Brits abroad - British subjects in foreign markings Chat

[JackG]

I'm interested, and also couple questions.

 

Judging by some of the images posted it looks like 'foreign' use can include British equipment captured and put to use by enemy forces?

 

Also, along the lines of foreign license built, what if the subject was designed by another country to British specifications, such as the the Canada built CMP truck?      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Military_Pattern_truck

 

regards,

Jack

[Antoine]

On 12/04/2017 at 11:20 PM, JackG said:

Judging by some of the images posted it looks like 'foreign' use can include British equipment captured and put to use by enemy forces?

 

Well, this fit exactly the GB title, don't you think?

[Giorgio N]

Jack, yes I'd say that any British equipment reused by enemy forces would be eligible. I don't how widespread this may have been, I know that British WW1 tanks were used by the Germans in quite large numbers but my knowledge of tanks and the like is quite limited. if you have other examples I'll be very happy to see them built if the GB goes ahead

 

Regarding the CMP trucks I'm not sure.. to me they would look like Canadian designed and built trucks, even if they were built to a British specification. In a sense I would have to allow the P-51 Mustang if I allow the CMPs as this type too was designed outside Britain to a British specification

[JackG]

Hello Giorgio - that is fair enough.  I had to ask about the CMP trucks to test the boundaries for this particular theme.  Now that I know how much my ideas have to be reeled in, I have a fairly good idea what to plan for.

 

regards,

Jack

[Botan]

Stratus is preparing a new book, just right for this GB

 

 

[zebra]

Count me in. Nice idea for a group build and there's plenty in my stash that would fit the bill.

[modelling minion]

Quick question, would a Tornado in Saudi markings qualify? I know that the aircraft isn't a purely British design but I believe the Saudi aircraft were built in the UK at Warton.

If not then I'm sure I could find something else.

[Antoine]

Can't see any problem here.

If the answer is no, we should also get rid of Lynx, Jag, Gazelle, Puma, etc...

[Giorgio N]

On 17/4/2017 at 1:15 PM, zebra said:

Count me in. Nice idea for a group build and there's plenty in my stash that would fit the bill.

 

That's great, you're added to the list. We only need a few more interested parties to go to the vote !

 

On 1/5/2017 at 10:52 AM, modelling minion said:

Quick question, would a Tornado in Saudi markings qualify? I know that the aircraft isn't a purely British design but I believe the Saudi aircraft were built in the UK at Warton.

If not then I'm sure I could find something else.

 

Interesting one... at the moment I'd probably answer that I don't know...

The Tornado is probably something that I'd consider as British because it really was mainly designed in Britain, although a number of features came from other countries (including some not part of Panavia). Regarding the other subjects mentioned by Antoine, I may probably also consider the Jaguar as British, although it started as a French project. I would sure consider the Lynx as British because the French involvement was very limited. In the same vein though I'd exclude the Gazelle and the Puma as I believe they are really French products with very little British content

I'd be happy to hear what other modellers think about this and then we can set a policy and stick to it

[Botan]

International projects with British involvement, looks like somebody opened a can of worms. It's tricky one, but I try propose some rules.

 

1. If British company participated in designing a vehicle and owns rights, then vehicle is considered British. One could argue about where airframe, line etc. is located, but to make this simple, I think this is enough (So Austrian Typhoon is fine I guess).

2. In case in Point 1, countries which participated in project are not considered as exported abroad.

3. If vehicle was produced by British company on licence, or rebuilt, modernised, or version specifically designed for UK was resold, without shares in company, which designed it, then only those vehicles sold abroad from Britain are considered British abroad.

4. British vehicles, or major parts (I realised for example, that Polish 7TP or Soviet T-26 had Vickers 6-tond hull) produced on licence abroad count. This is a bit risky rule, in theory it means a several Soviet T-26 could be built here. I mean, as long as single T-26 appears as a example of British technology abroad, then is fine.

5. Rules do not work into past, in case when British company was sold or bought another country company, after vehicle was designer (example from my country, Sikorsky bought a PZL Mielec producing a M-28 Skytruck, still a Nepalese M-28 won't be considered as  American plane abroad, or not now all Agusta helicopter become British).

