Magpie22

Further to @captnwoxof 's pics above, these below may be of some help. They are of Spitfire VC A/C but, the installation on 'tropicalised' Seafires was the same. First up, a line drawing with slightly clearer captions to the drg above. What is not clear from the diagram is that air was drawn through the filter at all all times. The shutter lever control could be operated to close the ram air intake, allowing hot air to be drawn from the front of the engine compartment. This inefficient arrangement was corrected on the "Aboukir" filter housings and, on the later filter housing fitted to Mk.IX and MK.VIII aircraft. Please note that labelling the filter housing on the Spitfire VC as a "Vokes Filter" and that on the later Spitfires as an "Aerovee" filter is not correct. Vokes made two principal types of engine filter for aircraft at this time, the Aerovee, which was a dry type filter for liquid cooled engines and, the Three-ply, which was a viscous type for radial engines. So Spitfires were fitted with Vokes Aerovee filter - only the Supermarine designed installation and housing differed. Now, climbing down from the soapbox, I have attached shots of the large oil tank installed on 'tropicalised' Spitfire VC A/C. As noted by captnwoxof, these were deeper than the standard tank and it was not a simple job to re-fit the standard under-nose cowlings. The large tank would have to be removed, the original tank re-installed, the plumbing revised, and the original air intake re-installed. The alternative would be to do what the Aussies did. That was to replace filter cowling with a more pigeon chested one that fitted over the large oil tank. What the Aussies failed to take into account, was that the engine air intake that mated with tropical filter had a larger cross-section, (as the air, having passed through the filter, was now moving at a slower speed), and this resulted in a miss-match with the carburettor that produced some rough engine running at times. Peter M

Just checking here because I’m confusing myself with second guessing…. All six roundels are 32”, right? Probably. Correct ratio was 2:5, based on outer diameter of each colour. This would give the White as 12.8", but measurements show it to be closer to 12" on many A/C, which is a nice round number, and possibly what the painters used. Close enough for guv'mint work. Squadron codes are light blue, the white in the roundels is 4:1 white and insignia blue? Codes were specified as Sky Blue. On later No. 452 Sqn A/C they were approx 24" high, 15" wide, 3" stroke. (i.e. a multiple of 8:5:1) Roundels definitely not 4:1 - I presume you mean what I would call 2:3, white/blue, based on diameter. This was an earlier spec - later spec, as stated above, was 2:5. Serial number is black, not white Probably. I can't see why they would have changed it. Assume that the fin flash visible in the Dec ‘44 pic is still there Jul ‘45. Unless there were repairs to the fin it would have remained unchanged. It was the standard 24" x 24" but, note that only the Red of the original was overpainted, leaving the White at 13" wide and the Blue at 11" wide. Model is looking v good, Peter M

Roger, @Dunny I do try to help when I can. Sometimes it is difficult not to sound as though I am preaching. I am victim of having spent too many years of my life researching the RAAF fighter squadrons and their camouflage and markings. It all started many years ago, when as a wet behind the years engineer I discovered my boss was an ex Spitfire squadron commander. He introduced me to many of his fellow pilots and ground crew and I was hooked. Not quite an obsession but ?????? Peter M

She's looking good, Mark!! Sorry to cause you problems with the bombs and tank. Actually, I think it was highly unlikely that underwing bombs and 90 gall tank were carried at the same time. that would be adding another 500lb to that of the 500lb for the bombs. The 30 gall tank was almost a permanent fixture on RAAF Spit VIIIs. At the risk of causing you further aggravation, could I suggest that you remove the cushion head rest while you are doing your other cutting, grinding etc? This headrest was not on a Mk.VIII. Cheers, Peter M

Hi Dunny, I like your interest in Red Wine. You're in the right place - just avoid the bush fires. We often tried to get over to the wineries when we had to go from FB in Melbourne to ARDU at Edinburgh. Won't ask about the name tho'. 🙄 Don't rely too much on Mk.1 eyeball, especially b/w prints. My advice to Mark re the finish on A58-518 is based on more than photo interpretation alone, a lot of other research as well. However, in this game we can never be definite, just propose the most likely possibility based on research. I've posted another shot of 518 below. Taken at same time as that front 3/4 shot that you have been looking at. Looks to be a single colour to me. Note that there is no sign of the RAF serial repeated on the aerial mast, no sign of over-painting of the original RAF serial, and no sign of 'corrections' around the roundel, thus indicating that the entire exterior of the A/C has been over-painted. So, since it was done by the RAAF, the upper surface would be either entirely Foliage Green or Foliage Green and Earth Brown. Based on my research, I'm sticking to the former. Cheers, Peter M

