SeaVenom Posted July 9, 2017 Share Posted July 9, 2017 (edited) After the goings on with Airfix's 1/48th Hurricane Mk1 and it's inaccuracies I thought I'd check this scheme is correct too as I'm finishing (hopefully) both aircraft off. Edited July 9, 2017 by SeaVenom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJP Posted July 9, 2017 Share Posted July 9, 2017 (edited) Serial P8088 of Pilot Officer Alec Lumsden? Check Profile No. 41, Spitfire I & II oublished in 1965. It was illustrated in colour 5-view by James Goulding and also with photographs supplied by the pilot. Full left and right sides, on page 9 of the same monograph. I missed the hubbub over the Hurricane. Edited July 9, 2017 by RJP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaVenom Posted July 9, 2017 Author Share Posted July 9, 2017 22 minutes ago, RJP said: Serial P8088 of Pilot Officer Alec Lumsden? Check Profile No. 41, Spitfire I & II oublished in 1965. It was illustrated in colour 5-view by James Goulding and also with photographs supplied by the pilot. Full left and right sides, on page 9 of the same monograph. I missed the hubbub over the Hurricane. Thanks. Yes that's the one (Borough of Lambeth). Here's the Hurricane discussion........ http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235023623-can-anyone-post-airfix-148-hurricane-mk1-paintingmarking-instructions/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Smith Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 (edited) 15 hours ago, RJP said: Serial P8088 of Pilot Officer Alec Lumsden? Check Profile No. 41, Spitfire I & II oublished in 1965. It was illustrated in colour 5-view by James Goulding and also with photographs supplied by the pilot. Full left and right sides, on page 9 of the same monograph. I missed the hubbub over the Hurricane. The Profile series have some good stuff and not so good, but the entire series are scanned and available here http://www.boxartden.com/gallery/index.php/Profiles/Aircraft-Profiles from the mentioned Spitfire profile this looks like a good profile, but there are plenty of others that no-one has ever seen reference photos for. eg - http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234976286-hurricane-mk-iic-flown-by-km-kuttlewascher/ the 'hubbub' over the Hurricane is that the scheme for R4118 is for the currently flying warbird, as AFAIK, no actual photos of R4118 in 605 Sq markings exist, read the linked thread. Airfix have chosen to depict a warbirds in a couple of other kits, BM597 in their Spitfire Vb, and a Hawker Fury of 43 Sq. HTH Edited July 10, 2017 by Troy Smith additions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaVenom Posted July 11, 2017 Author Share Posted July 11, 2017 Cheers for those also Troy. So that seems pretty straightforward and well documented unlike the lack of BOB photos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaVenom Posted July 26, 2017 Author Share Posted July 26, 2017 (edited) Just to check. The decal for the rear fuselage band has a blueish tint (the same as they say to paint the spinner) Shouldn't that be Sky instead? The same as the underneath colour like the painting above? Edited July 26, 2017 by SeaVenom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rs2man Posted July 26, 2017 Share Posted July 26, 2017 22 minutes ago, SeaVenom said: Just to check. The decal for the rear fuselage band has a blueish tint (the same as they say to paint the spinner) Shouldn't that be Sky instead? The same as the underneath colour like the painting above? I assume they're suggesting that the undersides were correctly painted Sky at the factory & then the rear fuselage band & spinner were done later on the Squadron , who presumably didn't have Sky paint & used a sky blue shade instead . I admit that in the photo earlier in the thread the fuselage band looks slightly different to the undersides , but that may well be due to them being painted at different times . I have no definite answer for you , but if I were building the model I'd do the fuselage band & spinner to match the Sky of the undersides . John Green Nantwich , Cheshire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted July 26, 2017 Share Posted July 26, 2017 This is a common sight - it appears that the MU supplying paint to the Service was issuing Sky Blue for trim due to a misunderstanding about Sky that lasted to the end of 1940. There are people who argue otherwise, but there is also colour evidence looking as near Sky Blue as you like. If a "Sky" was being mixed it would sometimes come out darker than the underside but is never seen in photos. By 1941 things had settled down and Sky used as desired by the AM. For the modeller, having to mix a "Sky" that was lighter and bluer then the official colour, and ends up looking like Sky Blue, this should be a no-brainer. Just use Sky Blue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Smith Posted July 26, 2017 Share Posted July 26, 2017 4 hours ago, SeaVenom said: Just to check. The decal for the rear fuselage band has a blueish tint (the same as they say to paint the spinner) Shouldn't that be Sky instead? The same as the underneath colour like the painting above? the colour of Sky is much debated, but t's certainly possible to have a different shade of Sky, if the band and spinner were applied at unit level Spitfire in England by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr it's probably easier to paint the band anyway. have a read of this as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rs2man Posted July 26, 2017 Share Posted July 26, 2017 I've just Googled the serial number for this aircraft & it was apparently not built until February 1941 . Since the order to apply the Sky rear fuselage band & spinner was given on 27th November 1940 , surely the spinner & fuselage band would have been applied at the factory at the same time as the rest of the aircraft was painted & would , therefore , be the same colour as the undersides . Any thoughts ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbob Posted July 26, 2017 Share Posted July 26, 2017 Don't be so sure- while I haven't done careful analysis, there are plenty of photos of Spitfires at factory rollout that do not reflect the current expectations of Fighter Command. Examples are the "full fin" (height) flash and, yep, black spinner instead of Sky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rs2man Posted July 26, 2017 Share Posted July 26, 2017 4 minutes ago, gingerbob said: Don't be so sure- while I haven't done careful analysis, there are plenty of photos of Spitfires at factory rollout that do not reflect the current expectations of Fighter Command. Examples are the "full fin" (height) flash and, yep, black spinner instead of Sky. Yes , very true . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaVenom Posted July 27, 2017 Author Share Posted July 27, 2017 Thanks guys. So a bit vague as is often the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaVenom Posted July 27, 2017 Author Share Posted July 27, 2017 14 hours ago, Troy Smith said: the colour of Sky is much debated, but t's certainly possible to have a different shade of Sky, if the band and spinner were applied at unit level Spitfire in England by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr it's probably easier to paint the band anyway. have a read of this as well Interesting pics and look how wonky that band is in the photo above. Funnily enough I tried putting the decal band on last night and it's the worst decal that comes with the kit. It didn't stick very well so I will paint it instead like you say. I'll just paint it the same Sky as underneath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Smith Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 http://www.spitfire-p8088.co.uk/P8088/ useful shot for wing walk wear. One final point, all WWII RAF Mk.designations are in Roman numerals, so it's Mk. II, not Mk. 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaVenom Posted July 28, 2017 Author Share Posted July 28, 2017 (edited) On 7/27/2017 at 2:33 AM, Troy Smith said: http://www.spitfire-p8088.co.uk/P8088/ useful shot for wing walk wear. One final point, all WWII RAF Mk.designations are in Roman numerals, so it's Mk. II, not Mk. 11 Cheers for that and it will come in handy for walk wear (numerals noted). Haven't seen that photo before and even though it's probably lit up by sunlight iInteresting to note the band appears very bright and almost as bright as the white on the tail. Edited July 28, 2017 by SeaVenom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now