Jump to content

Gloster Sea Gladiator - HMS Eagle, N5517/6oA NAS 813, July 1940


Grey Beema

Recommended Posts

After a bit of a hiatus (6Months) I'm back on the case now.  Working away on both the Seafire MKII and the Sea Gladiator, getting ready to move them to the paint shop But I'm a bit confused over the Sea Gladiator camouflage so I'm looking for input from the Fleet Air Arm experts out there (this really is a nerdy question)..

 

I am doing a collection around FAA Aces, largely based on the Osprey publication.  The Sea Gladiator I am building is going to be that flown by Commander Charles Keightley-Peach who led a fighter contingent NAS 813(F) on HMS Eagle N5517/6oA.  I have seen a photograph of this aircraft dated July 1940 the picture is from above and appears in two publications, the Osprey book and Stuart Lloyds Fleet Air Arm Camouflage and Markings (Atlantic & Mediterranean Theatres 1937-1941).  The kit also has the markings for this aircraft which is in the S1E scheme with roundel in all six positions.

 

In July 1940 would Sea Gladiator N5517 (which had been in storage in Malta until May/June 1940) have had shadow shaded S1E upper surfaces? 

It is impossible to tell from the photograph, I think it was supposed to be but I do know shadow shading was quietly dropped.  Other Sea Gladiator pictures from around the same period don't seem to have shadow shading but they also have straight demarcation between upper and lower schemes which indicates a repainted aircraft.

 

Would the aircraft have the black port underside (or just main planes)?

The Roden scheme does not show it, neither do any of the illustrations I have seen, but you cannot tell from the photograph.  The Lloyd books states that the aeroplane has roundels in all six positions which would indicate the standard Sky grey finish underside.  Pictures of 813 later in the year indicate that there was a black lower port side IFF but it had no lower roundels...

 

Ideally I would like a dated photograph of N5517/6oA just taking off from HMS Eagle, from below clearly showing every detail of the underside with the serial clearly readable - that's not going to happen but can anybody help?

 

 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grey Beema said:

Ideally I would like a dated photograph of N5517/6oA just taking off from HMS Eagle, from below clearly showing every detail of the underside with the serial clearly readable - that's not going to happen but can anybody help?

 

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

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want to model N5517 in July 1940, I agree with Claudio: scheme S1E, black/white ID markings and no codes. As for shadow shading, I don't think there is conclusive evidence. I have found several more Sea Gladiator photos since I wrote the camouflage and markings book in 2007, but they do not help resolve the question of whether shadow shading was applied, sadly.  However, Sea Gladiators were all camouflaged by units, rather than by MAP, so it would  have depended upon whether the unit followed Admiralty instructions. In all likelihood they would have done so, in my view, but that judgement is based on a cultural assessment of the status of orders in the RN in 1940 rather than any direct evidence pertaining to Sea Gladiator camouflage from photographs.

 

As for codes - the Combat Reports for 813F in July 1940 refer to aircraft by serial only. There is also a series of photos of N5515 being pushed over the side after a landing accident where the black and white ID markings are clear and the airframe has no codes.  Finally, the detachment of 813F loaned to Illustrious in November 1940 as fighter protection for the Taranto attack did not carry codes, so I'd be very surprised if codes were carried in July 1940. 

 

HTH

 

IG

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For such a small number of aircraft, 813(F)'s Sea Gladiators seem to have done remarkably well for photographic coverage.

 

1.  Burrow: Squadrons of the FAA, 3rd Ed, p.140: 6-H, captioned as Eagle, 1940.  No serial given.  Straight upper/lower demarcation, type A1 fuselage roundel.  Fin flash over whole fin.  Upper wing roundels masked by reflection.  Has unusual twin arrester hooks.

2.  Sturtivant: FAA Aircraft, p.221: 6-coded Gladiator N5567 airborne.  Code given as 6-C, unit as 805 rpt 805 Sq, date as Crete, around May/June 1941.  Wavy fuselage demarcation.  Type A1 roundel.  Fin flash over entire fin.  NB text says this aircraft served with 813 in Eagle between Jun and Oct 40 and with 805 at Maleme, Crete Mar-May 4, where she was probably lost.  So photo shows an ex-813 aircraft, possibly but not necessarily retaining 813 Sq markings.  (FAA Squadrons says 805 Sq used code 6-x (but possibly only because they'd taken on ex-813 aircraft (my speculation)).  

3.  Lloyd: FAA Camouflage and Markings 1937-41, p.97: N5567 6-C unmistakably on Eagle's deck.  No date.  Wavy colour demarcation.  Reflections obscure fin but it looks as if flash is of the full fin type.  Upper wing roundels not visible.  Fuselage bottom possibly in black or equally possibly in deep shadow.

