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. :)

KRK4m

Members
  • Content Count

    916
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

487 Excellent

About KRK4m

  • Rank
    Obsessed Member
  • Birthday 25/04/1957

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Krakow PL
  • Interests
    1/72 aircraft & AFV, 1/700 warships, H0 trains

Recent Profile Visitors

1,411 profile views
  1. KRK4m

    Tuskeegee Squadron 1:72?

    TGR72011 to be accurate :) I know both this one and AeroMaster 72225, but both of them show P-39Q with standard OD tail, while on the pictures I mentioned above (#11) the tails look freshly repainted - perhaps in red. Cheers Michael
  2. KRK4m

    Tuskeegee Squadron 1:72?

    If they haven't flown Cobras they couldn't be the FIRST group. The 322nd FG were flying P-40s, P-39s and P-47s for several months before receiving first Mustangs. Cheers Michael
  3. KRK4m

    Tuskeegee Squadron 1:72?

    Frankly speaking there are hundreds of parrot-like Mustang schemes to portrait and even the whole-redtailed Tuskegee P-51Ds aren't the most colourful ones. But a year or so earlier the 322nd FG flew Airacobras in standard OD/NG camouflage like these two portrayed in March or April 1944 on the Montecorvino airfield (some 10 miles/15km off Salerno). http://lestweforget.hamptonu.edu/page.cfm?uuid=9FEC33AA-CC00-30F3-45DA1E80EE4332CC And here (in my opinion at least) it appears that P-47D weren't the first red-tailed Tuskegee fighters, as the vertical fin of 44-3022 (image 10/14) looks lighter than the fuselage tail - moreover there's a darker area surrounding last two yellow digits on the rudder. For me it means that the whole vertical tail (or at least the rudder) was painted red already on the Tuskegee P-39s. And then there's another picture (image 13/14) from the same airfield - remnants of yellow band are visible between the fuselage insignia and tail as is the two digit (almost unreadable) tactical number on the cockpit door. But there is NO SERIAL on the freshly-painted fin while some digits ("72" can be clearly read) are visible under the tailplane. A red-tailed P-39Q should be something really special on your cabinet shelf, don't you think? Cheers Michael
  4. KRK4m

    Airfix Paints Colour Chart?

    I know it's hard to believe, but yesterday in my basement cell I came across some 30 tins of Humbrol and Airfix enamels from the 1970s. And more than 80% of them are still usable ! So I can send you a photo of Airfix M2, M9, M11, M12, and M18 lids together with their Humbrol "equivalents" from the list above - just send me your address on PM. Then you will see that M2 is lighter and yellower than H27, M9 lighter and pinkier than H72, M11 lighter and greyer than H96, M18 lighter and yellower than H76, whereas M12 has almost nothing in common with H73. Cheers Michael
  5. KRK4m

    Vampire and Meteor in Operation Firedog

    Are all these Vampires High Speed Silver overall? If any one is camouflaged is the serial visible? Cheers Michael
  6. Perhaps 1:550 is not so commonly used scale. I've got a Trumpeter Kiev in stash and some signs in the sky and on the earth do indicate I'll build it this (2019) year. But it's a 1:700 waterline one... Cheers Michael
  7. KRK4m

    Vampire and Meteor in Operation Firedog

    Thank you, Antti, for the links. It looks that No.45 Squadron Meteor F.8s were sporting High Speed Silver overall (like No.60 Sq. Vampire FB.5s) and not the beautiful 50's RAF camouflage used on No.80 Sq. Hornets and No.28 Sq. Vampire FB.9s. Pity... By the way - can anybody put some light on the 50's RAF camouflage changes calendar? What was the period of PRU undersurfaces usage? When (or where) the HSS overall was used? Why weren't all the fighters from Tempest VI up to the Phantom FGR.2 consistently camouflaged in the same shades of grey and green? Cheers Michael
  8. In my mind there was also something like a camouflaged PBY on the cover, but thanks to Scalemates and @dogsbody now I must say I was wrong. The only PBY featuring article is the one in Vol.4 issue 7 (July 1969) SM with red Macchi MC.72 racing floatplane on the cover. The question remains whether this very article features the VP-22 camouflaged PBY-5... Thank you for these nice words about Krakow. I hope you had enough time to visit the oldest/largest/best historic aircraft collection in Poland. If not - be in touch with me before your next visit there. It would be the honor for me to be your guide at the Polish Aviation Museum. Cheers Michael
  9. KRK4m

    Vampire and Meteor in Operation Firedog

    Yeeesssssss, James. Surely they're the ones I need. Cheers Michael
  10. Almost everyday I do increase my knowledge of many aviation subjects thanks to the plenty of BM fellows. Thus I feel obliged to write something about the matters I'm used to know on this other side of Iron Curtain And I hope it helps Cheers Michael
  11. KRK4m

