Magpie22

Lovelly!!!!! I think it would be more correct to say that the wing was lowered due to the increased depth of the Merlin with its intake trunking under the engine, and to allow for a deeper radiator to be installed. This made for a deeper fuselage and, as you say, necessitating the installation of a cockpit floor. Peter, the pedant.

I must be more careful when making light hearted comments. I thought that I put a 'smiley' in there, but apparently not. Perhaps I had in mind Ben Kelsey's comment when he was asked about the performance of the XP-38. He is quoted as saying. "....it goes like hell". Of course, after many years experience in the industry, I am well aware that there are many factors, often conflicting, influencing the design of an aircraft. If Hibbard and Johnson had been only concerned about speed, they would have sacrificed fuel capacity, chosen a much thinner high speed aerofoil section, and avoided the compression problems suffered by the aircraft. Next time I make a light hearted comment I promise to put in appropriate smiley. 😁 OK?👍 Peter M

Hi Mike, I was lucky enough to see 'Glacier Girl' fly not long after her rebuild. I've always had a fascination for the P-38. The basic design philosophy seems to have been to make the fastest fighter you can. Make it complicated, big, poor maneuverability, and expensive - none of those matter - just make it fast. I also remember Lefty Gardner and Gary Levitz throwing #13 and # 38 around the pylons - aah, those engines, so beautiful! Modelling wise, I'm currently building a couple of Cleveland racers, #27, 'Teterboro Special', and #25, both highly modified with clipped wings, T/P and no superchargers. Want to do a few others, including #88 which raced in the Bendix X-country race fitted with wingtip drop tanks. Peter M

This aircraft was both a P-38E and an F-4-1. It was born at Lockheed as a P-38E, 41-2144, (manufacturer's serial 5362). It was officially received by the USAAF as a P-38E on 1 Jan 1942. In March 1942, it was earmarked for conversion to an F-4. In late April, it arrived at the Lockheed modification center at the B-6 plant in Dallas, where it was converted to an F-4, along with another 98 aircraft, between April and August 1942. On return to the USAAF in June, it was officially re-designated as an F-4-1. By November, it had made its way to San Francisco, where it was embarked for shipment to the USAAF Fifth Air Force in Australia. Australia had received two F-4 aircraft in August 1942, but one was lost soon after and, in February 1943, 41-2144 was turned over to the RAAF as a replacement. The RAAF received it at Eagle Farm Airport near Brisbane and assigned it the stores reference number A55-3. By late March it was in service with No. 1 PRU, based at Coomalie, south of Darwin. Although suffering from problems related to the intercoolers, it saw continual ops until August when it required a 240 hourly check. The overhaul of turbo-charged aircraft was not an area in which the RAAF had much expertise and the aircraft was sent to the 5th US Air Force at Eagle farm for the work. The aircraft was received back at No. 1 PRU in early November, but lasted just over a month. On 10 December 1943, the pilot was forced to land with the undercarriage retracted. The pilot escaped without injury but, a fire broke out in the port supercharger and the A/C was damaged beyond repair. There were a series of shots taken at the same time as that posted by Mike. I have attached some. She's not quite as clean as Mike suggests. At the time of the photos, (circa mid 1943), note the replacement intercooler on the starboard wing, and the usual exhaust deposits behind the superchargers, The letters 'L' and 'R' have been added to the inboard side of the appropriate nacelle as an 'aid memoire' for the pilot in an emergency situation. She also carried three aerial wires from the canopy, one to each fin and one to the center of the tailplane. In 1/48 scale, the Academy kit is the best way to go. The Red Roo conversion has a few problems with the placing and the size of the camera ports and, i my opinion it is easier to modify the nose and cut your own camera ports. However, the decals included in the Red Roo conversion are worth the cost. A55-3 received a new paint job as part of the overhaul in Sep/Oct, as can be seen in the shots below.

