Edgar

It was Vasko Barbic, and the change of position for the filler cap was what caused the bulge in the upper cowling of the IX (and XVI, since it was a common item, but not on the VIII) from July/August 1944:-

"RV" was Vickers/Supermarine's preferred terminology for the "low-back" "bubble canopy" or whatever you prefer..

If it was D.T.D. 441 (which is listed as a distemper mat finish,) it wasn't that easy to remove; when the black port wing was done away with, units were told to add detergent to the water, to aid removal. When the "distinctive markings" had served their purpose, it had first been thought that they could be allowed to fade, but this took so long it was found that, in some lighting conditions, they could resemble the German black cross, so they had to go, and 17 days were allocated for the work to be done.

Just like the Hurricane II (and Spitfire III) the Defiant II fuselage was 4" longer.

Between 7-9-44 & 24-9-44:- PL433 FF-B S/L Charney; NH476 FF-E F/O Parker; NH176 9G-Y P/O Monette & P/O Macintosh; NH537 LO-U; PT357 FU-L; NL345 9G-W S/L Kelly Walker; NH171 LO-Z; NH481 FF-B; NH305 FF-R; NH473 FF-Z; PL226 FF-R; ML265 FF-B; NH407 9G-T; PT396 LO-C; PK998 FF-Z; PL213 LO-W; PL454 FF-Z; NH380 LO-Q. FF = 132 Squadron, 9G = 441 Squadron, LO = 602 Squadron, FU = 453 Squadron

"Wrecks & Relics" has it listed with Kennet Aviation, at North Weald, having moved there in September last year.

85,000 gallons of paint (not distemper) were specially ordered for the "distinctive markings," and the likeliest material is the same "paint, semi-permanent (D.T.D.441,)" that was used, in 1940, for the return of the black port wing. The painting, on June 4th., might well have been hurried, but replacement aircraft, after June 6th., would have come from M.U.s, with slightly more time to make a better fist of it. Not generally known is that, when the stripes had served their purpose, consideration was given to allowing them to fade out naturally, since their removal, from fabric and wood, was likely to damage the underlying surfaces, which doesn't sound like a temporary, easily-removable material.

The Binbrook lads told us that, with a full belly tank plus full overwing tanks, in an emergency landing, with the likes of a failed braking parachute, the brakes didn't have enough meat on them to stop the aircraft on their own, hence the hook was fitted to the F.6.

I don't know the CE sight, but early types had an oval reflector glass, with a square type later on (and I don't know exactly when.)

Going by photos (which are not mine to show here) of hard-to-reach areas, interior grey-green would seem to be standard (wheel wells, too.)

It's back, and there's also this one which seems to predate it, so I wonder (have no way of being certain) if this one was the early type, which had the "empties" (try to) leave via a chute alongside the gun. The one above, being later, could date from when the cases were redirected out of a hole beside the wheel well.

The under-keel and deeper rudder were embodied from L1648 (the 102nd. aircraft.)

17-7-39 it was reported that the first "stressed-skin wing" Hurricane was about to be delivered and would be L2027. 19-9-39 the last 35 sets of fabric wings had just been delivered, for production, Hawker's had 15 sets for repair, and were expecting a further (estimated) 15 sets for repair. At that time Gloster's were already producing 15 sets of metal-covered wings per week. The main drawback, for the fabric-winged Hurricane, was its maximum diving speed of 380 m.p.h., while the metal-winged airframe was 450.

If you're anywhere near Reading, on Saturday, there's an O-gauge trade show about 1/2-mile from Caversham bridge.

Remember that, with Sutton harnesses, the ends of the straps containing the grommet "holes" could not be draped, but were absolutely rigid. This was because strips of stainless steel were sewn inside the straps, as strengthening.

why is their this blank refusal to accept the possibility (Blenheims with blue undersides had been shot down in France, and the Germans had an intact Camotint/Sky-painted P.R. Spitfire delivered into their hands) that the Germans, seeing how Sky worked, might have matched it, and used it themselves? The writer of the report said the colour was identical to Sky, not the paint used for German internal areas, nor any other German colour; it's entirely likely that Farnborough did not have colour cards with German designations, but it's a fairly safe bet that they would have had colour samples of the British colours with which to make comparisons.

A few weeks ago, I found A.P.2082C "Rocket Racket," which I'd previously never heard of, but which is a 30-page "primer" on rocket-firing. When you read it, and discover that a pilot was expected to keep to a set I.A.S., dive angle, flight trajectory (not curved, but straight,) not allow the a/c to skid, allow for the target's movement, and allow for wind, all the while trying not to flinch while being shot at (and possibly thrown off course by near misses,) it becomes rather less surprising that some rockets (which didn't all follow exactly the same course, anyway) missed.

The only confusion, regarding Sky, was with the airfields/Squadrons who were supposed to use it, since they only had a name and vocabulary numbers (therefore should not have been confused with Sky Blue, which had a different set of numbers) with which to work. Farnborough were perfectly well aware of what Sky/Camotint was, since they'd helped Cotton with the painting and preparation of his Blenheims in 1939, also his Spitfires long before the Battle of Britain. They would also have had to ensure that it was of the right material for use on aircraft, and would have been tasked with the job of supplying colour samples to the paint manufacturers who were to produce the paint. They would not have sent out any "odd bod" to inspect a German aircraft, but someone well versed in colour, complete with a set of master colour samples, kept back for the purpose. If he said that the colour on the Ju-88 was identical (not "an approximation") to Sky, it was because he laid a sample on it and compared the two; do you really believe that his references ( to the greens being slightly darker than our Dark Green and Extra Dark Sea Green) were made without use of colour samples, and relied on memory?

It had only the "E" configuration, but had an extra "compartment" outboard, designed for survival equipment like water, etc.

Remember that Farnborough were responsible for mixing, and issuing colour cards of, the colours used by British aircraft; bearing that in mind, it actually seems to be a very clear report, by a Farnborough employee (back to his head office,) of the colours that the Germans were now using, compared to what had been seen previously. Since the Air Ministry would already be fully aware of the efficiency of Sky, at medium altitudes, this report could lead Farnborough to lead experiments on other colours for the upper surfaces, by day and night, which is what they did; they eventually led to green/grey for daytime fighters and green/light grey for nightfighters, replacing the old schemes.

Single-engine - Spitfire, by a country mile; twin - Mosquito (made in this town); multi-engine - Lancaster; glider - any shot-down enemy aircraft.

It's possible; Blenheims with "light blue" undersides were being sent to France before the end of 1939, and fighter Squadrons were demanding an end to the black/white scheme during their time in France.

Hoping that you mean the 1/32 Mk.II, it's a hangover from when Revell first produced the instrument panel the wrong way round. It's actually the control for the landing lights, and should be mounted on the panel, just above and to the left of the pilot's left knee.

In October 1940 Farnborough examined a shot-down Ju-88, and found that the original underside blue had been overpainted by a new colour which was an exact match to Sky. The original top surface dark green had also been overpainted by a lighter green in 6' bands, similar to the British scheme, but rectilinear rather than curved.