Test Graham

What I've seen suggested, but not tried myself, is to use the blank sheets. Paint them first with the interior colour and then with the external camouflage, so that when applied they appear more appropriate.

Microscale did do some sets with stripes of constant colour, as opposed to overall sheets, so if you could find them they'd do for what you want.

You don't say which Mk.I. If you have the Mk.I/II boxing, you'll also have the oil cooler. The canopy may also be different from that in the basic Mk.I, but from the sound of it you'll have covered that.

My usual sources for decals are Hannants, Flightdecals, and Fantasy Print Shop. If you can't find them on any of those you're probably out of luck. There was an individual selling blank transfer sheets a few years ago, that you could paint whatever colour you wished. Over the years I've had, or still have, such coloured sheets from a number of companies but I don't think any of them are still active.

The requisite propeller diameters might be a hint, if that is known. The aircraft will have been designed for the less powerful inline BMW VIs, whereas the more powerful Bramos would need a larger prop requiring a wing rebuild to move the engines further out. The wing will have undergone a redesign anyway when moving from a fabric-covered structure where all loads are carried by the internal structure, to the later stress-skinned design where some of the loads are carried by the skinning. It would seem an ideal opportunity to do the two redesigns as one.

At least one Matilda and Bren (Universal?) carrier. Presumably more Army vehicles. I've not seen any reference to an official name, only to references to stone walls as on the island. ("brick" does lead to the question English bond or Flemish bond?) Mike Starmer calls it the "rubble" scheme in his page on the MAFVA site www.mafva.net/resources.htm with suggested colours.

Thanks NIck, this helped a lot. The two Marylands operating out of Aden were AX670 (ex French 102, shot down over Diredawa 16.12.40) and AX671. (ex French 82 Missing on recce over Djibouti 8.9.4 - presumably 1940 too.) There were in a fascinatingly mixed batch of impressed aircraft with AX serials, all consecutively allocated, and including Marylands AX689 (ex 1174 Spun in Heliopolis 4.4.41); AX690 (ex 1170 soc 23.3.43) both to 39 Sq.; AX692 (ex 1167 belly landed Shandur 4.11.41); AX693 (ex 1173, s.o.c. 14.3.43) both to 223 Sq. and AX696 (ex 1191 - to SAAF) The last five were all diverted from French contracts rather than being ex-French. Perhaps someone can explain why the jump from numbers around 100 to over 1100, I don't think it a simple progression.

AR733 was a standard RAF Maryland, the serial being in the middle of a run of such aircraft. Aircraft impressed into RAF service in the Middle East were given serials in the HK range. Marylands taken up this way include HK836, origin unknown; HK845 presumed ex-Vichy, struck off charge 22.2.42, and HK865, with no known record of service. I suggest this was probably 114/2, if that aircraft received a serial at all. The earliest aircraft is presumably the one operated from Aden that was lost in the East African campaign. There may be more said about this in "Dust Clouds in the Middle East."

Give him seven points, Mr Fry. Thanks for the access. The other pages do have other yellows, but I think I'd add that the Blue Gray is Very Interesting.

I understood that the lighter of the SEA greens (34079) was replaced by a brighter, yuckier, Medium Green, perhaps this was 340092? Certainly this was seen on other types, I can't say for the RF-4C. I believe these colours were available in Xtracolour. There has been continued confusion over these two Medium Greens, with some Australian warbirds being painted in the "modern" colour rather than the more(ish) correct 34079 (Medium Green 42). But then the correct shade of green for WW2 Australian types is another tin of worms, not to be investigated here! PS This posting delayed by link failure - I think Richard E has covered much the same ground.

I don't think those are torpedoes - look more like the RAF trailer with oxygen bottles. They appear too thin, too short for torpedoes, and also rather too casual for what would be a lot of high explosive. Not to mention enough weight to bend the axles of the trailer. The RN bought whatever lorries they needed at the time, rather than entering into steady relationships with any producer. They had some Matadors, and Bedford QLTs certainly got around so an RN one doesn't seem out-of place for bringing the crew. It's a shame the photo isn't quite wide enough to have caught the vehicle at far right - how good are we at identifying front wheel arches? Looks more Tilly sized than a 3-tonner.

Thanks for that. No Dark Sea Grey or Extra Dark Sea Grey either, despite the presence of the Slate Greys. Or Yellow... I think there must have been at least one other page to this. (If such is mentioned on the link, I'm sorry that it doesn't work for me either - until I sort out a more memorable password anyway!)