The RAAF used RAF style Sutton Harness. PIc is of F/L Allan Hodgkinson in a No. 77 Sqn P-40K. Peter M

Hi Graham, I too remember Edgar's post. I interpreted it as relating to the dropping of desert and high altitude schemes, both to be replaced by the DFS. Must dig it out again. I stick with the info I posted above. More than just the aircraft flown in from the ME arrived in India in the desert scheme. Early examples retained their desert scheme, later aircraft were repainted. Approximately half the Spitfire VIII aircraft sent to Australia were finished in the desert scheme. I think that this constitutes a little more than 'some examples'. It certainly was not 'fairly rare errors'. In 1944 the RAAF was informed that future production would be finished in the DFS, and that is how they arrived. Cheers, Peter

No problem, Steve although I must confess I'm not that well disposed to things Canadaian at the moment, as I'm trying to turn a Hobbycraft Norseman into something resembling the real thing. Peter

Aw, Gee?? Tony.

Steve, As I understand it, all Spitfire Mk.VIII aircraft were built by Supermarine. They had three main assembly plants, at Eastleigh, Keevil and Chattis Hill. Each assembly plant had minor variations in the camouflage pattern, particularly around the nose area, regardless of the scheme applied. Spitfire Mk.VIIIs in the JF, JG, LV, MB and some MD ranges were finished in the desert scheme. A few MD aircraft were finished in the DFS as were all those in the MT and MV ranges were finished in the DFS. All Spitfire MK.VIIIs sent overseas were dispatched in their factory applied scheme. Early aircraft that were sent to India, initially saw service in the desert scheme. JF835 would have arrived in India in the desert scheme, still carrying standard RAF roundels. It is a moot point as to when it was repainted in the SEAC scheme. You need to check the date when the photo was taken and which scheme it was carrying at that time. A good clue is the tone of the colour through the cockpit area. If it is the lighter tone of the two upper surface colours, it is probably in the desert scheme, if it is the darker tone, probably repaint after arrival. Peter M

The RTAF Museum Curtiss aircraft. Hawk III Hawk 75N Cheers, Peter M

Yeah, I go back a long way with Ley, and also a number of the IPMSers in Sydney. Fred and I often drove up there for meetings. Greg did a good job on the patterns for that Beaufort. Pity that that it was stretching the limit of the moulding that HP could do. They had a lot of problems with the deep draw items, particularly the fuselage. We owe a debt of gratitude to Steve and Greg for their work in giving us accurate models of a number of RAAF types. As for a 1/48, (the only true scale), Beaufort: and, Pretty Airfix!!! Peter M

No worries CD. John, your model looks nice. I did build an MPM SB-2 kit. It is still on the shelves with my other Russian aircraft. Even survived the trip from Aus to Thailand! As I recall it was a relatively easy build. Still trying to work out why I bought two, though!!! Peter M

If you are desperate, I have the old MPM vacform, which you are welcome to for cost of postage. I'll never build it. But, be warned, all transparencies are MPM yellow. Peter M

Hi Steve, I concur with BS-w. Only the Spit F.VIII with the Merlin 61, 63 engines had the oil cooler. These aircraft were in the early JF serial range. A/C after that did not have it. The cooler was in the port wing root as shown in photo from Ettiene's website. The gun camera was fitted in the starboard wing root of LF and HF Spitfire VIII aircraft, as shown in this shot of a RAAF Spitfire LF.VIII that has come to grief. The covering patch, (fitted to keep out the coral dust), is lifting showing the open camera port. The keen eyed will also notice the two different types of U/C leg fitted to these A/C. That above has the splined type leg while that below has the later type with torque links on the front of the leg.

Yes, they were shipped with wings removed. IThe bloke at the wingtip is signalling to the bloke connecting the cables where they enter the cabin area. This particular aircraft was a combination of the two airframes, A11-1 and A11-2 after both had suffered damage. Hence, merely the stores number 'A11' without the individual aircraft number.