4.  Brown: Carrier Operations In World War II, Vol 1, 1st Ed, p.61: 6-C landing on.  No date or serial given.  Wavy fuselage demarcation.  A1-type roundel.  Fin flash of equal stripes covering most of but not extreme leading edge of fin.  Upper wing roundels not visible.  No dinghy pack.

5.  Thomas: RN Aces of World War 2, p.23: 6-A reportedly landing on Eagle.  Serial given as N5517, date as July 1940.  Wavy fuselage demarcation.  A1 fuselage roundel.  Fin flash in heavy shadow but from proportions of white stripe, probably equal stripes as for 6-C above.   

6.  Lloyd, op cit, 6-A p.143.  Same photo as Thomas, above.   Captioned as N5517 .  No date.   Caption highlights 3-bladed prop and says this aircraft was one of several to "certainly" retain pre-war roundels in all 6 positions.

7.  Lloyd, op cit, p.118.  No code.  Wavy fuselage demarcation, captioned as N5549 after minor landing accident on 9 Nov 1940, while detached from 813 to 806 in Illustrious for Op JUDGEMENT.  A1 fuselage roundel.  Yet a third style fin flash: equal width stripes but starting back from leading edge of fin so red practically non-existant.  Type B upper wing roundels.  Apparent high contrast on upper wing camo colours.

8.  Lloyd, op cit, p.79.  Unknown Gladiator, captioned as on Eagle.  No code.  Serial not visible.  No date.  Higher and straight(ish) colour demarcation.  Type A1 fuselage roundels.  Equal width finflash starting forward from rudder post.  Type A upper wing roundels.  Caption suggests this aircraft has been repainted.

 

Phew!  So where does this leave Grey Beema with his questions?  Not one whit further forward: many pictures don't show upper surfaces (so no evidence re shadow shading on upper wings) and the intense shadows of the Mediterranean make it difficult to be dogmatic about whether undersides are half-black or just in shadow.  However I note that in his text (p.119) Lloyd reckons that aircraft with a hard straight demarcation had been repainted with sky undersides while those with wavy demarcations had the split black-white undersides - and puts his money on that option in the artwork on p.85.

 

I see iang has just posted so I shall crawl back into my shell.  Not going to read his post before pressing the button for fear of losing 1.5 hrs of reference-thrashing and typing.  But, in case of conflict, I generally find it unwise not to defer to his views! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, iang said:

There is also a series of photos of N5515 being pushed over the side after a landing accident where the black and white ID markings are clear and the airframe has no codes. 

 

I see from Sturtivant that papers were deposited for N5515 on 25 Sep 1940, so the accident predated that, possibly by some time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you everybody for your input.  I have thought about your input and considered it all a bit more and had another look at the pictures and Admiralty orders as stated in Lloyd I think there are a couple of things that leap out.  

 

1.  I think that in July 1940 N5517 would have been painted to S1E Air Diagram 1172 in Malta as per LLoyd p.119.  Air Diagram 1172 indicates shadow shading on the lower main planes (not forward fuselage).

2.  N5517 would likely have had the port under surfaces of the upper and lower mainplane, tailplane, and fuselage black (I think the Admiralty order got issued in April for this) starboard white.  

4.  On 5th June the Admiralty indicated (A1248) a change of underside markings so that they should have a yellow outer concentric ring when displayed against a 'Night' underside making it more visible which means there must have been an order to put roundels on the lower mainplanes(?).  Perhaps this is what Lloyd means in the picture of 6oA on page 137 having roundels in all 6 positions.

3.  From Lloyd p143 there is a picture of a three bladed Sea Gladiator coded 6A which is captioned as N5517 landing on Eagle and there is also an undated picture (p.97) of N5567 on Eagle coded 6oC (which incidentally shows the underside of the port fuselage which looks black) - So I'm going to make a wild guess that initially the aircraft were coded but these were painted out later possible when the admiralty order to paint the undersides to Sky S or removal of the Black/White IFF was issued ( I note that the sky demarcation is higher than the original Sky Grey demarcation).

 

So I think what I am going for.

 

S1E with Shadow shading on lower mainplane.  Black/White IFF under surfaces overall divided down the airframe centre line. Six position roundels with lower Port roundel having a yellow concentric ring.  Code 6A on the fuselage.

 

Are there any definite no no's in that?  Any thoughts?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, ClaudioN said:

 

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

 

Interesting footage Claudio.  It seems to me that the Gladiator at Frame 183 is not wearing underwing roundels, although the night/white undersides are clearly visible, divided down the centreline.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mhaselden said:

 

Interesting footage Claudio.  It seems to me that the Gladiator at Frame 183 is not wearing underwing roundels, although the night/white undersides are clearly visible, divided down the centreline.

