KRK4m

A rare example of a propeller-driven AFV. The Axis countries had amazing design ideas Cheers Michael.

It's interesting what you write. As director of the Polish Aviation Museum, in 1989 I was ordered to take a MiG-21PFM from Goleniów. There were several dozen of them there, most of them had four-digit tactical numbers, as you well know, being the ending of the mfrs serial. Your 7903 is serialled 94N7903. You say that the Goleniów regiment had 12 such machines (7809-7815 and 7901-7905). I don't deny this - all 12 were "special weapons" carriers. But then, at the air base, my attention was caught by MiGs with a two-digit tactical number. There were eight of them: 01, 03-06 and 08-10. They had completely different factory serials than all the others, and the regiment CO "secretly" told me that they were "special weapons" carriers. So I swallowed this 01 like a young pelican swallows pincers and to this day I was convinced that the Krakow museum had a nuke-carrying Fishbed in its collection. It has the mfrs serial 940ML01 and is described in the museum's inventory as MiG-21PFMN. And now I have doubts: whether these two-digit tactical numbers (and completely different factory serials) were some kind of hoax (by whom?), or whether Goleniów had 20 and not 12 MiG-21 nuke carriers? And one more small note about the IAB-500. In addition to 300 litres of fuel, the bomb contained quite a large charge of phosphorus (it weighed a total of 470 kg), which ignited the entire mixture. One could say that it was the predecessor of later thermobaric bombs. And apart from that: a well-made model. I was sure it was 1:48 👏. Cheers Michael

You're asking difficult questions, @Casey and I'm not a colour professional. I just like to have models painted with the appropriate color gradation - this one should be darker and that one lighter, or this green should be more blue and that one more yellow. Of the five questions you asked, I can only answer three: measurement angle was 45°/0°, observer angle: 10°, illuminant: D65, light source: 8 LEDs. The equipment I use is called Datacolor ColorReader Pro. The instrument is easy to use and (via BlueTooth) works with Android, which makes it just one step away from PhotoShop on my laptop. The price in Poland is about Ł300. Cheers Michael

If these colours are to look like the samples provided by @PhantomBigStu, then the RGB for Light MB is 91-117-142 and for Dark MB 62-88-115. Please check this on your spectrometer and correct me if I'm wrong. The colours given by @MACALAIN are from a completely different story: Light MB as Hu157 is 65-121-157, which is a bit darker and much less purple, and Dark MB as Hu134 is 33-66-137, which is noticeably darker and again much less purple. I was surprised by @Mike Starmer proposals, which so far has always hit the mark. I don't have acrylics, but by mixing enamels in its proportions I obtained Dark MB almost identical to Phantom's (61-88-125) and obscenely bright Light MB. With a 4:1 ratio I got RGB 204-210-216, which is a light grey, closest to Hu147 (201-202-204), because Hu44 (181-208-237) - if similar in brightness - is much more bluish (saturated). Only a strong reversal of the proportions (2x Hu34 + 5x Hu104) gave RGB 89-121-143, which is close to Phantom's. But note that pure Hu96 from a can is not far from it either (97-121-147). As for Dark MB, in Mike's mixture I would only replace Hu25 with Hu134. Then with a 3:2 ratio we get RGB 61-85-123, a tad closer in hue to the sample provided by Phantom. Cheers Michael

I started working on US Army AFV from the Vietnam War. First up are the M109 and M113, both in overall OD, of course. It is known that they should have white stars (four in the M109: front, rear and 2 sides, and in the M113 there is a fifth - on the roof), white double-row serial like US ARMY 123A456 on the sides (a question: should the M113 also have such a number on the rear wall?) and the unit markings on both mudguards at the front and rear. The latter in M109 is created by white letters and numbers directly on the OD background. And what should it be like in M113? In some drawings the background is OD, in others there are black quasi-plates? And one more thing: on some instruction sheets (Italeri, Tamiya) the M113 also has a yellow round shield on the front with black number 11 - probably a bridge limit. Was such a sign actually used in Vietnam, or did only vehicles used outside the combat zone have it, e.g. in Korea, Europe or the USA? Interestingly, a similar shield never appears on the M109 from Vietnam. Cheers Michael