Not ailerons but horizontal tailplane? Could the windows for the ballast weights be necessary not for the ground crew but as part of the pilot's pre-flight checks? The weights would not be a one-off fix but added/removed depending upon the load (eg gunner and gun) carried in the back. Such weights can be seen carried externally on the Hawker biplanes in the Hart family.

Yes. They had inner and outer segments.

Not only part of the original French order but operated by the French and obtained, in some manner, by Warburton. After a visit to North Africa? Or was it a defector to Gibraltar? The French-operated aircraft were painted after delivery: those diverted to the UK were all painted in RAF camouflage. Other (1 at least, I think 2) defected French Marylands were operated from Aden in support of the East African campaign and presumably these retained their French camouflage too.

Prewar maybe, but in wartime orders were placed by the thousand. Production batches were considerably smaller, dependent upon manufacturer and type. The recent book Consolidated Mess gives some indication of this for B-24 production. What you did get was considerable expansion of factory space. Sometimes these were new factories altogether, and they'd need to be organised by experienced staff, either from the aircraft industry or elsewhere. They might well start with smaller runs of competitor products because the intended main production type wasn't ready. There won't be a single simple answer that fits all cases. A specific example might be the Blackburn Roc, built in small numbers by Boulton Paul in their new factory at Wolverhampton in advance of the full establishment of Defiant production. In this case there is the obvious link of the powered turret. Another might be Fairey's factory at Stockport, built for Halifax production, whilst production of Fairey's Swordfish was handed over to Blackburn because of their own lack of a suitable production type, clearing the main Fairey factory for later designs. I don't know a good source for such a description of the US industry as a whole, but for the UK I can recommend Sebastian Richie's Industry and Air power, The Expansion of British Aircraft Production 1935-1941, from Cass ISBN 07146343-2.

I hope kev gets his Sea Vixen, but the moral is plain and probably has been since Hasegawa stated it outright in the late 90s. If you want a model, get it when you see it. Leave it on the shelf and it may not be there when you get back. This does lead to stash-building which is not to everyone's taste, but has the supplementary benefit of supporting the model trade which feeds back to increased production of models, both new and old. Plus, it seems, a vibrant trade in second-hand models as modelling priorities change!

Because the undercarriage gets in the way underneath. Mounting them closer to the fuselage would have increased the drag because of interference between the bodies (I haven't seen that said so it's a presumption but an informed one). Having them over the wing increases the drag anyway so is always the position of last choice - or rather no choice.

You don't say what it was you were planning to do beforehand. The 4-blade prop needs the big tailplane, which was seen on aircraft with 3-blade props built before the new prop was available. Excuse me if you knew that already, but this is not something that has always been recognised by modellers or manufacturers.

Brush some of the paint onto some scrap plastic and see how it dries. If it does, then it's something you did mix it with. If it doesn't, you have a duff tin. It happens. I painted a Hurricane model with three different Humbrol colours yesterday and they all dried fine. Other people have had trouble with WEM - you didn't - or Xtracolour and I hated the Tamiya acrylics I tried.

Just one qualification: the first Mk.IC were requested to be in Temperate Land Scheme. On 4th January 1941 HQ Coastal Command reminded HQ 41 Group Maintenance Command of this, because two aircraft had been delivered uncamouflaged, in grey primer. The colours eventually applied to these aircraft is discussed in detail in Paul Lucas' Britain Alone, from Aviation Workshop Publications. I suspect the deliveries to Coastal Command will have been altered to TSS ahead of any deliveries to Australia. However, TLS was officially the standard scheme for overseas deliveries, as you will no doubt recall from the discussion over the mistaken Tropical Land Scheme.

However historically interesting, the sample presented here is too vague to be of use for modelling purposes. For example, just how were these 60% coloured green and silver? Mottle? Upper green lower bare metal? Patchy green? Weave pattern? Tiger stripes? Or indeed, which aircraft carried these yellow roundels? Perhaps it went on to describe the unit markings on these aircraft, or any individual numbering/coding?

RAF uniform (or indeed flag) Blue was not available as an aircraft paint. Nor was the darker blue used on RAF vehicles until adoption of camouflage colours. I'd add however that the Sea Green originally mentioned above was. However, I think it possible that someone familiar with the TSS scheme might well think of Dark Slate Grey as being "sea green", and the term "sky blue" is notoriously vague.

I suspect one reason for the continuing success of this kit is because the chassis and cab can be used for so many purposes with specialist bodies - Matador Models do offer a number of these together with conversions to other manufacturers lorries with the same standard military cab.

Very nice. That settles it for one aircraft.