    PBY4 Catalina 1941

    Back to the original topic. As @jimmaas has stated above the mystery of VP-101, -102, -21 and -22 camouflaged PBYs is one of the USN holy grails. The matter touches at least 25 (maybe even 50 ) Catalinas operating in December 1941 and early (January-April) 1942 over the Philippines and the NEI archipelago. There are several poor quality b&w photos known - all of them show three shades of uppersides camouflage. But the colours themselves remain a mystery. At least one of them was some kind of blue gray, but what about the other two? What are the facts? The idea of camouflaging the Asiatic (yes, they didn't belong to the Pacific) Fleet flying boats was born in Admiral Thomas Hart's brain already when he took over the command of the AF at Luzon in July 1939. Both VP-101 and VP-102 (i.e. the 1st and 2nd squadron of Patrol Wing 10) were then equipped with mixed bag of PBY-3 and PBY-4s sporting non-specular silver fuselages and yellow wings. Most aircraft were repainted before the Japanese attack in December 1941, but on at least one photo you can find black diagonal stripes on the otherwise camouflaged wing On another one (look at the wing pattern - this is NOT the same plane) a slightly darker rectangle on the lightest area of fuselage just ahead of the fin (originally occupied by "U.S. NAVY" letters) suggests that the lightest colour of camouflage could (at least in this single case) be the pre-war non-specular silver. As to the colours there's no consensus at all. Academy in their PBY-4 kit give: Dark Blue Gray, Medium Blue Gray and Light Gull Gray (over Light Gray undersides). At first it sounds logical, but the aircraft have been painted BEFORE the Blue Gray/Light Gray scheme was introduced which makes using "non-invented-yet" colours hardly possible. My USN camouflage guru @Dana Bell asked for his opinion told me: dark yellow-green, medium blue-green and light purple-blue. Hundreds of modellers all over the world do build these PBY-4s according to their own invention - in the web you can find colours ranging from mauve and sand to deep Brunswick green and olive drab with dozens of gray and blue shades between them. The whole matter becomes more complicated still when you realize that after the thorough decimation of PatWing 10 aircraft in mid-December half of Pacific Fleet PatWing 2 units (VP-21 and VP-22) were despatched from Hawaii to the Philippines leaving remains of VP-23 and VP-24 in Oahu. Of course no one can be sure whether these additional aircraft were camouflaged "in Asiatic mode" after arrival at Philippines. First - they were already camouflaged in USN standard of Blue Gray over Light Gray scheme when still in Hawaii before the Pearl Harbor attack. Second - there could be no time in those days to repaint the large flying boats just to make them similar to the others operating in the area. But there' one hint, however... In opposition to the VP-21 equipped with PBY-4s, the VP-22 had just received the new PBY-5s (with higher tail and waist blisters) and there are very few (if any) pictures showing the camouflaged VP-22 PBY-5s over the NEI in early 1942. In this case two colours can be sure: undersides Light Gray and Blue Gray (as the middle one of the topside three). I have seen the model of such a PBY-5 # 22-P-3 reviewed 40+ years ago within the US Scale Modeler magazine, but now I'm unable to indicate the right issue (1969-79 volumes for sure). IIRC the very plane pictured used Olive Drab and Desert Sand as two additional uppersurface colours - very picturesque for the flying boat, isn't it? In April 1942 the survivors of all four VPs were combined into the single unit - VP-101 (other three were thus disbanded). Over the years I've managed to gather the BuNos of some dozens of the VP-21/22/101/102 aircraft mentioned above. They are twenty eight PBY-4s (1214 and 1216-1243) plus nineteen PBY-5s (2291, 2293, 2301-2306, 2308-09, 2321, 2407, 2409, 2418, 2424, 2446, 2447, 2449 and 2455). Individual (tac) numbers are known for 31 of them. I'd like to know your opinion about this data - maybe some further "white spots" can be eliminated... Cheers Michael
  12. Looks like some serious business ahead of you, Sir... Cheers Michael