G'day Mark, Some stuff on RAAF designed bomb racks for the Spitfire VIII. By the second half of 1943, the RAAF realised that, in the future, Spitfires were more likely to be used in an offensive role and requested supply of same form the UK. A number of universal bomb racks and their adaptors for fitting to the centreline hardpoint were received at the end of the year. For the envisioned island hopping campaign the RAAF Spits would often need to carry auxiliary fuel tanks on the centreline hardpoint so these racks were of limited use. North Western Area Command then decided to institute their own program to have the Spitfire fitted with two underwing racks, each capable of carrying a 250 lb bomb. This work was initiated in the workshops of No. 7 RSU. When RAAF HQ heard about this they 'hit the roof' and demanded that all information be forwarded to the RAAF Directorate of Technical Services to ensure that the engineering would be to an approved standard, and the project became a joint effort. A58-308 was fitted with the new racks and flew a series of trials in October - November 1944. Production of the racks was then approved to be carried out by No. 14 ARD who manufactured packs that could be installed at the RSUs. The racks themselves were modelled on those fitted to P-40N aircraft. A standard electro-mechanical bomb release unit was mounted to the outboard side of Wing Rib No.9, the rib that passed through the centre of the cannon bay. Only a short section with the suspension lug protruded below the wing surface. Bomb steadies were made from 1" x 1/8" mild steel. The front steady, which had no adjustment, was bolted to the wing D torsion box, just ahead of the front spar. The rear steady was bolted to a heavy stringer that passed through the bottom of the cannon bay, just to the rear of the shell ejection chute for the inboard cannon. This stay was fitted with two adjustment screws that pressed on the rear of the bomb to force its nose into contact with the front steady and prevent it from swaying. They also ensured that the bomb left the aircraft nose down when released. The outboard cannon could not be fitted when these racks were installed. The bombs had to be released before the inboard cannon could be fired as the ejected shell casings would hit the bomb and be deflected, risking airframe damage. This is my sketch of the layout. A bit rough but, in conjunction with the text above, gives some idea of the layout. Note how close the bomb sits to the wing surface. The original sketch was done to 1/24 so if you print it at 50%, it should come out close to 1/48. Bloody small at that scale. I used brass shim when I made mine but, leftover etched parts sheet could also be used. The rack mounted under a Spitfire VIII wing. The suspension lug can be seen protruding just below the wing surface. That's the IFF rod antenna at left. A58-308, the trials aircraft, fitted with British bombs under the fuselage and starboard wing and, an American bomb under the port wing. The 'things' on the inboard side of the wing bombs are cannon shell deflectors. As far as I can ascertain these were not used operationally, the procedure being to drop the bombs, before firing cannon. And, yes, the red pitot-static tube is a back story. I had noted in the past on some kit and decal instruction sheets the colour callout for the pitot-static is often given as red. I made the point with Eduard when doing the book for the Aussie Eight kit - and what call out did they put on the instruction sheet - red! As any aerodynamicist will tell you do not paint pitot-static tubes or any static vent. They are left in their natural metal colour - in the Spitfire's case, a brass/bronze colour. All that bomb rack stuff is pretty small on a 1/48 model. I reckon a small block between the bomb and the wing and some shim / etched leftover / very fine plasticard should suffice. Oh, and they appear to painted gloss black enamel. Peter M

I almost feel like a voyeur looking at, knowing what Norman Cullen didn’t know when it was taken. Yeah, my heart paused for a moment, when I realised what the photo might mean. The ICM kit comes with reasonably close facsimiles of the bomb rack and luckily I’ve already attached their bases in the right place. The RAAF designed racks were different to the UK racks. They were based on the units used on P-40s. The bomb release was actually inside the wing with steadying stays made from bent metal bar. I can send you some info on this if you want. If I may push my luck, the spinner appears to me to be red, would you agree? No. Most Foliage Green Spits had the spinner overpainted in that colour too. In this case, since the spinner was originally White, I think FG or Black were more likely. Even No.457 had to abandon the Red spinners hen they moved on from Morotai. I have mixed and applied RAAF Sky Blue on the underside. Correct. The give-away is the lack of stencilling under the wing. We Aussies don't believe in making work when it's unnecessary - leave that to the Poms. When the RAAF re-painted, or over-painted, they did not bother with replacing the stenciling. None visible on that A/C - ergo, it was Sky Blue. Oh, and please don't paint the pitot-static tube Red. Cheers, Peter

