Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by WLJayne

  1. I've come up with a much simpler set of guidelines based on periods, and factory or field finish. This might be a bit more digestible! Rudder DTD 308 patch: All periods. Tail "JACK HERE" and "ELECTRICAL" panel: All periods. Wing walkway lines, "WALK INBOARD," "NOT TO BE WALKED ON," "WHEEL UP WHEN INDICATOR FLUSH" markings: All periods. Filler cap "FUEL 100 OCTANE CAPACITY 85 GALS" on fuselage: Autumn 1940 factory/MU applied Earth/Green/Sky onwards (I can't see this in earlier photos.) DTD 314 patches on fuselage stbd side tail and under canopy: Autumn 1940 factory/MU applied Earth/Green/Sky onwards (I can't see these in earlier photos.) Underside DTD 308 aileron/elevator and DTD 314 underside wing and horizontal stabilizer patches: All periods with the exception of unit applied makeshift "Sky" undersides June-Aug 1940 and pre 1939. Half white on Night & White schemes. Wing trestle lines: All schemes with the exception of unit applied makeshift "Sky" undersides June-Aug 1940 and pre 1939. DTD 472/B oil filler cap on port side nose: Autumn 1940 factory/MU applied Earth/Green/Sky onwards (I can't see this in earlier photos.) "WT OR BALLAST FIRST AID" on port side fuselage hatch over roundel: I haven't found any photos of Mk.I/II spits with this, have any of you? I hope that makes more sense!! Will.
  2. Hi all, I've been reading around as much as I can, both in all my books and using the search function here and google, and it would be great if you knowledgeable folks could give me a bit of a "sanity check" on my plans for stencils in our seventeen (why did I pick so many) early Merlin powered Spitfire schemes in the different 1/144 kit boxes and extra decal sets. From reading books by Lucas, Postlethwaite, Goulding, Scott & Madgwick et al as well as what I can find online, I've come up with this a proposed plan: Spitfire Mk.I Early Box: K9795, 1939: Upper wing stencils and walkway lines, DTD 308 rudder patch, jacking points, electrical panel. K9799, 1939: Upper wing stencils and walkway lines, DTD 308 rudder patch, jacking points, electrical panel. Spitfire Mk.Ia Box: P9546 QV-H, Sept '40 [George Unwin:] Upper wing stencils and walkway lines , DTD 308 rudder patch, jacking points, electrical panel. R6595 DW-O, June '40 [John Ellis:] Upper wing stencils and walkway lines, DTD 308 rudder patch, jacking points, electrical panel. Spitfire Mk.I PR Box: K9969 DP, Winter '41: Upper wing stencils and walkway lines only. X4784 ZW, Spring '42: Upper wing stencils and walkway lines only. Spitfire Mk.IIa/b Box: P7666 EB-Z, Dec '40 [Donald Finlay:] Upper wing stencils and walkway lines, fuel and oil cap stencils, trestle lines, full DTD patches, jacking points, electrical panel. P8342 UZ-N, Aug '41 [Marcin Machowiak:] Upper wing stencils and walkway lines, fuel and oil cap stencils, trestle lines, full DTD patches, jacking points, electrical panel. Spitfire Mk.I Vs Bf109 Box: N3196 XT-L, Sept '40 [Gerald Stapme Stapleton:] Upper wing stencils and walkway lines, DTD 308 rudder patch, jacking points, electrical panel. Dunkirk Spitfires decal set: N3250 GR-S, May/June '40 [Alan Wright:] Upper wing stencils and walkway lines, trestle lines, DTD 308 rudder/elevator/aileron patches, DTD 314 wing underside patches (half white,) jacking points, electrical panel. N3200 QV, May/June '40 [Geoffrey Stephenson:] Upper wing stencils and walkway lines, trestle lines, DTD 308 rudder/elevator/aileron patches, DTD 314 wing underside patches (half white,) jacking points, electrical panel. Spitfire Aces 1 decal set: K9953 ZP-A, July '40 [Adolf Sailor Malan:] Upper wing stencils and walkway lines, DTD 308 rudder patch, jacking points, electrical panel. N3183 KL-B, July '40 [Alan Deere:] Upper wing stencils and walkway lines, DTD 308 rudder patch, jacking points, electrical panel. 610 Squadron decal set: P9502 DW-Q, June '40 [William Henry Cromwell:] Upper wing stencils and walkway lines, DTD 308 rudder patch, jacking points, electrical panel. P9495 DW-K, June '40[Stanley John Arnfield:] Upper wing stencils and walkway lines, DTD 308 rudder patch, jacking points, electrical panel. 457 Sqn RAAF decal set: X4817 BP-C, Sept '41 [Keith Kolyer:] Upper wing stencils and walkway lines, fuel and oil cap stencils, trestle lines, full DTD patches, jacking points, electrical panel. P8175 BP-R, Oct '41 [Alf Glendinning:] Upper wing stencils and walkway lines, fuel and oil cap stencils, trestle lines, full DTD patches, jacking points, electrical panel. Basically, the only spits on that list with a "full house" are the Mk.IIs and very late Mk.Is as far as I can tell. Lots of photos showing a DTD patch on the canvas rudder stbd side from 39-40. I haven't found any photos showing fuselage DTD patches from 1939 to late 1940. There are some other schemes we are doing as bonus decals, and some of those represent pre-sky underside schemes, in which case case I will