The new 3/4-colour camouflage for USN aircraft was announced on January 5, 1943 with an effective date of February 1. And stars with white bars were introduced in June. So formally, from February 1 to July 1 (5 months), the planes were to have new camouflage and old markings. For years, there have been speculations here and there about the "incomplete" repainting of aircraft in units in the spring of 1943. It mainly concerns fighters - in the case of the F6F, there is talk (apparently - I can't find it anywhere) of leaving the fuselage sides and fin in the old colour Blue Gray M485 (by the way, really barely darker and greener/less purple than ANA608 Intermediate Blue). Even more interesting insinuations appear with F4U - there (due to the lack of connection between the fuselage side areas and the fin+rudder) many artists (e.g. John Wood) willingly paint the fin in the old M485, and the sides in the new ANA608. There is even a famous photo of Boyington's F4U-1A, in which the underside of the outer (folding) part of the port wing is painted M685, and the starboard one - ANA608. https://www.asisbiz.com/il2/Corsair/VMF214/pages/Aircrew-US-National-Archives-80-G-54288-VMF-214-Turtle-Bay-Espiritu-Santo-New-Hebrides-Sep-1943-04.html With such a headache as they had on the Solomons, the planes could have many days of flying in such irregular patterns. Cheers Michael

Let this be an excuse for the late Joe Baugher that he did not post information about the allocation of these 90 RAF numbers to the USN BuNos on his website. Until the day of his death, he did not complete his research on this matter and did not post it on his website. The data published by me is only a preliminary attempt included in the correspondence with me. Nevertheless, Joe insisted to the end that all 90 planes had BuNos. The problem remains: which ones? On the other hand, immediately before these FM-1s, the Royal Navy received 220 F4F-4B (Wright R-1820-engined) Martlet IV in 1942. These planes were financed by Lend-Lease, but did not receive BuNos. Could it be the same with the first FM-1s? So were there 7,825 or 7,915 Wildcats? Cheers Michael

To sum up - most likely all 19 wore NMF or silver at some time. But at least 9 (that's how many photos I found) also appeared in other colours. Today I have 4 planes in SEA camouflage (63-8443, 66-9231, 66-9232 and 72-0439), two in desert camouflage (63-8440 and 73-1603), two in gray-blue low-vis (63-8441 and 72-0449) and one in pale gray low-vis (73-1607, thanks Giorgio). Unfortunately, some of these photos were taken after these planes were grounded and changed their designation to GF-5B. Either way, I have a few options for my F-5B . Cheers Michael

First several hundred of production a/c had them. As well as the gun fairings. Cheers Michael

After all, this new, even demarcation line runs much lower than the previous - wavy one. And there are no signs of the presence of M495 Light Gray above it. Therefore - although more interesting from the modeller's point of view - the concept of leaving the sides in M485 Blue Gray becomes unlikely. The photos simply don't show the wavy remnants of M495 above the low demarcation line from ANA601 White. The conclusion is that the entire sides above the white were one colour. Unless the paint shop on the Yorktown (and Essex, because only these two carriers are known to have operated F6Fs in the original camouflage) did not have ANA608 Intermediate Blue paint and the Light Gray "waves" protruding above the lowest demarcation line were painted over with a darker M485. Cheers Michael

Probably only about 15-20 F-5Bs (not T-38s) flew in the USAF colours. Personally, I have only seen photos of these planes either in NMF or in SEA camo. Has anyone seen any other painting schemes for the USAF F-5B ? Cheers Michael

They were definitely repainted White, because after adding Dark Sea Blue on the top, the demarcation line is even, and in the original scheme it is wavy. Cheers Michael