Mark, I've been doing a little research, trawling through photos. I found the shot below. It was taken on 10 July 1945 at Tarakan. The aircraft is one of four from No. 452 Sqn taking off from Croydon Strip for a raid on Japanese installations at Taweo, East Borneo. The photo is available On the AWM site as 111110, but I think you will find this one is of better quality. According to the A51 sheet, the four aircraft were: A58-636, (QY-D), S/L Barclay A58-504, (QY-R), F/O Watson A58-518, (QY-O), F/L Cullen A58-619, (QY-G), F/O Dehnent This gells well with the Aircraft Casualty Report, which I assume you have accessed. The codes have been added by me. Both 636 and 619 were HF.VIII and had light coloured spinners, so the aircraft in the pic is neither of those. Other photos I have of 504 show that the 'wrap around' of the upper surface camouflage where the white leading edges have been overpainted extends further aft than the aircraft in the photo. Therefore, I believe that this is probably a shot of F/L Cullen taking off in A58-518 on the day he and 518 were lost. A58-504 showing the 'wrap around' on the LE. It extends musch farther aft than in the photo above. So, do not paint your LEs white. The model will aslo look good with a couple of 500 pounders under the wings, but those RAAF racks are a pain in the proverbial to make. Many No. 452 Sqn A/C still had the No. 8o Wing emblem on the rudder at this time, some did not, so you will have to use artistic license there. Peter M

Mark, Is it your intention to model A58-518 as she was in December 1944, (as depicted in the photo you posted and, as flown by F/O Jack Pretty when he scored a kill on Christmas eve 1944. Another shot is OG1971 that shows the codes and seial), or as she was in July 1945 when she was lost? If the latter, the photos of her as CR-C are of no use. G/C Caldwell left No.80 Wing in April 1944, (G/C Cooper Taking over), and A58-518 was absorbed back into No. 452 Sqn and re-coded QY-O. She was flown initially by 'B' Flight commander, F/L Freckleton, then F/L Cormack, and by quite a number of other pilots including F/L Colyer and F/L Cullen. She also acquired underwing bomb racks after she returned to No. 452 Sqn. Incidentally, Caldwell never had two spare Spitfire aircraft. He was assigned A58-484 in December 1944 and flew her until he got A58-528, (an HF), in March. During that period A59-518 was held as a back up. Re the general finish of A58-518. Built as MT618. Finished in the standard RAF Day Fighter Scheme of Dark Gree / Ocean Grey / Medium Sea Grey. 19/7/44. Rec'd No. 1 AD. Erected there. 6/9/44. Rec'd No. 14 Aircraft Repair Depot Replacement Pool. 20/10/44. Rec'd No. 9 RSU. Here she was re-camouflaged in the RAAF colours of Foliage Green over Sky Blue. 10/12/44. Rec'd No 452 Sqn and held as back up for G/C Caldwell. The over-painting in RAAF colours was done free-hand, by spray painting. Hence, the demarcation between the upper and lower colours was not sharp, or straight, as there was no masking and, there was overspray between the two colours. Peter M

Yes, and applied by the same unit! All those aircraft were erected by, and had threir stores numbers appled by, No.1 Aircraft Depot. RAAF aircraft were not given serial numbers in the manner of RAF aircarft but, rather, stores identification numbers. 'A' stood for aircraft, '58' for the type of aircraft and, '315' was the individual item. A58-315, (JF934), was in the first batch of 19 Mk.VIII Spitfires received in October 1943. She went to No. 1 AD where she was erected, given a quick coat of Foliage Green over her Middle Stone, and had her RAAF stores number applied She then went straight to the Special duties Flight of No. 1 AD, where she served until 1946. (SDF later became No.1 Aircraft Performance Unit) A58-395, (JG377), and A58-405,(JG467), were received in February 1944. Both were assembled at No.1 AD and repainted in Foliage Green over Sky Blue and had their RAAF stores number applied. As noted by Finn, the style of lettering used in the stores number had changed by then. The photo above was taken in April 1944 when A58-315 was escort to a flight of Spitfires flying from Melbourne to Lawnton and Strathpine, near Brisbane, to form the initial equipment of the recenttly arrived RAF squadrons 548 and 549. This was a relatively short hop for the RAAF ferry pilots. Although A58-395 and A58-405 were fresh from the paint shop, A58-315 had spent an eventful five months of test flying from Laverton near Melbourne and had spent much of her time parked outside in a hot Melbourne summer. This accounts for her 'Flory wash' appearance, noted by @Biggles87. Peter M PS. Reminds me of the time I was approached by a decal manufacturer who wanted me to give him the size and shape for generic Sky Blue code letters for the RAAF Spitfire squadrons. When I explained that each squadron had its own unique style, several squadrons changed this at least once and, that it would require in the order of 10 to 12 sheets to cover all the squadrons he lost interest. Can't understand why. 🙄