include the trestle lines and underside DTD patches which would all have been overpainted when the AMO for sky came through. But it seems to me like a full suite of DTD 308/314 patches and other small stencils only start to appear on photos of spits out of factories and MU's close to the end of 1940 and into 41 before the change to DTD 83/517 which is more of a MkV era thing. At least, that's what I have observed from the photos I can find which isn't exhaustive - even the later 1940 sky underside with roundel schemes appear not to have trestle lines. I suppose this is because the ground crew had been ordered to repaint in sky in summer, then add roundels in autumn but never did the stencils in the field. Does that all sound reasonable? This is the last thing to decide before I start exporting all the final art files for both decals and profiles for the instructions. I really hope that together we can get to a solution that is acceptable, even if some of it may end up being an educated best guess. Thanks all! Will.
  3. That's sad to hear @Peter Roberts, but it's clear how knowledgeable and respected he was. I've sent a letter to Paul Lucas about the stencils, I know most BoB spits would have had minimal stencils but the kit also covers earlier Mk1s as well as MkIIs, so if I have a set of stencils that work well for any configuration (as an educated guess which I think is the best we can do) then that adds something to the kits. I'm glad to see @Mark Postlethwaite confirming my suspicions in that other thread that "If I were to hazard a guess I would say the lower demarcation was used up until the factory changed from black and white undersides to sky." This is also something I reckoned would be a good rule of thumb and had planned on adopting where I couldn't get photo proof. But it makes sense, you're ground crew who have been ordered to repaint many aircraft undersides in great haste with whatever materials you can get - you won't have the stencils or masks that the factory had and I doubt you have the time to faff about with tape. So you pick the easiest panel line to paint to, and voila! It does appear that many effective time saving methods that were developed on the field eventually became standard factory finish, which again makes sense as they were trying to churn them out quickly while reducing costs.
  4. Shout out to @Edgar, just read your 2011 comments on a thread about WT inspection stencils, really helpful! I've just gone in and changed them all to DTD 308 which was the cellulose in use before DTD 517 synthetic was introduced in 1942. Furthermore, this week Paul Lucas kindly sent me through a copy of his July and August colour conundrum articles in SAM, in which he includes evidence that units were ordered never to mix DTD 314 (synthetic) with DTD 308 (cellulose) in order to mix their own "sky" colours during the summer of 1940. So I'm pretty sure that all these stencils on early Merlin spitfires would be DTD 308 out of the factory? You would of course not see under surface stencils on any RAF fighters that had been repainted in the field, until sky became factory standard, and old aircraft passed through various MUs for overhauls and maintenance. I had been using P9444 (in the Science Museum) as a reference as I have excellent and very clear photos of the stencils, but that must have gone through an MU (or restoration) and been repainted, as all the WT patches show DTD 517, save for the port elevator which is still marked DTD 308. Am I in the right ballpark in thinking that upper surfaces were finished in DTD 308 from 39-42 ish? The devil really is in the details! EDIT: Just been re-reading Camouflage and Markings, and now I'm thinking that DTD 314 may have been used on metal areas, with DTD 308 on doped canvas such as tails. Later these were replaced by 517 and 83 respectively. You're not going to be able to tell on the model, but it would be nice if it were correct on the stencil diagram at least. Will keep reading but any input here would be useful.
  5. Many thanks @Grey Beema! That's high praise indeed and we'd be delighted if modellers who usually build in larger scales give these a go. I am going to ask Piotr if A & B masks would be possible, I'm sure people would appreciate them. It's something I've thought about before but not had the headspace to action yet. I think once all these decals and boxes are off for print, it would be a good thing to look into so they're ready when the kits go on sale. @Troy Smith someone on my discord asked if we could include strut/wheel colour information on the profiles, which is actually a great idea but a huge can of worms. I'm currently trying to digest your comprehensive comments on another thread about it, but I hope you'll forgive me if I end up have a few points that I might need help with . I think what's likely is that I'll end up with "best guess rules" for it based on serial numbers and the profile's time period.
