John B (Sc)

Thank you Mike - that explains the occasional red banded Stearmans as well. I had wondered if they represented some other specialisation & also what benefit that gave, The original red bands, for "stand clear, I am not carrying out normal lookout and may not conform to visual flight path rules'" are understandable - though at any distance in the air I think both red and green bands will simply look black. Makes sense to change away from red, though it does indicate the level of worry and panic existing if training biplanes in the USA itself were likely to be mistaken for Japanese aircraft! Of course at that time there was a great ignorance about the capabilities of the enemy and a natural tendency to overestimate them. Graham's carrier and squadron colours information is a quite different topic and also very useful since I have several old 1/32nd Hasegawa biplanes of the USN to build. A colourful period in aviation history. John B

Strange. I have just checked my kit, bought from 'the Works' late last year; the fit looks good.

Interesting topic. So, what are everybody's thoughts on the various 1/48th and 1/32nd kits of F-104s? John B

Thanks Mike, Dennis and Graham. An interesting topic. Dennis - I must check. I have a few RAF Flying Reviews from that era, which I haven't looked at for a very long time. I wonder...

It could well have been that one Ewen - thanks. Shall hunt around. 'Geoffrey Sinclair' - I agree about the lack of reliable information, as far as bombing effectiveness was concerned. No-one knew, and later on they were horrified at how ineffective and 'blunt' it was. Quite agree Portal also bears a burden in this.. I was thinking more of those who were supposed to think in true strategic terms - CIGS and Churchill, who were along with the Sea Lords very concerned about the Atlantic U boat war, which very nearly defeated Britain. The lack of patrol aircraft and the use of obsolescent types in Coastal for far too long was astonishing. Releasing a few squadrons of Lancasters to Coastal would have made a huge difference, much greater than losing them over Germany. Just the equivalent of a few nights losses...

A few years back I read a fascinating book about allied oil production and its strategic challenges during the war - I wish I could remember the name of it. (maybe you know it Ewen?) As oilfields and refineries became harder to use or fell into other hands, some extraordinary efforts had to be made to blend usable fuels. This sometimes involved specific tankers ferrying particular crudes of a high strategic chemical mix value to allow blendings. Individual vessel journeys were occasionally strategically vital ; losses could have meant major supply problems in some cases, There was some superb chemical engineering work done behind the scenes as well as superb logistical planning and execution involved! It also made clear how much our aircraft performance depended on the higher octane fuels we could get access to or make. Thank you for the references Ewen - interesting stuff in there. John B

Hi, I as told some time back that the coloured bands on otherwise all yellow US Navy Stearman aeroplanes denoted their principal training purpose. As an example I was told that green bands indicated an aircraft being used for instrument flight training. Has anyone else heard of this? If so, do you know what the other training band colours (colors) meant? I think prewar USN operational aircraft on carriers used different colour bands as part of a complex code to denote squadrons, flights and squadron positions. John B

An excellent summary of the challenges facing the UK during the war and the immense, nation bleeding, costs of the bomber offensive. It still astonishes me that Arthur Harris was not properly challenged by those supposedly in authority when his dogmatic narrow focus on strategic bombing - as he saw it - seriously impacted other vital areas. It makes it very clear that there was a lot of doubt and ignorance in high political circles. A dogmatic and determined officer, Harris was allowed far too free a rein!

That is astoundingly good , realistic weathering ! Any chance of a 'how-I-did-it' tutorial?

Can I just say that I find Revell kits very variable. I have no recent experience of their car kits, so cannot to the original poster. They di have a kit range that goes back a long way, some few to the Fifties, plus kits originally by other manufacturers, like Matchbox, so caveat emptor. Some of their own recent kits are superb - try the 1:32nd sailplane range or the 1:32 light aircraft like the Super Cub. Revell Germany products and excellent. There are still some excellent old Monogram kits around under Revell titles. Occasionally, really good moulds just keep on going. I was astonished to see the venerable 1:32 Hasegawa F-104G is still around. A nice kit, I built one in the Eighties for my daughters who thought Starfighters were terrific - superb noise, I bought two kits then from a shop for ~£6 each. Rather more than that cost now. But still a good kit, superseded now of course by Italeri's recent issue, but at a price!

AS 72 modeller says, it is normal for the same colour dope to look slightly different in shade and reflectivity on fabric as against on metal. With modern materials it is possible to get a very smooth finish on fabric at a fairly small cost in weight. Most warplanes would have used minimum paint amounts & the Japanese in particular were very weight conscious. John B

The storing of cars is likely to be a profitable exercise for a few years only, but probably too long for the aircraft storage prospects. Very sad.