I'm definitely not as much of a Wildcat expert as you are. But I once corresponded on this subject with the late Joe Baugher. If you trust his data, here it is: FM-1 Total: 1060 (including 312 for Britain) GM built version of the F4F-4, folding wings, 4 wing guns, 14 cyl. two-stage s/c R-1830-86, 1200hp, built 1942-43 by General Motors Linden, NJ BuNo. 14992-15401 410 for USN BuNo. 15402-15425 24 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV415-438 BuNo. 15426-15469 44 for USN BuNo. 15470-15479 10 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV439-448 BuNo. 15480-15519 40 for USN BuNo. 15520-15539 20 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV449-468 BuNo. 15540-15569 30 for USN BuNo. 15570-15579 10 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV469-478 BuNo. 15580-15629 50 for USN BuNo. 15630-15649 20 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV479-498 BuNo. 15650-15679 30 for USN BuNo. 15680-15699 20 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV499-518 BuNo. 15700-15729 30 for USN BuNo. 15730-15744 15 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV519-533 BuNo. 15745-15774 30 for USN BuNo. 15775-15804 30 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV534-563 BuNo. 15805-15824 20 for USN BuNo. 15825-15854 30 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV564-593 BuNo. 15855-15869 15 for USN BuNo. 15870-15889 20 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV594-613 BuNo. 15890-15893 4 for USN BuNo. 15894-15916 23 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV614-636 BuNo. 15917-15951 35 for USN BuNo. 46738-46746 9 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV325-333 BuNo. 46747 1 for USN BuNo. 46748-46753 6 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV334-339 BuNo. 46754 1 for USN BuNo. 46755-46760 6 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV340-345 BuNo. 46761 1 for USN BuNo. 46762-46769 8 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV346-353 BuNo. 46770 1 for USN BuNo. 46771-46782 12 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV354-365 BuNo. 46783 1 for USN BuNo. 46784-46796 13 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV366-378 BuNo. 46797 1 for USN BuNo. 46798-46811 14 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV379-392 BuNo. 46812 1 for USN BuNo. 46813-46815 3 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV393-395 BuNo. 46816 1 for USN BuNo. 46817-46830 14 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV396-409 BuNo. 46831 1 for USN BuNo. 46832 1 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV410 BuNo. 46833 1 for USN BuNo. 46834-46837 4 lent/leased to Britain as Martlet Mk.V JV411-414 Cheers Michael

Dear @Graham Boak, I don't know what sources you base your statement on, but IMHO the truth was completely different. Only the F13 version (without suffix) from 1919 had short wings (14.8 m span). Already in 1920, the F13a variant with a wingspan of 17.7 m entered production. And in total, until December 31, 1920, only 79 F13s were produced, i.e. less than 1/4 of the total of 351 F13s. So where do you see the "majority" here? Note that the first F13 was the factory WNr. J0531, and the J0533, used by the Polish airline Aerolloyd (renamed Aerolot, then Lot) in 1921-36, had a wingspan of 17.7 m from its first days. The next step was 1929 - from then on (F13f and later) all F13s had a fuselage 3 feet (90 cm) longer and wings from the W33 - the same span of 17.7m, but the leading edge sweep was increased 4 degrees and the trailing edge sweep was 4 degrees less - the wing area remained unchanged. The thoroughly researched and very extensive source http://www.hugojunkers.bplaced.net/junkers-f13.html presents the timeline of changes as follows: F13 was the initial design of 1919, powered with BMW IIIa or Mercedes IIIa F13a with increased wing span since 1920 F13b, c, d standard versions until 1928 with Junkers L2 (a since 1923), Junkers L5 (e since 1925), BMW IV (i since 1925) or BMW Va (o since 1926) F13f with modified wings, tail and undercarriage, same engines like d-series plus Puma (fy) and Jupiter (fae) since 1928 F13g with modified wing, W33 fuselage and Junkers L5 engine since 1929 F13h for US-market, increased wing swept and larger wing and Junkers L5 engine since 1929 F13k since 1930 with enclosed cockpit, toilet, modified undercarriage and wing and different engines Junkers L5 (ke), Jupiter IV (kae), Hornet and Hornet Geared (kue, kai), Jaguar (kao), Wasp (kau), Jaguar Major (kay) Ju13 or PS-2 Russian (Fili-built) F13s since 1923 JL6 original F13s of 1919, modified by Larsen in the USA JL12 original F13 of 1919, equipped with Liberty engine as ground attack aircraft by Larsen. I'm afraid that the urban legend about the large number of short-winged F13s was born in the USA, because all 25 aircraft assembled by Larsen actually had short wings. But in Europe it was really different. Cheers Michael

But @JWM is not talking about the asymmetry of their location - we all know that in 1939 the Polish planes had checkerboards on the s/board wing closer to the fuselage than on the port. The point is that in this photo (I haven't seen it in any other photo) the uppersurface insignia are rotated about 10 degrees clockwise - their front and rear edges are not perpendicular to the direction of flight. Cheers Michael

Not exactly, @Michou. Only the prototype had these tiny wings with a span of 14.8m and an area of 34.5 m2. All production versions from the F-13a onwards have wings with a span of 17.7m and an area of 43 m2. The a/b/c/d versions with the original (short) fuselage had a leading edge sweep angle of approx. 4 degrees and a trailing edge angle of approx. -8 degrees. After extending the rear part of the fuselage by about 80-90 cm (F-13f/g/h/k), the situation was reversed - the leading edge sweep was approximately 8 degrees, and the trailing edge was approximately -4 degrees. Cheers Michael