  6. Many thanks for that @Troy Smith I've been trying to get my hands on that and not yet found it, so that's ideal. @Peter Roberts I imagine the spec for that paint border was changed in the factories in the summer or autumn, but the pattern generally seems to be that what was done (sometimes hastily) in the field in accordance with the various AMOs eventually became standard factory finishes. So I think it's possible that N3196 might have been painted this way when its underside was repainted from night and white in whatever "sky" shade it had, as it was an earlier airframe that would have been painted in the field along with the others which we have more photos of. Hopefully I'll be able to confirm the plausibility of that through the Hooton article and others.
  7. Hi chaps, I've worked a bit more on Stapme's profile. I'm pretty happy with it at this point and it's a work in progress for how the profiles will look in the A5 colour printed instructions. It's just missing decal numbers and perhaps some detail notes. The Medium Sea Grey codes might look a bit dark compared to other profiles, but it's a perfect match for the facsimile swatch in British Aviation Colours, as well as for the real paint swatch sent to me by Warbird Colour who restore spitfires. You can also see this darker MSG on X4650 and P9374 flying today. What do you think? EDIT: Just noticed that other 603 spits had Sky painted up to the panel line on the engine cowl at this time, it's almost certain that N3196 would have been painted in this way too. So I'll change that.
  8. I asked myself the same question, and indeed it is a reconstruction but it appears to be a restoration as you say, there's a fair bit missing and I think it was a bad exposure or the negative was damaged. However the photo below is just clear enough in the book (not my phone camera shot) to show the codes and roundel in the same positions and size. I think it's the best we're going to do nonetheless.
  9. Thanks @Peter Roberts, I'm really glad there was a photo out there. I'll have to go through all of these and try to double and triple check them before they go off to Cartograf. But I think for the most part I've more or less got a hang of the consistent inconsistency of these early markings.
  10. @Ed Russell thanks, I'm really happy I managed to get it! it's a little bit clearer in the actual photo and I'm pretty certain the fin flash is the standard 7" band one that goes from the stabs to the top of the rudder post about 3' in height, my phone's camera isn't that great sadly. I'm pretty sure the roundel would have been the previous AM standard of three concentric 5" bands, so there's only an inch difference between the codes and the roundel which seems to be what the photo shows. At 1/144 this is as I say "a gnat's chuff." But it's all coming together now! Having put the final touches to Stapme's MkIa, I'm working on Marcin Machowiak's MkIIb scheme today.
  11. Thanks @Troy, that's high praise indeed. Many of you are far more knowledgeable about these aircraft than we are, and the help we've had here and elsewhere in gathering evidence and resources has been invaluable. As you say, it's important to get these right as best we can, they may be small models but it's a hugely significant period of history that means a lot to many modellers, we want these kits to set a benchmark in the scale so we're taking our time and being as thorough as possible. We definitely bit off a huge mouthful to chew with releasing 30 schemes out of the gate between main box schemes and extra decal sets, but we hope it'll increase the appeal to those what want to collect and model. I don't think we'll do as many with future releases though. I agree with your assessment, two foot six codes seems right to me too. As for other decal sheets, it's something we can always get around to in future and I'm sure these threads will be good reference for other companies who dig around on this site for information. EDIT: Just looked again and 2'6 is far too tall compared to the photos. I'm pretty certain now that these were 2' codes, it a dead match for the photos.
  12. Gents I believe we have our answer, thanks to @Ralph's tip about Stapme's AB. What I can see here appears to be: - 35" A1 roudel - 28-30" ish codes - 7" flash bands - XT-L code order on stbd side. @Troy Smith @Peter Roberts @fishplanebeer @Ed Russell, do you see what I see :)?
  13. Indeed so, many left the production lines with the larger roundel in that period, hopefully the photo in the autobiography will help, but if it isn't there then unless anyone knows of another photo I'll probably change it over to the larger type.
  14. Many thanks Ralph! Very kind offer but no need, I just picked up a copy on ebey for a princely three quid!! Hopefully it will have the photo in it, and if not, well it'll be a darned good read!
  15. I did find the photobucket but unfortunately it was restricted. I have emailed Gary at SAM and maybe he will be able to help with this. But the more I'm thinking about it, the more I'm inclined to switch to a 49" Type A1 roundel (as seen on the 610 spits) and 29" codes. What do you think?