As you say Finn, no rule without exception. My reply was brief, as I had some earlier correspondence with Vlad, and I was pretty sure that he was building an operational RAAF MK.VIII. There was at least one RAAF Spitfire Mk.VIII fitted with the HF antenna wire running from the aerial mast to the top of the rudder. This A/C was used as an escort for Spitfires undertaking the long flight from the south of Australia to the airfields in northern Australia and New Guinea. RAAF Spitfires were only fitted with VHF radio and could not communicate with long-range escort A/C, such as Hudsons, Venturas, etc., that were providing navigation guidance and weather watch. Relying on keeping the escort A/C in sight was fraught with danger for the Spitfires if bad weather was encounted. Therefore, A58-315 was specially modified for the Special Duties Flight of No. 1 Aircraft Depot to provide a fast leader and, It was fitted with HF radio so the pilot could communicate with bases along the route for weather updates as well as other escort A/C. The triangular piece on top of the mast, that you mentioned Finn, can be seen on A58-315, as well as the tensioning fitting atop the rudder. Two of the standard Spitfire VIII A/C of the flight being escorted can be seen in the background. Peter M

No antenna wire on Mk.VIII Spits. The VHF antenna is in the aerial mast. Peter M

OK, so you are modelling A79-626. The CFS did not change the size and positioning of the roundels on the aircraft it assigned to the Telstars. The markings changes were confined to the nose where the side number was reduced in size and the Telstars emblem added. Here is another shot of A79-626 in September 1966. As you can see she has roundels in an outboard position. I believe that these are 36" roundels aligned as I stated above. The upper wing roundels would have been in the same position. And a flight of Vampire trainers in an earlier scheme, clearly showing the standars size and position of the wing roundels. Later the area of the dayglo on the upper wings was reduced as it faded badly under the Aussie sun. HTH, Peter M

My apologies Steve. I thoght that I was just backing up your original post. Thanks for putting it up. Peter

As I indicated above, the trainers can be a bit of a minefield. You will have to more specific re A/C and year. Photos of the Telstar's A/C you are modelling will help. Even then I may not be able to give an answer. If you can'y post here, PM me with your email and I will respond. Peter M

Nothing new, but this AMO confirms what Steve has already stated re RAN Vampires. NOTE: Roundels on RAAF Vampires were not the same as above. On RAN A/C the underwing roundels were moved out towards the tips to make room for the 'NAVY' lettering. On RAAF F.30 and FB.31 A/C, the roundels on the upper and lower wing surfaces were further inboard, both being in the same spanwise position. The center of the roundel was the same station as the outer edge of the aileron trim tab. In both cases the diameter was 36". Trainer aircraft differed yet again but, I am assuming you are working with the recent Airfix single-seater kit. Peter M

I can't help with drawings - should have asked 20 years ago! Do these photos of the Vamp at the RAAF Museum, taken some time ago, help? I tried to get as close to profile and front elevation as I could. Plan view would have been a little more difficult. 🤔 Peter M plus one on a CAF A/C.

Vlad, I've sent an email. Let me know if you've got it. Peter M

Incidentally, the caption with that OG2410 photo is a load of man-vegetables. The photo was taken at Sattler, near Darwin, in January 1945. A58-606 was the first A/C to be painted in the Grey Nurse scheme. Peter M PS: Is this what what is called a smart editor? I wrote "man-vegetables", not, "man-vegetables". OK so it cannot be Bo...ocks. 🙄