 

This is the most loose set of rules though.

[stevehnz]

Apologies Giorgio, I must learn to pay attention more & not skim read the topic headers so carelessly, I've only just spotted this. Yes, I'd be keen, it sounds spot on for my recently bought S&M Hunting Provost in Omani colours.

Steve.

[Moggy]

British Aircraft in the Argentine Air Forces 1918-2008

 

Avro Lancaster
Avro Lincoln
English Electric Canberra

Gloster Meteor Mk.4
Percival Prentice
HS 748
Avro Lancastrian
Airspeed Consul
Bristol 170 Freighter Mk.1
DeHavilland DH.104 Dove
Vickers Viking Mk.1 /1B

Avro 552
Fairey IIIF
Supermarine Walrus
Felixstowe F5L
Supermarine Southampton
Shorts Skyvan
Westland Lynx

Avro 504
Avro 626
Bristol F2B Fighter
Avro/Cierva C.30

 

Commercial use:

 

Avro York

de Havilland Comet 4

Avro Lancastrian

 

Cheers, Moggy

 

Edited May 9, 2017 by Moggy
spelling

[Giorgio N]

On 6/5/2017 at 10:26 AM, stevehnz said:

Apologies Giorgio, I must learn to pay attention more & not skim read the topic headers so carelessly, I've only just spotted this. Yes, I'd be keen, it sounds spot on for my recently bought S&M Hunting Provost in Omani colours.

Steve.

 

Glad you find this interesting Steve, added you to the list ! Like the idea of an Omani Provost

[Giorgio N]

On 6/5/2017 at 8:54 AM, Botan said:

International projects with British involvement, looks like somebody opened a can of worms. It's tricky one, but I try propose some rules.

 

1. If British company participated in designing a vehicle and owns rights, then vehicle is considered British. One could argue about where airframe, line etc. is located, but to make this simple, I think this is enough (So Austrian Typhoon is fine I guess).

2. In case in Point 1, countries which participated in project are not considered as exported abroad.

3. If vehicle was produced by British company on licence, or rebuilt, modernised, or version specifically designed for UK was resold, without shares in company, which designed it, then only those vehicles sold abroad from Britain are considered British abroad.

4. British vehicles, or major parts (I realised for example, that Polish 7TP or Soviet T-26 had Vickers 6-tond hull) produced on licence abroad count. This is a bit risky rule, in theory it means a several Soviet T-26 could be built here. I mean, as long as single T-26 appears as a example of British technology abroad, then is fine.

5. Rules do not work into past, in case when British company was sold or bought another country company, after vehicle was designer (example from my country, Sikorsky bought a PZL Mielec producing a M-28 Skytruck, still a Nepalese M-28 won't be considered as  American plane abroad, or not now all Agusta helicopter become British).

 

This is the most loose set of rules though.

 

Some interesting points Botan, thanks for this

 

A few thoughts from my side:

1) Makes sense, we could include all international collaborations where a British company had an input in the design. For example, the Tornado would be as BAe or their predecessors had a considerable input in the design. At the same time this would rule the Puma helicopter out as the design is really 100% French and Westland only produced some components and built the RAF aircrafts.

 

2) Agree, an Italian Tornado wouldn't really be eligible as Italy also had a part in the consortium. A Saudi aircraft following this logic would be eligible

 

3 & 4) Tricky ones ! My as originally posted is that I'm happy with a British type built under license, for example the Vampires built in Italy, unless the final product has such a local input to end up being a different type. I made the example of the Canadair Argus, that while derived from the Bristol Britannia ended up being a different aicraft.

I don't know much about tanks, so I don't know how much the various designs you mention differ from the original British designs. Did the Polish simply produce copies of the original design when building the 7TP ? Or did they improve on the original design ? Same for the T-26, did the Soviet modify the original Vickers design in a way that made the T-26 clearly recognisable as different ? If any of these designs introduced improvements or important modifications then I would have to say that they are not anymore British types but Polish and Soviet types.