G'day Slywolff, I was with the late Fred Harris when we took the measurements added to the Control column drawing in post #9 above. Fred did most of the writing, I did most of the measuring tape and scale rule work. As Fred noted, that drawing is pretty good. Copies were given to HP when Greg was doing the patterns for their kit - as you say easily the most accurate kit available, if a right cow to build. Re the Frog kit, Fred was an 'engineering' modeller and would go to quite extreme lengths to correct a kit. He undersold his modelling ability in his last comment in post #21. He did far more than correct the plan-view shape. To him that was difficult, to we mere mortal modellers, that was well neigh impossible! I binned the 1:48 vacform and am well into a scratch-build using Tamiya wings etc. I keep stopping every time there is a rumour/announcement that someone is doing a 1/48 kit, only to pull the project out again when it turns out to be yet another false lead. I had better finish, then I am pretty sure I can guarantee someone will do a kit. 😊 Cheers, Peter M

I don't have any drawings either, but these photos of RAAF A/C may help.

As Corsairfoxfour uncle says there is an entry hatch on the underside of all Bostons. It is at the rear of the compartment and, opens up and in to the rear, being latched on the rear bulkhead. This a restored A-20G gunner's compartment, looking aft. The door is opened and latched on the rear bulkhead. There was a fold down jump seat behind this, which could be deployed when the hatch was closed. The hangar floor. (yellow tie down point), can be seen through the open hatch. Similar view in a Boston III, (DB-7). Note deployed tunnel gun. These and a number of very useful Boston interior shots may be found on Aussiemodeller at: www.aussiemodeller.com.au/pages/History/Aircraft/Mead_A20G.html and www.aussiemodeller.com.au/pages/History/Aircraft/Mead_DB7Boston.html You may need to sign in at the main page to gain access to walk arounds. HTH, Peter M

Did you know that the CA-15 was originally supposed to be powered by the P&W R-2800? No but i do wonder what that might look like ? This is a CAC display model of the final version before the R-2800 was found to be unobtanium and the switch made to the Griffon. It is not a wind tunnel model as often labelled. The fairing under the fuselage was where the engine cooling air and engine exhaust were mixed to gain thrust. Somewhat akin to the 'Meredith effect' employed with great success in the P-51.

Salutations Admiral, I happen to be working on a Monogram/Belcher PBY-4, (one of the RAAF A/C of course!). I may be able to help with a few clues to fitting the Belcher bits. I found the tail to be OK, but the waist hatches were a bit of a problem, not helped by mine being warped. If interested drop me an email. Cheers, Peter