I have just blow the image right up, if you look closely I think there are roundels on the undersurface.  You can see it clearer on the white side and just about an arc of a light circle on the black side.

 

Capture_zps7eqv9unu.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ref. Seahawk's ref. 1, "6-H" and its twin hooks. This puzzled me once, but I worked out that there are NO hooks - the single standard hook has been left astern (maybe on the aft lift edge?) and the sides of the A-frame have become independent. I hope the pilot either made a successful go-around or survived the barrier - a Glad almost certainly wouldn't!

Anyway, what's nerdy about getting things right?

BD

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have seen the pictures mentioned in the posts above. If it may help, this is what I noticed:

  1. 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;
  2. 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;
  3. 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;
  4. '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);
  5. 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;
  6. 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

 

Edited by ClaudioN
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting observations from Claudio.  My comments keyed to his:

 

1.  I am very happy with BD1944's explanation of the "twin hooks".  I couldn't understand how they would work: surely the risk of one but not the other catching a wire would have made them downright dangerous.  My blushes are slightly spared by the fact that Ray Sturtivant himself thought the a/c had twin hooks (caption to photo in Fleet Air Arm At War, p.22).  A pity that the incident was not, apparently, dramatic enough enough to be captured in the records drawn on by Sturtivant's FAA Aircraft

2.  Afraid I'm unwilling to venture an opinion either way of whether the screen grab shows underwing roundels or not or of the tailplane undersides.

3.  I too took Lloyd's comment as meaning A- or A1-type roundels in all 6 positions, possibly in pre-war "bright" colours.

4.  I would be unwilling to be dogmatic on whether 6-C in the photograph you cite has black undersides or not.

5.  Not sure I follow you if you are suggesting there were two 6-Cs.  Sturtivant (FAA Aircraft p.220) records N5567 as serving with 813 Sq in Eagle (Jun-Jul 40) which is borne out by the photo on Lloyd p.97 in which the carrier is obvious and the serial legible.  The serial is also legible in the photo on FAA Aircraft p.221, reportedly during 805 Sq service in Crete.  Both those show full-fin tailstripes.  I suggest that the photo in Carrier Operations, showing a 6-C with narrower fin stripes, is of the same aircraft but at a different time: I note from the table in Lloyd p.141 that fin flashes were promulgated in May 1940 but 24"x 27" (ie equal width) ones in September 1940.  If all 3 photos are of the same aircraft, it suggests that the photo in FAA Aircraft p.221 is incorrectly dated: if the aircraft was remarked with the newer finflash style, it beggars belief that it would have been later remarked with the old one.  All 3 show a wavey colour demarcation so no major repaint.

6.  Thanks for drawing our attention to the photo on p.62 of Brown's Carrier Operations.... .  I knew I'd found a clear photo of a Gladiator with Type A upper wing roundels but then lost it at the moment critique.  I think it likely that it's part of a sequence with the photo on Lloyd p.79, not least because of the light-coloured canopy frame.   The odd thing is that it has a straight colour demarcation (suggestive, so Lloyd, of a repaint into Sky undersides) and a narrow fin stripe (promulated Sep 1940), yet retains Type A upper wing roundels when Type B were promulgated as early as May 1940.     

 

Interesting thoughts on being aware of the photo credit as an important indicator of where and when.  Once upon a time it was pretty keen to bother finding a photo of the subject, now we need to know who was behind the camera!  Off now to see if there are any relevant unconsidered trifles in Wellham's autobiography.     

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Seahawk said:

Interesting thoughts on being aware of the photo credit as an important indicator of where and when.  Once upon a time it was pretty keen to bother finding a photo of the subject, now we need to know who was behind the camera!  Off now to see if there are any relevant unconsidered trifles in Wellham's autobiography.     

 

To be honest, it's less about who took the photo and more about determining whether the photo is accurately captioned.  I've seen numerous examples where authors have accepted incorrect captions from prior works, and even entire falsification of an image.  Sadly, in these days of computer manipulation, it's too easy to modify an image and present it as something it's not...and thar be monsters!

 

How is Wellham's autobiography?  I hadn't seen it before.  Is it worth adding to the library?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mhaselden said:

 

To be honest, it's less about who took the photo and more about determining whether the photo is accurately captioned.  I've seen numerous examples where authors have accepted incorrect captions from prior works, and even entire falsification of an image.  Sadly, in these days of computer manipulation, it's too easy to modify an image and present it as something it's not...and thar be monsters!

 

How is Wellham's autobiography?  I hadn't seen it before.  Is it worth adding to the library?

 

My comment was partly tongue-in-cheek and Claudio's point that knowing who took the picture can be a valuable pointer to when and where it was taken is well made.

