Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)


Sadly Missed
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Edgar

  1. Modification 657 "To introduce 170gal jettison tank inc overload oil tank and pilot's relief tube" is listed as "5c only" & "S.O.O." A later mod 729 "To introduce 29gal fuselage fuel tank in conjunction with mod 657 + pilot's relief tube" also for the 5c & S.O.O., was added, but later cancelled in 1943, presumably when Malta had been relieved, the IX was readily available, so direct flights for the Vc were no longer necessary. Beware the cannon stubs in that photo; Park complained about Vcs being delivered with the outer stubs removed, when he needed to fit cannon there on aircraft used as bombers.
  2. Sea Grey Medium was ordered, by the D.T.D., 7-10-1936, for "markings, for identification purposes on camouflaged aeroplanes," and Farnborough were requested to produce 100 metal, and 100 fabric samples, coated with the paint, presumably for supply to paint manufacturers.
  3. Edgar

    RAF Sky Grey

    In July 1939, a memo was issued, listing, with their vocabulary numbers, all the paints that could be used, and the surfaces on which they could be used. Sky Grey had no vocabulary numbers, so should not have been capable of being ordered, much less stocked.
  4. It seems to have been only early aircraft which were affected; the panel was deleted in November 1941
  5. There is no commercially available paint that's a match, in fact (unless they've changed it) you'd be better to mix a colour that matches the colour of the cap. The man who built the "May Spitfire" told me that ex-riggers told him, if they couldn't get the proper green, they'd mix their own from Sky + very small amounts of camouflage Dark Green.
  6. Edgar