I think these books may be the scanned collection of Wally Kahn, a well known glider pilot in days of yore. John B

A most interesting discussion - I think several different areas, several slightly different topics, are being mixed up together here. Not surprisingly. The original question is in a sense too simple – the only sensible answer is ‘it depends’. For the late war daylight tactical European operations which Pierre Clostermann describes and which my father mentioned to me when discussing radar predictors, clearly flak was the greater threat. For night time operations over occupied Europe by Bomber Command for most of the war. It is clear that while the crews appear to have mostly thought that flak was the main worry, in fact quite a high proportion of the losses were due to fighters. The comments by Len Deighton in his book ‘Bomber’ and elsewhere are interesting; the low speed advantage of the Me110 night fighter over the bombers was not fully appreciated at the time. Had it been, different tactics could have made interceptions much harder. Which was the greater hazard for daylight USAAF bomber operations over Europe – I wonder. I think it changed with time as escorts became more capable. One other comment – I do not think the purpose of air combat is primarily to shoot down other aircraft. Its principal intent is to prevent the opposing air force from carrying out its tasks – so if an enemy bombing raid is thereby disrupted without loss, that is a success. If escorting fighters can drive off opposing fighters intending to attack your own bombers, so allowing their mission to go ahead, that is success. Actually shooting things down is a bonus, not necessarily an aim, except in so far as it helps deter & demoralise the opposition. Ultimately air only exists to support the ground arms ! (Troy Smith - I agree. 'The Big Show' enthralled - an appalled me - me as a kid. A terrific story. I asked myself if I could l have climbed into a Tempest to do what those pilots did. My best, honest answer? - not twice !)

Most interesting. Both parts G4 and G12 show the lowest glazed panel 'frosted', as if to be painted over. That might well be correct for the night fighter and for some Mk1 bombers, however I have found a picture online of desert based Mk1s which clearly show that lowest glazed panel in use on both sides, not just the starboard. There also seems to be a nightfighter with that lowest glazing panel in use both sides. Not too difficult to polish up I suppose. John B

There are some impressively ugly agricultural aircraft around; the LET Z-37 is certainly a challenger in that category! I bet it is fun to fly though...

I wonder if having test pilots in suits was a purely Avro thing - didn't Roly Falk of Avro almost always fly in a suit and tie? I think you are right that the aircraft would be kept fairly clean. Maybe a few oil dribbles here and there would be all. I presume that the probes are static and dynamic ports for airspeed. Given all the uncertainty about the whole design, where to get minimum position errors would be a guess - shown by the way the later 707s had such different jet intake position for instance.

Excellent. Thank you for pointing these out. The 1966 RAF Leuchars BoB Day film in particular astounded me when I first saw it (some months ago). Part way through, a young John B, strides determinedly across the picture ! What are the odds on that? I remember that day well; wet throughout, some fine machines I hadn't seen before, GHB's paint stripped Javelin and the first Lightning F Mk6 for 74Sqn in one of the hangars. I still have some slides taken that day. Where I was going as I crossed the picture I don't recall. The Leuchars and Lossiemouth films are super - very nostalgic stuff. John B

I am pleased to find I am not the only person struggling with the new website. It does still have quite a few teething glitches, like A B-25 Mitchell being thought of as a commercial aircraft, and an HS Dominie or HP Jetstream being thought of as 'WW2. Must have been long development runs ! I was looking for the new 1/48th Blenheim 1, but it has completely disappeared - not just 'out of stock' but gone. Some of the comments earlier reassure me a little ; l presume this is another temporary glitch? Certainly should be - I already got one from them and was hoping for another. Any comments/thoughts? Cheers, John B

My word, that must have rattled their fillings! I've had few days when the runway seemed to be a different height to my estimates, but that level of crinkle damage is bad news. Well beyond the elastic limit there, and I suspect past economic repair. In fact it looks as though the port wing upper skin has been pushed up, presumably by the main gear assembly or its support structure. Shades of the French 'tin parachute' Rallye which was said to be designed so that in an emergency the undercarriage legs would punch up through the wing as you struck the ground in a level attitude,, effectively stalling your way in when all else failed. (Powerful elevators!)

All that information really says is that. like many small companies just now, they have been struggling to get suitable accounts into an accepted format - challenging with all the variables just now. The ' strike off' move is just an attention getter really to get the directors to do something,= 'at least let us know what is happening'. I agree, not nice to see, but stay positive - I've been involved in rather worse than that way back when and the company survived, and thrived, later ! Rather a different area of work admittedly,. but the principles stay the same. Like flying - "aviate, navigate, communicate." Keeping the business running comes first in Directors' minds. sorting accounts second and telling the authorities is apt to be a distant third. Fingers crossed. John B

I'm certainly not expert on this Shaun, but from ancient memories of Lossiemouth, the early silver scheme Hunters used an orange dayglo - called 'Blaze Orange' by some sources. It faded rapidly. I think the Navy, like the RAF went to a much redder, Fire Orange, dayglo later, so it seems probable that would have been what was used with light aircraft grey. The Navy seemed to continue painting dayglo; the RAF went extensively for adhesive panels instead. I have a very old Humbrol tin of orange dayglo, Blaze, and it is notably more orange than the Fire Orange issued later. It also fades quite like the original did! Revell had a Fire Orange as well, though I think Humbrol's more recent 209 Fluorescent Fire Orange is rather good. I hope that helps. John B

Sorry to hear of this. Back in the late Eighties and early Nineties I bought quite a bit from them, by post. Good service.

Super picture. Chris, the original poster, says it was loaned by an RCAF pilot who flew with an RAF Kittyhawk Squadron. Did no 16 Sqn fly Kittyhawks by chance? They are/were known as 'the Saints' - from their St Omer days in WW1, I think.

I'd agree that ICM's recent issues have been superb. The biplanes are lovely, although I did need considerable care with the decals on the Gladiator. Very careful sliding off with a long hair brush and plenty water. Important to make sure the decal doesn't try to fold over on itself; that can be disaster! The Stearman which has just come out is really lovely, though I seem to have got the wrong engine for the specific machine I intend to model,. Perhaps ICM will do as Eduard have done and issue extra sprue kits from time to time