 

Wellham's autobiography With Naval Wings (Spellmount, 1994) worth adding to the library??  Surely you jest.  A late arrival on the scene but well up there with Charles Lamb's War in a Stringbag and John Godley's (Lord Kilbracken's) Bring Back My Stringbag: covers the entire war from sprog pilot in the China Fleet to Far Eastern service as Commander(F) of Empress.  It's a while since I read it but highlights are eye-witness accounts of the Bomba incident (in which 3 Swordfish sank 4 ships (well, 1 destroyer, 2 submarines and a depot ship) with 3 torpedoes) and of Taranto (in which he launched his torpedo despite heavy damage from a balloon cable).        

 

As to the current topic, the book is hindered by lack of an index but the only reference I can find to Sea Gladiators is on p.51 where he records Eagle picking up 3 Sea Gladiators from Dekheila in mid-June 1940 (tallying precisely with Sturtivant's records for N5517 and N5567), the creation of the fighter flight under Keighley-Peach and the destruction of one or more shadowing CANT flying boats shortly thereafter.  Certainly no Gladiator pics.    PS He describes the Gladiator as "one of the most satisfying aircraft that I have ever flown".

Edited by Seahawk
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Fraid it was a new book...at least new to me.  Please don't mock my ignorance. :)

 

Did a quick gander online and it looks like a worthy addition to my growing library.  Thanks for the recommendation.  I note Wellham also co-wrote "Attack on Taranto" which adds a certain "been there" quality that is often absent from most historical accounts. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Seahawk said:

5.  Not sure I follow you if you are suggesting there were two 6-Cs.  Sturtivant (FAA Aircraft p.220) records N5567 as serving with 813 Sq in Eagle (Jun-Jul 40) which is borne out by the photo on Lloyd p.97 in which the carrier is obvious and the serial legible.  The serial is also legible in the photo on FAA Aircraft p.221, reportedly during 805 Sq service in Crete.  Both those show full-fin tailstripes.  I suggest that the photo in Carrier Operations, showing a 6-C with narrower fin stripes, is of the same aircraft but at a different time: I note from the table in Lloyd p.141 that fin flashes were promulgated in May 1940 but 24"x 27" (ie equal width) ones in September 1940. 

 

 

I think there were two different aircraft coded 6C. Look at the camouflage demarcation around the numeral 6. They are quite different patterns (as well as the obvious differences concerning fin flash etc). These differences are not due to repainting, in my view.

 

 

75022bfb-7f0d-41cd-baba-5797c1c7434a_zps 

 

 

f8d68018-7dc5-40b8-badd-1c19e25f1b69_zps

 

 

 

I have another close-up starboard side photo of 6C, which conforms to the top picture (but I don't want to post that one).  Interestingly it doesn't carry the serial number. 

 

 

 

On the subject of which were embarked in July. The Combat Reports for mid-July refer to N5513 (Keith) and N5517 (K-P). 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Seahawk said:

1.  I am very happy with BD1944's explanation of the "twin hooks".  I couldn't understand how they would work: surely the risk of one but not the other catching a wire would have made them downright dangerous.  My blushes are slightly spared by the fact that Ray Sturtivant himself thought the a/c had twin hooks (caption to photo in Fleet Air Arm At War, p.22).  A pity that the incident was not, apparently, dramatic enough enough to be captured in the records drawn on by Sturtivant's FAA Aircraft.

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).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, ClaudioN said:

 

 

 

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).

 

The greatest number of Sea Gladiators in one photograph that I have seen  is one taken in early 1941, which shows 4 Gladiators and 2 Fulmars. Sea Gladiators present are 6A and 6H, plus two unknown. One of these is probably 6G, as I have another set of photos that show 6G, 6A, 6H together and one other.   6A and 6H have high, straight demarcation in these photos (I assume repainted). 

 

I have photographs of 6A, 6B, 6C, 6G and 6H, but not 6F

 

 

Edited by iang
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, mhaselden said:

 

To be honest, it's less about who took the photo and more about determining whether the photo is accurately captioned.

 

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, thanks again for all of your interest.  I have been beavering away down in the Cave for two days and I have the basic airframe sorted now..   Photobucket now acting the maggot re third party hosting so 

 

Here we go courtesy Flickr...

35206442310_d54d09c4c8_k.jpg

 

Now to figure out which markings I'm putting on the aeroplane and which I am not...

 

 

 

 

Edited by Grey Beema
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

The Sea Gladiator has managed to get off the naughty step.  New cabane struts of Brass tube and wire pins have made for a much more stable assembly.  Hopefully this will be a quick sprint to completion...

 

I will take a couple of quick snaps later so you can see where I have got to...

Edited by Grey Beema
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...