    Sorry, but, no, he didn't. "Junior," of which much is made, was a "bitsa" from several airframes, carried no guns, and he only flew it once, possibly to visit his home. There is no written evidence, either (that I've found,) that he did any beer runs.
  7. It was a clear-view panel; if the instrument faces misted over, the panel could be punched out, and the resultant blast of cold air would/should clear them.
  8. It's impossible to say; A.C.A.S gave permission to the Civilian Repair Depots to fit the narrow blister to the V, VIII & IX on 25-6-42, and the RAF shows it as being fitted from 9-11-42. Supermarine reckoned that they didn't fit it, on the production line, until 7-1-44.
  9. There's also this one; note that, late in the war, the clipped wingtip still retained its navigation lamps; early clipped tips (as on AA937) were carved from wood, and had no lights:-
  10. Such a pity that you never thought to point that out at the time, but 20/20 hindsight is such a useful tool.
  11. Maybe in driving at least one modeller to hack his kit about unnecessarily? The Hurricane might only be £16.99, but it represents quite an investment for some. If there's one lesson, I've learnt, in my several years of research, it's that it pays to be absolutely certain of your facts, before dashing off some piece of deathless prose.
  12. There is no photocopying involved; it's the original set of plans (as used at the start of all this,) taken from the magazine in 2005, and overlaid with a steel ruler, photographed from a range of about 2 feet.
  13. No, because there isn't one, so it obviously didn't happen. However, I can show you the bar on the set of Arthur's drawings by which so much store is being set. Metric aficionados will be unhappy with this, but, in 1/48 scale Imperial, 2" (should) = 8', but it's about 1/16" short (and, yes, I have tried it with two rulers.) The saddest part of all this is the huge delight taken in finding an apparent fault in an Airfix kit, followed by an apparent reluctance to acknowledge that maybe further research might be needed.
  14. All this righteous indignation, regarding Arthur's work, is all very well, but we have yet to see one of his latest drawings, reworked by him after he got them back from Nexus. If there is a suspicion that a magazine reprint might not be all it's supposed to be, then anyone should have the right to say so. When Peter Cooke produced his "Hurricane Veracity" article, he included 1/48 drawings of the fuselage, something that has been missed (or ignored.) I dug out my copy of the article, and laid the Airfix fuselage halves on top; the panel line, under the windshield, the swoop of the spine, and the shape of the fin all match perfectly, in fact the only "error" I could find was at the rear of the fin, where the fairings, surrounding the rudder hinges, were fitted, and that appears to be about 1mm. We now have two men, both at the pinnacle of their chosen professions, who appear to have produced material which is at variance; I suggest that someone revert back to the methods we employed when this hobby was in its infancy, and get to some real airframes (preferably Hawker Restorations and Peter Vacher, whom Hornby used,) with a tape measure, then report back. My days of crawling under and over airframes are long gone. I do hope this will be accepted as the requisite evidence.
  15. 20-odd years ago, the Westland historian would occasionally visit the model shop, where I worked. I remember him telling me how, on airframes for repair, panels, doors, etc., from Westland and Supermarine could be thrown in a heap, and then pulled out to be refitted on any of their Spitfires; Castle Bromwich panels had to remain with their particular airframe, because they wouldn't fit any other.
  16. It's always rather depressing to see how, in the event of any discrepancy, the kit is automatically assumed to be at fault, so "I'd like to tell you a story." When Peter Cooke was beginning his researches into the Hurricane, I decided it would be a good time to carry out my own checks on the Mk.I/II fuselage lengths, and Peter asked me to also measure the fuselage depth just in front of the fin/tailplane. He did the same, on other airframes, and we both found that the fuselage depth was 2" less than Arthur's set of drawings. This set Peter off on a quest, and he found that Hawker had changed the set of the canopy, but had never altered the factory drawings. We know that he passed the information to Arthur, who, at some time, amended his drawings, but we don't know when, or how many wrong sets remained in circulation. Now to return to the kit, and, first, Hurricanes were not fitted with mirrors (as with the Spitfire) until September/October 1940; pilots tended to go to the local car showrooms, and "borrow" one if they could, so find a photo of your particular airframe first. When I measured Hurricane (six of them) front ends, I found that the forward part of the engine cowling was 50.5" to the join line just aft of the exhausts, with the second section, back to the panel line under the windshield 41" (45" on the Mk.II.) In 1/48, 50.5" (128.27cm) = 1.052" (2.672cm) and 41" (104.14cm) = .854" (2.17cm.) Using a digital caliper on a borrowed kit, I have the following measurements - front section 1.051" (2.67cm,) aft section .858" (2.179cm,) or a combined difference of .003". At the base of the fin it's inordinately difficult, but I get about 23.62mm
  17. From engine no. 2907, the Merlin III was fitted with a "necked down shaft" enabling certain de Havilland and Rotol V.P. airscrews to be fitted; from engine no. 5607 a "universal necked down shaft" was fitted, enabling more types (like the Hydromatic) to be fitted.
  18. Genuine = Air Ministry approved; Malta's bomb conversion wasn't, so it wasn't, and looking for a number will be a waste of time. Other bomb-carrying mods were approved, and (as so often happens in the research world) it would be tempting to tie them all together. Every mod had to go before the Local Technical Committee for approval, or otherwise, and this is something, in today's more relaxed atmosphere, that modellers often have great difficulty in understanding.
  19. I've copied the entire Vickers Spitfire/Seafire modifications ledger, which the RAF Museum's library holds. If it's a genuine modification, I should be able to find its reference.
  20. According to Prosser Hanks, the only Malta Spitfires converted to carry bombs were Vc, using the outer 20mm cannon stubs for cannon, with the so-called bomb racks fitted where the inner guns were normally housed. The only visible sign, once the bombs were dropped, was a strip of metal about 1" deep. The "sway braces" were nothing more than steel rods fitted into holes drilled partway into the bombs, then into the wings themselves. The rods left when the bombs left. Park complained about the policy of cutting off the outer cannon stubs, to make the leading edge smoother, because it was stopping him turning the Vc into bombers.
  21. Gloss; the paint was given a clear varnish. Mind you, "scale effect" might need to be employed.
  22. AB508 was a Vc. The wing walk stencils often remained in the Mk.V style, i.e no "L" shape on the starboard wing. Dark Earth was replaced by Ocean Grey from August 1941. As well as your other changes, the yellow leading edges were introduced at the same time.
  23. The hot air exits and extractors remained until January 1943, when they were blanked off on the Vb.
  24. This was the only other A.P. that I found; apparently the same gear went into the Barracuda:- Plus this:-
  25. This is the early layout according to the A.P:-
  • Create New...