The same would be true in reverse, that is for types built in Britain under license. If the licensed product is identical to the original, or the differences are negligible, then IMHO this would not be eligible as British. If the licensed product introduces enough modifications to result in a something easily recognisable as a different product, then it would be eligible. To make an example, the L1A1 rifle was a British modification of a Belgian design. It introduced a number of modifications that made it quite different from the original one, so in my view a model of this rifle would be eligible. The AR18 built by Sterling or the M2 machine guns built in Britain however didn't introduce significant differences from the originals, so in my view they would not be eligible. A Westland Wessex helicopter is IMHO different enough from the Sikorsky S-55 to be a British product. The Sea King.. the differences may not be so pronounced but I'd still say that a Westland Sea King is a different beast from a Sikorsky one, so a German Sea King may be seen as an example of a British type used abroad. Of course an Iranian Sea King would not be eligible as these are based on the US variant (IIRC even built in Italy...).

 

5) Agree, a type designed in Britain by a British company remains British even if the company changes hands. The Lynx is a British helicopter even if Westland has for some time been part of an Italian company.

 

6) I know that there was no point 6 in Botan's list, however Jack's question made me realise that there may be cases of types designed in a country to specifications from another country. IMHO a product designed in country X for Britain is not British, but there's of course the matter of things designed in Britain for another country... I know that British shipyards built several ships for foreign navies, in this case I'd be inclined to consider these British products even if the specitications came from somewhere else, as the design and production would be British

 

Now hopefully there will only be a few cases of potentially controversial subjects. In any case I realize that I will need the help of someone with a better knowledge of areas that are not aircrafts... should the GB go through the vote for next year, I'll be glad if members will volunteer to help sorting these issues.

[Botan]

10 hours ago, Giorgio N said:

 

3 & 4) Tricky ones ![...]

I don't know much about tanks, so I don't know how much the various designs you mention differ from the original British designs. Did the Polish simply produce copies of the original design when building the 7TP ? Or did they improve on the original design ? Same for the T-26, did the Soviet modify the original Vickers design in a way that made the T-26 clearly recognisable as different ? If any of these designs introduced improvements or important modifications then I would have to say that they are not anymore British types but Polish and Soviet types.

 

Now hopefully there will only be a few cases of potentially controversial subjects. In any case I realize that I will need the help of someone with a better knowledge of areas that are not aircrafts... should the GB go through the vote for next year, I'll be glad if members will volunteer to help sorting these issues.

 

History of Polish 7TP tanks is well covered here, same as history of Vickers Mark E (6-Ton) light tank. 

7TP was pretty heavily modified. The weakest point of the Mark E was its 90 hp air-cooled petrol engine Armstrong-Siddeley, which was prone to overheating. The licence did not cover the engine anyway, as a result of the tank's evaluation in Poland. At an early stage of development it was decided to replace it with a stronger and more reliable water-cooled Saurer Diesel engine. The new vertical inline engine and its water radiators, replacing a lying inline air-cooled engine, demanded high rear compartment, which was the most obvious visual difference from the Vickers E and T-26 family. Among other improvements were: thicker and better quality armour (up to 17 mm face hardened plates instead of 13 mm homogenous plates), strengthened suspension and new transmission. The tank was also fitted with a modern anti-tank gun, Swedish 37 mm Bofors. Yup, the best Polish tank had English chassis, Swiss engine and Swedish cannon

So there is a lot of differences, anyway Polish Vickers also were modified by  adding large air intakes behind the crew compartment to improve engine cooling, and those would fit here greatly, it was an unique feature of the Polish tanks only. This, and some other minor improvements, were designed by Vickers on the Polish demand, and completed in Poland.

 

I'm not sure about T-26, I assume that early models like model 1931 were pretty similar.

 

I can help if needed, after all even with lack of specific knowledge, just a bit of time spend on looking for it is enough to sort basic questions. Anyway I have decided to make Ukrainian Austin armoured car from around 1919-1920, so I will not bring any tricky case. And with just armoured car I may make it on time...

 

Edited May 8, 2017 by Botan

[Giorgio N]

Botan, thanks for the notes on the Polish 7TP tank history ! I'll happily take your offer of helping me with similar subjects if the GB goes through the vote.