You have nothing to be "sorry" about, John. It's great that you brought this to my attention. I have never built a Type 10 before (I currently have Type 5 and Type 24), and I consider this change to be the most important in the I-16 evolution. Since JWM did not mention this modification in the list of differences between Types 5 and 10, I assumed that it must have happened later. But I looked it up and you're definitely right. Cheers Michael

And of course, starting with the Type 17, the existing flaperons are replaced with much shortened ailerons and separate flaps extending also under the fuselage. But the Type 17 (and later) did not participate in SCW. Cheers Michael

But Trumpeter only makes Mi-8 in 1/35 and 1/48, and we are talking about 1/72. And here the starting point must really be HobbyBoss. Boxing #87208 includes all parts (nose) and even Chinese decals for the model in your picture. Cheers Michael

It is wrong, but not the way you write. The mistake is not the German Lim-5s with these pods, but the Polish ones . The Polish Lim-5s NEVER had these pods - they were part of the Lim-6 package, which came in two varieties: the Lim-6bis (and the fighter-reconnaissance -6bisR) had a short fuselage nose and a braking parachute above the tailpipe, and the -6M (and -6MR with a camera under rear fuselage) did not have a parachute, but had a large nose with radar fairings of the MiG-17PF interceptor (the radars were dismantled in the 1970s, when subsonic interceptors became useless, and the change in CG was partially compensated by these missile pods). The GDR Air Force bought 120 Lim-5 and 40 Lim-5P (MiG-17PF) in Mielec in 1959 - at that time these pods did not exist yet. It was only in 1971 that the GDR purchased 60 sets in Mielec, including pods and appropriate wiring looms, in order to modify its Lim-5s as part of overhauls carried out in Germany. But they did not order parachutes - thus the ONLY Lim-5s with these rocket pods are 60 GDR aviation examples. However, I am not able to determine whether they were only Lim-5 fighters or also Lim-5P interceptors. Cheers Michael

While creating a short Yearbook of my "2023 production" two weeks ago, I realized that I had over 30 kits that were started and unfinished. So I solemnly decided that I needed to sort this out as quickly as possible. And so only the third week of the new year 2024 passes, and I am already presenting the second completed model - although to be honest: it was started over a year ago. The history of the creation of the M3 Medium Tank, its position in the history of American AFVs and the circumstances that made it the best tank of the British army at a certain point in history were described here 3 years ago Well, in total, the British purchased 1,685 Grants, to which the US added (via Lend-Lease) 1,200 Lees with two turrets stacked one above the other. So the overall proportion was 58+42%, but the batches for each theatre of war varied enormously in Grant and Lee proportions. 500 tanks (150 Grants and 350 Lees) were sent to England, 730 (650 Grants and 80 Lees) to Africa, and 750 (500 Grants and 250 Lees) to Australia. But the largest shipment (900, including 380 Grants and 520 Lees) went to India. And it was in the jungles of Burma - probably due to technological supremacy over Japanese tanks - that the British M3s achieved the greatest successes. I had been fascinated for years by those jungle kings. After looking through hundreds of photos, I decided to replicate the standard (i.e. riveted, radial-engined) M3 Lee T-25602 from 3rd Carabiniers Regiment, 254th Indian Tank Brigade, as fighting at Mandalay in March 1945. Crewed by six and powered by the 16-litre air-cooled 400 hp Continental (nee Wright) R-975 9-cylinder radial engine, the standard M3 Lee (3712 built), armed with a single 75mm gun, single 37mm gun and two .3” MGs, weighed about 30 tons. The 2003 Mirage kit is still considered the world’s best Braille scale M3, as the only alternative is the Hasegawa kit of 1973 vintage. The #72802 boxing contains 142 styrene parts on 4 sprues and 3 rubber items – two continuous tracks and a tow rope. There are also two metal smoke dischargers and two small PE frets containing 21 items, most of which are only visible when the doors are fitted in the open position. The ones I actually used were the two headlamp baskets and the grille behind the turret. Kit decals are provided for two Canadian Lees from Britain (OD overall), one British from Libya (Light Stone overall) and two British from Burma (SCC13 Jungle Green overall). Last two were armed with the M3 long-barrel 75mm gun, while other three featured the short-barrel M2. The model was made OOB except for making the turret rotable (two notches cut in the hull upper decking and a rod glued under the turret). The paint is (as always) Humbrol enamel – this time the SCC13 Jungle Green colour made according to the recipe of @Mike Starmer from Humbrols 159/155/33 in the 4/3/1 ratio turned out to be a... clean Humbrol #242 straight from the can, painted with Italeri brush. All decals are courtesy of my drawer. Finally the Vallejo acrylic matt varnish was brush-applied overall. If you compare my model with the photos of the original (IWM SE3491 and subsequent ones), you will notice not only the lack of several pieces of junk on the model's hull, but also the lack of the unit emblem, the corners of which partially cover the white star on the left side of the prototype's hull. I'm trying to solve it in this thread https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235135689-help-needed-with-the-burmah-lee-t-25602-markings/ but so far to no avail. Once this is clarified, I will simply put the appropriate emblem on the model in the display case. The pictures are taken with an LG smartphone. Comments are welcome Cheers Michael