  13. The only combat use of RAF Vampire FB.5 and Meteor F.8 took place in 1951-55 during the Operation Firedog. Albeit the photos are known of the High Speed Silver No.60 Sq. Vampire FB.5s (WA237-WA276 range), the pictures of FB.9s (No.45 and No.60 Sq., WG, WL and WR serials) show them in camouflage - presumably DG/DSG over PRU. My question is whether are there any photos (or other documents) confirming existence of CAMOUFLAGED FB.5s over Malaya in 1950-56 period? Was this variant used only by No.60 Squadron? It is said that in April 1952 the ex-No.60 Sq. FB.5s were flown to Kai Tak to equip No.28 Sq. And these a/c (during their Hong Kong period) are sometimes shown as camouflaged. Were they repainted in HK or were they taken already camouflaged from Butterworth? The situation is even worse with Meteor F.8. It is said that only two aircraft were deployed with No.45 Squadron in 1955. No photos, no idea about the looks, even no serials are known to me. Does anybody know more details about these two specimen? Cheers Michael
  14. As the man guilty of acquiring of more than dozen of MiG-15/17s by the Polish Aviation Museum I'll try to outline briefly the Polish WSK Mielec-built LiM (Licencyjny Mysliwiec = Licence-built fighter) designation system: Lim-1 = 227 early MiG-15 a/c built at WSK-Mielec (incl. Lim-1A) Lim-2 = 500 MiG-15bis a/c built at WSK-Mielec (incl. Lim-2R) Lim-1A = (A just for the 1st suffix letter available) as LiM-1, but with ventral recce camera in blister fairing under belly starboard side Lim-2R = (for Rozpoznawczy = reconnaissance) as LiM-2, but with ventral recce camera in blister fairing under nose port side SBLim-1 = (Szkolno Bojowy Licencyjny Mysliwiec = training/combat licence-built fighter) various Soviet, Czech and Polish-built early (RD-45-powered) MiGs rebuilt by WSK-Mielec into 2-seaters SBLim-2 = as above, but powered with later VK-1A engine (both variants were NOT built as new in Poland, only remanufactured from existing airframes). Lim-2Art = (for Artyleryjski = artillery) ex-SBLim-2, but single flight controls only, for artillery spotting and FAC duties Lim-5 = 477 standard MiG-17F a/c built at WSK-Mielec (incl. Lim-5R). Unreheated MiG-17A wasn't built in Poland, the very few Poland used were received from the USSR. Lim-5R = MiG-17F with ventral recce camera in blister fairing under belly starboard side (like Lim-1A) Lim-5P = (for Przechwytujący = interceptor) 129 MiG-17PF a/c (with longer canopy and wider nose intake under the radar lip fairing) built at WSK-Mielec Lim-5M = (for Modyfikowany = modified) 60 a/c built with increased (chord and thickness) wing root parts housing large fuel tanks and twin-wheeled main u/c, underbelly brake chute and JATO bottles on fuselage sides. 10 lost in crashes, other 50 later rebuilt to Lim-6bis standard Lim-6 = 40 a/c built featuring different approach to the close support idea: standard wing and u/c, brake chute above the jetpipe, 2 additional hardpoints and blown flaps - later rebuilt to Lim-6bis standard Lim-6bis = (for Latin "the second one") 70 a/c built as simplified variant of the Lim-6 (unblown flaps) plus 90 others rebuilt from 2 other variants (as mentioned above) Lim-6R = several Lim-6bis a/c fitted with ventral recce camera in blister fairing under belly starboard side (like Lim-1A and Lim-5R) Lim-6M = in the 1970s all surviving Lim-5P interceptors were deprieved of the nose AI radar and the weight gain was used to fit the additional 2 hardpoints - though no brake chute was fitted Lim-6MR = as the Lim-6M but fitted with ventral recce camera in blister fairing under belly starboard side (like Lim-1A, Lim-5R, and Lim-6R) Hope it helps Cheers Michael
  15. Some 40 years ago a late friend of mine was regularly receiving the US Scale Modeler monthly. For the teenagers (from behind the iron curtain) we were those days these magazines were like the Holy Grail. Till today I remember the cover pictures of more than 200 issues I have read between 1966 and 1981 (when martial law in Poland cut off the supply of US-edited magazines). A few years ago my friend passed away and his widow simply thrown out all his books and magazines (happily the great model collection he made has been bought by the Polish Aviation Museum and thus saved) and today I'm unable to verify my memory condition... Looking into my notes from the 70s I have found that some PBY was featured in the July 1969 issue of Scale Modeler, but I'm not sure, whether this was THE one I need and whether they were other Catalinas featured in other Scale Modeler issues. So I'm looking for your help First - can anybody of you confirm that a PBY Catalina featured in July 1969 (Vol. 4 Issue 7) Scale Modeler is the camouflaged VP-22 (or VP-101) specimen that fought over NEI in January 1942 ? Second - can anybody of you outline me the contents of the SM issues that are missing in my notes? There are few of them: June 1976 (Vol.11 iss.6), November 1976 (Vol.11 iss.11), December 1976 (Vol.11 iss.12), May 1977 (Vol.12 iss.5), February 1978 (Vol.13 iss.2), March 1979 (Vol.14 iss.3) January 1981 (Vol.16 iss.1). Any help will be warmly appreciated. And the specimen itself looks worth of very ineteresting debate for many of us here. Cheers Michael
×