first patch of the B Mk IV Series II? (the book doesn't say if any other production batches had been built or if the 50 aircraft produced under the first batch are all the B Mk IV Series II aircraft produced.)

 

Cheers, Peter

Edited February 6, 2017 by Basilisk

[Jure Miljevic]

Hello, Peter

The reinforcing strake was definitely there. The photo above was originally taken in colours so perhaps strake had been lost during b/w conversion. Take a look at the same photo on this link:

http://spitfirespares.co.uk/reference12. html.html

Not of the best quality, but the strake is visible. There is also another photo of DK338, probably taken during the same flight, on the front page of Stuart Howe's ´De Havilland Mosquito - an illustrated history´ book, published by Aston. Again, though barely visible, strake is there. Cheers

Jure

[Basilisk]

Thanks for your reply Jure. But I am not 100% convinced if the strake is on this  aircraft as the colour picture you mention is full of JPEG artifacts, making it difficult to see any detail. But nonetheless, great to see this aircraft in colour.

 

Still would be nice if the introduction of the strengthening strake could be established.

Cheers, Peter

[Graham Boak]

What is the gap in time between the broken fuselage of the prototype and the aircraft we are seeing in the photographs?  If it is anything other than a very short time, then the absence of the strake is very doubtful indeed.  It is, when all is said and done. just a balk of wood glued onto the outside.  There has been no retooling and rejigging involved that would inevitably lengthen any gap, and this is an operationally vital safety modification.  It would be rather surprising if ANY Mosquito flew without this strake, except perhaps for test examples for a brief period immediately after the event.   It would be astonishing if any entered operational service.  Bear in mind that for a long time the Mosquito was secret, and many of these photos were not taken until well into the aircraft's service.  It is totally unbelievable that any would be around a year or more after the incident.

[Jure Miljevic]

Hello, Peter

Your reluctance to trust on-line photos is understandable, though for me personally often stated information about strake being present on all production aircraft of the type is quite enough. I would post the second photo of the DK338 I had mentioned, but I am nervous about possible copyright infringement. Still, you stand a fair chance to find Stuart Howe's book in your local library and examine the photo yourself. Cheers

Jure

[Dave Swindell]

7 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

 It is totally unbelievable that any would be around a year or more after the incident.

I'd have thought so too, but apparently not.

I've just had a scan through Thirsk Mosquito Illustrated History Vol 2 and there's quite a few photo's of Mosquito's without the strake.

P65 shows the stbd wing root of DK337 GB-N after flack damage 14/9/42 ( 4 days after delivery and 18 months after the prototype fuselage fractured), no strake.

Above this is a photo of Highball conversion DK290/G in "early 43", no strake.

P63 shows a rear stbd view of DZ379 GB-H with 105 sqn at Marham photographed by Charles Brown December 42, no strake.

 

From the photo's in this book I'd surmise the the following aircraft were built and delivered without the strake:-

All W serials

All PR1's (short nacelle)

All NFII's DD serials

All B Mk IV series i (short nacelle)

All B Mk IV series ii DK serials

B Mk IV series ii DZ serails up to at least DZ379, possibly to DZ652. DZ653 onwards should have been deliverd with strake if intoduced December 42.

Probably some early TIII's serials from HJ851 (delivered May 42), HJ880 delivered with strake March 43 (photo Thirsk p181)

They were in service at least towards the end of 42 and possibly into 43 without the strake.

 

The strake was retrofitted to some aircraft, as Graham says this shouldn't have been too difficult if it was just scabbed on to the outside. W4052 is shown on P129 with it fitted on 29/4/43. As this airframe stayed with De Havillands and went through many mods, I'd assume this would be one of the first to be retrofitted, but how long it had been fitted when the photo was taken I don't know. So the strake appears to have been introduced after November 42 and before the end of April 43

 

The photo's above of DK338 were taken on a test flight from Hatfield (most likely first flight 31/8/42) are from a series taken by Charles Brown. His photo's have been reproduced in many publications, but best in the Camera above the Clouds series which I can't get at currently, however one is in Thirsk p67 and I can't make out a strake.