Thanks a lot, @Kingsman, for noticing this topic. Although I still - to quote Socrates - know that I know nothing. But at least you have reassured me about the yellow stars on British tanks in Burma. The IWM film is very interesting and I haven't seen it before. I've seen these photos and all I know is that the emblem on this Lee T-25602 is neither a cat, nor a bull, nor even a deer of Gordon's Highlanders. Moreover, the 255th Brigade was equipped with Shermans and was fighting at that time near Meiktila (50 miles from Mandalay). So I stick to the description from IWM that "my" Lee belonged to the 3rd Carabiniers Regiment of the 254th Brigade. And the model I'm building right now simply won't have that emblem in front of the star on the port side of the hull for now. Firstly, he might not have had it, e.g. a month earlier, and secondly - if one day we know what the emblem is - I will always be able to stick it on the model already in the display case. Cheers Michael

The plane is assembled and repainted with paints provided by the USAF, which was personally supervised by Gen. Donald Kutyna - this very F-105 pilot from Vietnam. But with Lidar I recommend caution in two places: the plane arrived from Duxford without a front wheel and with shattered canopy glazing. Therefore, it has a wheel from a Soviet helicopter installed (the same size with a tolerance of 1 cm, but a completely different tread), and the glazing is made of a bent plexiglass sheet, not pressed as a undevelopable surface. Unfortunately, attempts to obtain original elements from the USA failed. Cheers Michael

The IWM collection includes a series of photos of the Lee T-25602 tank, taken by Capt E A Taylor in the Mandalay area on March 20, 1945. The vehicle itself is interesting because it is one of the few Lee tanks in Burma that still has the original American MG turret on the top of the main turret, while most British Lees had a round hatch at this place. It also has a short-barreled M2 gun with a counterweight and rear bins with an inclined (rather than horizontal) top cover. The photos are numbered IWM SE3491, 3494, 3495, 3497, 3499 and 3502. https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205205524 This tank was portrayed by Star Decals in the decal set 35-C1120 http://www.star-decals.net/35-C1120.html and this is where my doubts arise. First of all, Star Decals leaves it up to us whether the stars on the hull sides should be white or yellow. Has anyone ever seen yellow stars on this theatre and on British tanks at all? And secondly - in photo SE3491 above, the front horizontal arm of the white (yellow?) star is partially obscured by the corner of some vertically positioned rectangle, darker than Jungle Green, on which a lighter emblem is faintly visible. Star Decals presents it as a black rectangle with a yellow creature - either a kangaroo or a rat, similar to the one from the 7th Armoured Brigade, but with its tail pointing up instead of down - which is unlikely to happen to rats. I've looked at this photo over and over again, using different brightness and contrast settings, but to me it looks more like the white gauntlet of the 6th Armoured Division. But where does this sign on a tank in Burma come from? Can anyone shed some light on these two doubts? Cheers Michael

Fortunately, it's not that bad here. GDR purchased 120 Lim-5 (MiG-17F) and 40 Lim-5P (MiG-17PF) from Poland. After seeing the effectiveness of Polish Lim-6 during joint Warsaw Pact maneuvers, the GDR air force expressed interest in modifying their Lim-5s to the close-support aircraft role. In 1971 (thus 7 years after the end of Polish Lim-6 production), 60 sets of rocket launchers and necessary wiring looms to carry out the modification were ordered from WSK Mielec. The modernization was carried out during the aircraft overhaul in GDR in the 70s. The Polish Air Force Lim-5s did not receive such a modification, because all Polish assault regiments had plenty of Lim-6 (M, MR and bis) armed with these launchers as standard. Cheers Michael