From what you say my view is that the 7TP has enough Polish design input to be considered a Polish type, I'm not sure I'd consider this eligible.

 

Moggy, thanks for the list, pretty impressive. A Lynx in Argentine markings has actually been on my to-do list for a few years, this GB may be the chance to finally build one

[Ray S]

Hello, I would like to join in if this gets through the poll later on! I have a few things in the stash, if not, there are always models shops to check out!

 

Ray

[mirageiv]

Hi Giorgio, great idea, I'm thinking I'd like to have a go with a Saudi Lightning T.55, hopefully (if) when the GB happens I'll have the parts by then!

 

David.

[zebra]

On 5/6/2017 at 4:54 PM, Botan said:

1. If British company participated in designing a vehicle and owns rights, then vehicle is considered British. One could argue about where airframe, line etc. is located, but to make this simple, I think this is enough (So Austrian Typhoon is fine I guess).

2. In case in Point 1, countries which participated in project are not considered as exported abroad.

 

On 5/8/2017 at 8:15 PM, Giorgio N said:

1) Makes sense, we could include all international collaborations where a British company had an input in the design. For example, the Tornado would be as BAe or their predecessors had a considerable input in the design. At the same time this would rule the Puma helicopter out as the design is really 100% French and Westland only produced some components and built the RAF aircrafts.

 

2) Agree, an Italian Tornado wouldn't really be eligible as Italy also had a part in the consortium. A Saudi aircraft following this logic would be eligible

 

To test this a bit further - BAe participated in the design of, say, the Airbus A320. So would an A320 be eligible? My view is this stretches the definition slightly too far. I don't think of a Jetstar A320 as British when I see one fly over, but others might disagree. My alternative to points 1 and 2 would be: If a substantial part of the design in an international project is British, products sold abroad from Britain are considered British abroad.

 

To me "sold abroad from Britain" would mean final assembly and export from Britain. So Saudi Tornado or Typhoon would be in, A320 would be out. Westland Lynx would be in, Puma would be out.

 

On 5/8/2017 at 8:15 PM, Giorgio N said:

I made the example of the Canadair Argus, that while derived from the Bristol Britannia ended up being a different aicraft.

 

I think we'd have to be consistent. So if a foreign design is modified in Britain to the extent that we'd say it becomes British (e.g. Westland Sea King) a British design modified overseas to that extent (e.g. the Argus) shouldn't be regarded as British.

 

These might end up being the most complicated group build rules ever!

 

 

[Max Headroom]

My 2 cents worth with the Airbus is to say no, because it wasn't built in Britain. Sure, the wings were, but it was assembled in Abroad.

 

Before anyone asks, Concorde is a no! British built machines only flew for BA.

 

Me? I'm seriously thinking of a Viscount. Always liked the Tennessee Gas scheme...... 

 

Trevor

[Botan]

20 hours ago, zebra said:

 

 

To test this a bit further - BAe participated in the design of, say, the Airbus A320. So would an A320 be eligible? My view is this stretches the definition slightly too far. I don't think of a Jetstar A320 as British when I see one fly over, but others might disagree. My alternative to points 1 and 2 would be: If a substantial part of the design in an international project is British, products sold abroad from Britain are considered British abroad.

[...]

I think we'd have to be consistent. So if a foreign design is modified in Britain to the extent that we'd say it becomes British (e.g. Westland Sea King) a British design modified overseas to that extent (e.g. the Argus) shouldn't be regarded as British.

 

These might end up being the most complicated group build rules ever!

 

 

BAE sold their 20% share in Airbus, so problem is solved. I guess there could be more problematic cases, so maybe to keeps things simple we could set a minimal limit of British shares in project, like 25% for example. it would rule out Airbus, and in the same time there is no need to dig into details with every single time.

 

I disagree with your second point. Point of this group in my opinion is to explore a usage of British technology and vehicles abroad. So in my opinion indigenous British design, which was later modified but also substantial in other country, is a interesting to learn about. Argus is really too modified though.

 

By the way, we have enough participates. I hope that we will succeed in poll. Who know, maybe later other "abroad" GB will be made?