 

@Basilisk

Peter, as DK310 was converted from a B Mk IV at Hatfield on the line to a PR IV, I'd say it was delivered without the strake. If you're modelling it as delivered up to it's internment in Switzerland (ie in PRU scheme, LY-G) no strake. DK310 survived with the Swiss AF until mid 51, so it "may" have been modded with the strake. More history on this A/C in this thread, unfortunately the issue with the strake wasn't picked up at the time

Edited February 5, 2017 by Dave Swindell
update to serial range without strake

[Jure Miljevic]

Hello, Dave

W4052 had been fitted with a Bristol turret and also with a circular airbrake. One photo of the former installation shows W4052 lacking hatch behind the wing. Without it there was no need for strake. About DK338 photos I have to say I can still see the strake. Cheers

Jure

[Graham Boak]

Thanks Dave: I should have stuck with my upbringing as an ex-Radlett man, and believed anything of De Havillands!  More seriously, there's no such thing as a simple aircraft, or change to one, and I suspect that there was slightly more to the mod than just gluing on an extra bit.  Maybe not a lot, given the statements about easy of repair of the aircraft.  Even so, it still seems a long time before its implementation in production, if we are to accept all the serials quoted.  I've just seen a photo of an aircraft within that range with the strake, but as the photo was dated mid-1943 it can be dismissed as evidence for production.

[Jure Miljevic]

Hello, Dave

I went through my library again, this time searching photos from specific serial ranges you listed. I found photos of several aircraft with strakes and then came across the one of B.IV GB-H (no idea about the serial) from 105 Sqn. PR session, taken in December 1942. The photo is a close-up of the starboard side of the fuselage behind the wing and there is no trace of strakes whatsoever.

I must say this makes me very unhappy. I spend longer and longer periods of time researching and less and less actually building models. Where is a joy in model building if one has to check every panel line and every rivet? Cheers

Jure

P.S.: I have been probably examining photos of DK338 for too long, because now I can even see a shadow below the strake!

[Dave Swindell]

34 minutes ago, Jure Miljevic said:

One photo of the former installation shows W4052 lacking hatch behind the wing.

Squadron/Signal Mosquito in Action p4 has a photo of W4052 with the Youngman circular segmented air brake fitted, the hatch is clearly visible in this photo, no strake.

Thirsk, p127 has a photo of W4053 with the Bristol turret in which the hatch is clearly visible, again, no strake.

The photo above this shows W4052 in late 41 with series i cowlings and extendeed nacelles. The caption states the stiffening strake above the rear access hatch became a standard feature of production machines from December 42. The photos of DK338 taken at Hatfield 31/8/42, of which the above is one, don't show a strake.

16 minutes ago, Graham Boak said:

More seriously, there's no such thing as a simple aircraft, or change to one, and I suspect that there was slightly more to the mod than just gluing on an extra bit.

As an engineer I also suspect the same, and I wouldn't be surprised to find a similar strake on the inside, with the outside one screwed though the fuselage into it. This would give significantly more strength than a thin strip tacked on the outside. Can't find any photos or drawings to substanciate this though. The strake also acted as a rain gutter, apparently damp was affecting the fuselage skin around the hatch which the strake helped prevent.

14 minutes ago, Jure Miljevic said:

The photo is a close-up of the starboard side of the fuselage behind the wing and there is no trace of strakes whatsoever.

I must say this makes me very unhappy. I spend longer and longer periods of time researching and less and less actually building models. Where is a joy in model building if one has to check every panel line and every rivet?

Jure, for myself, and I'm pretty sure Graham too, research and historical accuracy is half the fun of modelling. We're not trying to prove anyone right or wrong, we're just trying to establish a little recognised detail of mosquito production. I too have spent a couople of hours trawling through a dozen or so Mosquito books looking at loads of photos - did I get any modelling done? no! did I learn something I didn't know yesterday? yes! Did I enjoy it? yes! Will it bother me if I see a pre 1943 Mosquito model with a strake? no!

If the details are killing the fun, stop worrying about them (oh  and by the way, there's very few panel lines and rivets on a Mosquito, should be easy to count... sorry couldn't resist )

 

Earlier serials post edited regarding DZ serial range and TIII's