G’day Finn, Both Steve and I are regulars on this forum, but I will have a go at answering your question. This post will be a bit long but may help to explain why I believe that this aircraft was painted in a particular way. I think the idea of a ‘custom job’, using Light Earth and Sky Blue, for A58-254’s finish is a load of rubbish. A little history on A58-254 may help understand its paint scheme. · Built at Castle Bromwich as MH591, rolled out August 1943. · 14 Sep 43, Embarked on Hotoata for shipment to Australia. · 25 Oct 43, received at No. 1 Aircraft Park, nr Melbourne, where it was erected. · 9 Dec 43, received at No. 14 Aircraft Repair Depot Replacement Pool. · 5 Jan 44, received by No. 452 Sqn. Coded as QY-F. · 5 Feb 44, F/S Haile overshot taxiway and undercarriage collapsed. · 9 Feb 44, issued to No 7 Repair and Salvage Unit, for repairs. · 9 Mar 44, received by No. 452 Sqn. Coded as QY-V. · 1 Aug 44, received by No. 14 ARD/RP. · 11 Sep 44, received by Central Gunnery School. · 19 Apr 45, F/O Fireash force landed with wheels up at CGS. The aircraft was then placed into storage and eventually written off. Spitfire VC aircraft built by Castle Bromwich were finished in RAF Desert Camouflage. On arrival in Australia the Middle Stone would have been over painted with RAAF K3/177 Foliage green. S/L Spence took over command of No. 452 Sqn, from S/L MacDonald on 3 February 1944. At that time he inherited MacDonald’s Spitfire, A58-240, coded QY-D. A58-254 was received by No. 452 Sqn in early Jan 1944 and coded QY-F. One month later it was damaged in a taxiing accident. S/L Spence was flying A58-240 at that time. It, in turn, was damaged in a landing accident on 5 April 44. After A58-254 was returned to No. 452 Sqn in mid March 44, Spence took it over as his own and had it coded as QY-V, rather than QY-D that had been used by No. 452 Sqn COs up to that time. (After Spence left the squadron, QY-D was revived as the CO’s code). Spence named the new aircraft 'Rima II', after his wife. It remained with the squadron until replaced by Spitfire VIII. A58-254 was a late production Spitfire VC so had narrow bulges over the cannon feed mechanism, 'streamlined' rear view mirror, and no ID light on dorsal spine. When received by No. 452 Sqn, A58-254 would have been finished in RAF Dark Earth and RAAF Foliage Green on the upper surfaces. The under surfaces would have been RAF Azure Blue. Codes were in RAAF K3/195 Sky Blue, serial in RAAF K3/183 Medium Sea Grey. Roundels and fin flash were K3/170 White and K3/197 Dull Blue. Those on the fuselage sides and under wing were 3:5 ratio. Those on the wing upper surface were 2:5 ratio. Note the smaller size common on later RAAF Spitfires. Note also that the 24” wide fin flash has been modified merely by over painting the red leaving the blue at 11”, but the white is now 13” wide. A58-254 after her mishap in February 1944. Note that the white LE only extends out to the outboard mg, and there is an oil deflector fitted behind the spinner. The small upper wing roundels are also evident. Clearly, after the accident of February, A58-254 had a repaint job. This would have been done at No 7 RSU as part of the repairs. The new pattern loosely follows the original, but the upper surface colours now come down on to the sides of the air intake fairing. It is often said that Light Earth and Foliage Green were used. I find use of the former colour difficult to justify. It was a paint specifically intended for use on the lower wings of biplanes. No. 7 RSU was part of NWA and tasked with providing support for the Spitfire, Boomerang and, occasionally, Beaufighter units. Their paint shop would have no requirement for Light Earth, and it was probably not in their stocks. I regard it as far more likely that the the RSU would have used RAAF K3/209 Dark Earth, (a very close equivalent to the RAF colour of the same name) for the repaint, as they did with other Spitfire repair jobs. The apparent lighter shade in the well know photo below is probably due to the fact that the RAAF colours had a slight sheen to them compared to the RAF colours which were more matt. The colour ‘seen’ by photographic film is the reflected light from the subject, and the apparent shade will vary with the reflectiveness of the surface. That the aircraft was probably also waxed and polished would exaggerate that effect. The under surfaces seem to have been retained in Azure Blue. The RAAF colour K3/316 Azure Blue was close to its RAF namesake. The fuselage and under wing roundels seem to have remained the same, but the upper wing roundel is back to 54” dia and 3:5 ratio. The fin flash is now smaller with the white and blue the same width. Serial is now black in a rather ‘blocky’ stencil style. Codes are of the later style of lettering, (note the ‘Q’), and are Sky Blue. After it left No. 452 Sqn, A58-254 went to the Central Gunnery School at Cressy in Victoria. Initially, it retained its QY-V codes but, later these were painted over. Spinner was now White or Sky Blue. The photo below may help with a few more details for your model. Finally, a, not very sharp, shot of several of CGS's Spitfire VC aircraft. A58-254 is in the foreground. I can discern little difference in the tones of its camouflage and the aircraft behind, indicating to me that it is not painted using Light Earth. Hope the above is not too long and helps you with your model. Cheers, Peter Malone