[Giorgio N]

On 18/5/2017 at 5:02 PM, Ray S said:

Hello, I would like to join in if this gets through the poll later on! I have a few things in the stash, if not, there are always models shops to check out!

 

Ray

 

That's great, added your name to the list. We're almost there...

 

On 18/5/2017 at 8:31 PM, mirageiv said:

Hi Giorgio, great idea, I'm thinking I'd like to have a go with a Saudi Lightning T.55, hopefully (if) when the GB happens I'll have the parts by then!

 

David.

 

And with you we've hit the 30 interested members target ! If I got the rules for grup builds right this means we're going to the poll at the end of the year. Thanks to all who expressed their interest !

Of course other interested parties can join with their names and of course, once the GB is set up anyone can join regardless of their original expression of interest.

[Giorgio N]

Some interesting ideas regarding the eligibility or not of subjects built by international consortia with British participation, thanks to all for sharing their thoughts and please, keep 'em coming !

IMHO what is important is the extent of the British participation and how the subject is generally felt as "British". With the Tornado for example the British participation was important, the exported aircrafts came from the British assembly line and these had quite a lot of British content.

The participation of British industries in the Airbus projects is a topic that would deserve a book considering how much and how often things changed. The content of British design may have been important on some types, however I don't think anyone would really feel that these aircrafts "are British". Personally I would leave them all out. BAe also had a part in other programs, for example the Gripen, yet none of us would include the Gripen in a list of British types. In the same way as Grumman contributed to the Tornado program but nobody would ever list the Tornado as a US type.

Fortunately the number of subjects that could lead to confusion is relatively limited, I'm sure we can find an easy to apply rule

 

Regarding license built subjects, I agree that we have to be consistent, that's why I proposed to check how different the subject is from the original, having this working both ways. A Macchi built Vampire is identical to a DH built one, so IMHO this would be eligible. The abovementioned Argus is so different that it's a different aircraft. Of course there are cases where the differences may not be so clear, like in the example made by Botan of the Polish 7TP. I may add the Australian variants of the Lincoln to this kind of subjects (I have yet to make my mind on this): I'm sure there are other controversial subjects (is the Olifant tank British or South African?), should the GB go ahead (fingers crossed...) we'll try to have a simple rule. If we can't, we'll have to decided on a case by case basis.

 

Other "abroad" GBs ? I'd be all for it ! We already had a GB dedicated to exported Soviet/Russian hardware and was very succesful, I'm sure that similar GBs dedicated to other countries would be of interest too. In a similar mood, we could also think of a GB dedicated to foreign hardware in British use, something that I suspect would raise interest among modellers of military vehicles

Edited May 22, 2017 by Giorgio N

[zebra]

6 hours ago, Giorgio N said:

we'll try to have a simple rule

 

Good idea! The problem with Botan's and my earlier suggestions is probably that they're not simple. The Made In Britain II GB which just started has just one rule on Britishness - designed and/or built in Britain. 

 

So a completely different suggestion from me. British might mean different things to different people. Some people looking at an Argus might think of it as a modified Britannia, others might think of it as a Canadian aircraft. You could get similarly different views on a B-57, or a Westland Sea King. So perhaps we should simply let participants in the GB reach their own view on when something is British enough.

 

If we want to set a guideline on what the GB is about, I like Botan's suggestion as a basic principle behind the GB:

 

On 5/20/2017 at 3:24 AM, Botan said:

Point of this group in my opinion is to explore a usage of British technology and vehicles abroad

 

As for Giorgio's other suggestion - I'd join these GBs:

6 hours ago, Giorgio N said:

Other "abroad" GBs ? I'd be all for it ! We already had a GB dedicated to exported Soviet/Russian hardware and was very succesful, I'm sure that similar GBs dedicated to other countries would be of interest too. In a similar mood, we could also think of a GB dedicated to foreign hardware in British use, something that I suspect would raise interest among modellers of military vehicles

 

 

[Antoine]

On 22/05/2017 at 3:36 PM, Giorgio N said:

we'll try to have a simple rule. If we can't, we'll have to decided on a case by case basis.

 

Yes, keep it simple, there's lots of subjects to be found that won't need a court to decide about their admission, yet are exotic and rare enough to be interesting.