Vlad, I'm not quite clear as to whether you intend to build your model as TE308 or A58-606, Bruce Watson's kite, (CO of 457 Sqn at that time and he was responsible for the instigation of the Grey Nurse shark scheme). If you intend the latter PM me with your email, as I can help with info and photos. The aircraft markings changed several times, but the basic paint work remained the same. Basically, if you want a nice clean A/C, the small shark mouth version is the way to go. If you want an aircraft showing the wear and tear of of six months of hard flying look for one of the late war large shark mouth variants. Peter Malone

A quick comment re interpreting photos to try and ascertain whether the bracing wires were on a particular aircraft. While I totally agree that the modeller should always refer to photos of his/her subject, there can be traps involved. Be wary of using photos that have been printed in a book or magazine. It is hard enough to ascertain small details on well-printed, large, original photos or high-quality scans, let alone small poorly printed or scanned photos. Generally photos reproduced in books and magazines have been printed using the offset process. Offset printing can only print a single solid colour – it cannot print tones of that colour. In order to print a photograph with its many tones, the original photo is broken up into a series of dots. This is done by photographing the original through a lattice work silk screen: the resulting film is then used to make the printing plate. The actual process can be quite complicated so I won’t go into it in detail. One of the major factors affecting the quality of the resultant printed halftone is the size of the holes in the screen. The larger the hole, the larger the printed dots and, therefore the lower the quality of the printed halftone: the smaller the hole, the higher quality of the halftone. Clearly cost becomes a major factor as a high quality print requires high quality paper and superior quality inks. Publishers have to make a choice between cost of the product and adequate print reproduction. The viewer needs to be aware that the fidelity of the printed photo will always be lower than the original photo. When the original print is ‘broken up’ some fine detail can be lost. This is particularly relevant in this case, as we are trying to see quite fine detail in the bracing wires. Even if the bracing wires were present on the aircraft and even visible in the original print, they will be lost in the screening process and printed photo. So, even if you can’t see a small detail in the photo, it is not valid to say it was not there. Peter M PS: I have found the varying thicknesses of filaments used in print screens to make great antenna wires. They are strong, can be stretched to make them taut and, easily fixed in place with cyanoacrylate glue.

Peter, Early Avro 652 aircraft did not have the fin/tailplane bracing wires. The A4 RAAF A/C I listed were all K series A/C - K6212 to K6223 - from the second half of the first Anson Mk.I production batch. Perhaps the mod came in in the early part of that batch. My hypothesis at this stage, and I have no data to back this up, is that the bracing wires were added to 'stiffen' the fin after the turret was fitted to the Avro 652. The turret would have produced a turbulent flow field that would have passed over the fin, possibly inducing fin/rudder oscillations and degrading stability. As I said before, over to the Anson experts. Perhaps @Graham Boak may have some thoughts on the subject? Peter M

Thanks for the great photos Carl, and Chis for putting them up. I have had a quick scan of my collection of RAAF Anson photos. Where I could not discern from the photo whether the A/C had the bracing wires or not, I have made no conclusion re those photos. The RAAF Anson I photos on which I can clearly see the fin to tailplane bracing are: A4-1, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 17, 19, 20, 29, 31, 34, 35, 38, 41, 43, 44, 45. L9161, 9162. N1331, 1336, 4868, 4879, 4918, 4926, 4960, 4965, 4970, 4977, 5003. R3350, 3543, 3558, 9775, 9896. W1530, 1534, 1587, 1589, 2054, 2078, 2083, 2111, 2114, 2133, 2481, 2522, 2556, 2564, 2598, 2599. AW665, 848, 879, 963. AX439, 642. DG733, 924, 934. DJ213, 231, 287, 387, 417. EG425, 426, 504, 531. MG168, 448, 454, 655, 898, 973. While this is only a small sample, it does cover a fairly wide range of serials and, therefore, I believe that it would be a reasonable conclusion that all Ansons in these serial ranges were fitted with this bracing wire on production and that it not a service modification. The above aircraft include those finished in aluminium dope, overall yellow, RAF camouflage, and RAAF camouflage, so this has no bearing on whether the bracing wires were fitted. Incidentally, this bracing is also evident on an Anson Mk.12 A/C, NL153, and an Anson Mk.19 A/C, VM375, that found their way to the RAAF, so the wires may have been on all Ansons. Over to the Anson experts, Peter M

Not IFF. Rigging/bracing wires. Streamlined section, (RAF wires?), running from rudder post at top elevator hinge attachment to tailplane main spar at centre elevator hinge attachment. There is a tension adjusting device, (turnbuckle?) at the tailplane end. Presumably there to carry excessive downloads on tailplane. Peter M