Ed, I agree that excellence can be relative. It really depends on what the modeller is looking for. Some want lots of detail in the cockpit, some want accurate colour schemes, others are looking to check that each panel line is in the correct place, and some want a quick build that looks OK to them. There is nothing wrong with any of those approaches. My baggage is many years spent working in aerodynamics, so errors in shape and dimensional accuracy leap out at me. To my mind, the shape errors in the 1/48 SH kit were rather basic and a modicum of decent research could have avoided them. On the other hand, as you point out, they probably do not worry many modellers and they are happy to build the kit as is. I choose to model the Wirra my way, but I do not criticize the way other modellers choose to model it. The enjoyment is in the build. Tony's model certainly demonstrates what can be done. I have no desire to build a VNS-41, although I have had the opportunity to inspect one in the 'flesh'. Interesting little beastie. Perhaps one of the Russian companies may produce one for you as that is where it originated some 20 years ago? Any idea when Red Roo may get some new stock of the 1/48 Wirra set? Peter M PS: Can you define the "average modeller" please. No such beast in my opinion. Your 'years of feedback' may tell you what the majority of those modellers seem to prefer, but it does not define the "average modeller".

Mark, I have found no indication that the RAAF had them repainted before they went to the RAF. I doubt that the RAF repainted them after they were handed over as things were getting rather hectic by then. If the RAF repainted them, that brings up the question: what colour? I tend to lean to no repaint and the aluminium under surfaces retained, but that is just an opinion. Pedant I am. My boss for many years at ARL was an ex Tomahawk ace and Spitfire squadron commander. He became an aeronautical engineer after the war. He was very thorough and accurate in all his work and ensured that all T's were crossed and I's dotted - I must have picked it up from him. Cheers, Peter

Nice models Tony!! 👍 Pity the 1/48 SH kit is so poor. 😒 I can however thoroughly recommend the Red Roo detailing set that you mentioned. The fuselage of the SH kit is quite incorrect in planform. SH have elected to give it a continuous curve from front to rear. The designers at North American were not stupid and didn't want to put all those stringers through the roll bender: they elected to keep them straight as much as possible. This meant that the only double curvature panel was between frames 6 and 7; all others were single curvature only, much easier to make. So, when viewed from above, the fuselage tapers in sharply behind the engine cowling back to frame 1, parallel sided from frame 1 to frame to frame 6, curved from frame 6 to frame 7, straight taper to frame 10, and then sharper taper to frame 11, (note, it does not fair into rudder). SH also managed to get that latter part wrong. The windscreen is too shallow in slope and too wide at its base, and the canopy tapers in planform. SH also managed to make the wing centre section too wide, resulting in wheel wells and doors that are too large. The wing/fuselage fillets are totally inaccurate aft of the wing. Tailplanes are undersized and inaccurate in shape. Otherwise its not a bad kit. I'm probably too close to the subject, but I elected to base my Wirraways on the Belcher BT-9 kit with wings etc modified from the Monogram T-6. I just can't visualize a Wirra without all those rivets. I recommend that anyone contemplating building a Wirraway check out Derek Buchmaster's drawings at http://dbdesignbureau.buckmasterfamily.id.au/. Top notch stuff. While I'm nitpickin', technically the Wirraway did not have Type A and Type B roundels, it had Scheme M.2 and Scheme M.1 roundels. OK, OK, I know they were the same as the Brit roundels upon which they were based. 😁 Cheers, Peter M

Paul, The Wirras were finished in RAAF Earth brown / Foliage Green with aluminium lacquer under surfaces. They retained their RAAF stores ref numbers on the fuselage and under the wing. Roundels were RAAF standard for the time, (R/W on wing uppers, R/W/B on fuselage sides and RWB under wings). After arrival in Singapore most, if not all, had fin flashes added and a narrow Yellow band added around the fuselage roundel to conform with RAF practice as they operated under RAF control. If you go to the AWM at www.awm.gov.au and search the collection, you will find shots of A20-47, GA-B and A20-85, GA-F, one with yellow roundel band, one without. Photo refs are 006644, 006645, 006646, and 006650. HTH. I have other shots. If they may be of use, PM me. Peter M