  16. Also I'm still on the fence abut the fuselage roundel. @Troy Smith's suggestion of a factory applied 35" roundel with the yellow band applied later is very plausible, and the only thing making me hesitant is that I can't find any other photos of spits from 603 with the large roundel in that period.
  17. I've completed a draft of this profile, based on research, photos of aircraft from the same squadron in the late summer period, best guesses and your very valuable suggestions, and I would welcome feedback on it . Features: - A Pattern camouflage scheme (suggested because of even serial and early production date.) - 7" stroke fin flashes (suggested as per May AM order) - 35" A1 fuselage roundel (suggested factory applied 25" with 5" yellow band added as per other 603 spits.) - 28" codes (suggested as per per other 603 spits - 24" seemed too small to me and code size varies a lot in this unit.) - Stb side codes read "L-XT," port side codes read "XT-L" (as per photos of other 603 spits.) - 25" underwing roundels (suggested because of photos of spifires post August AM order, but before 50" factory applied type A roundels appeared.) So as you can see, it can hardly be called a definitive scheme, and is only what I believe is plausible given available evidence, but there may be room for improvement so please let me know if you have any thoughts. Please note, colours shown are approximate and will vary due to screens etc. Suggested underside colour will be of a "sky" variety as recommended by Paul Lucas. Thanks chaps! Will.
  18. Hi Everyone, Long time since I updated this but I just wanted to thank everyone for their input on this. I've been working through all these profiles slowly and have been utilising the pile of books I now have on the subject including: - Camouflage and Markings: Supermarine Spitfire 1936-45 (James Goulding) - The Battle of Britain: Camoflage and Markings 1940 (Scott & Madgwick) - Wingleader Photo Archive: Supermarine Spitfire MkI (Mark Postlethwaite) - Camoflage & Markings No.2: The Battle For Britain - RAF (Paul Lucas) I have also been in touch with Paul to discuss some of the various points of detail and he's been of great help. A lot of it is still a best guess, where I've had to take what we know was standard(ish) in a particular timeframe during 1940, and modify it to reflect photos of other aircraft in the same unit. For example things like the size of the red dots and yellow bands in the A1 fuselage roundels, which varied quite a bit on the early airframes and serials. I've spotted a few things that other profiles and decals didn't get quite right (compared to good photos) and in some cases I've had to nail my colours to a particular post where no one really knows the truth, only what's plausible. I'm also working in 1/144, which adds its own challenges with the limitations of size! Nonetheless I hope I'll have done justice to these aircraft when I'm finished, and I'll be uploading profiles to the website when they're finished so you can see exactly what you're getting in the boxes and in the bonus decal sets. Will.
  19. That's really helpful thanks Jack! So if there's no photo that shows the actual pattern on White Outline 12, it would be reasonable enough to deduce one that's based on all the others. There are quite a few in the Wingleader book, enough to make a good guess I think.
  20. That's the same photo as the one I was referring to in the Wingleader book :). I think that Bevan probably used that profile of White 8, but checked it against this photo and kept the original splinter camo under the the RLM02, but that's just a hunch. This may end up being one of those cases where "nobody really knows but this proposed pattern is as plausible as anything else."
  21. Hi all! I have chosen this aircraft as one of our potential E-1 schemes as it's interesting and fairly brush painter friendly. The aircraft has a profile in both Wing Leader Photo Archive Me109 Units Part 3, and also the same profile in Kagero JG53 "Pik As" booklet, both of which I have. However for the life of me I can't find any photos of this aircraft's wing camo pattern and there is no plan view profile that I can find. The photos of several JG 53 Emils in WPA Part 3 show the factory applied RLM70 and RLM71 splinter scheme which has been overpainted by various patterns of RLM02 and they don't appear to follow a standard (other than the factory applied pattern below the RLM02.) There is a profile below of "White 8" which appears to be based on the photo on page 8 of WPA Pt3, where the pattern of RLM02 appears correct however they have omitted the RLM71 which I don't think is correct especially looking at the photo of White 8's wing where you can see the 70/71 contrast. Bevan Brooks did a very nice model of White Outline 12, and the RLM02 pattern looks like it's taken from White 8 but has the original RLM70/71 splinter patter showing through the gaps in the RLM02, which you would expect. https://www.largescaleplanes.com/articles/article.php?aid=2830 Unless I have missed a photo of White Outline 12 in one of the books I have or the websites I have visited, it seems that the wing camo pattern on that particular aircraft is anyone's guess. Does anyone know of a reference photo, or would bit be better to make an "educated guess" at the pattern? Thanks all!
  22. I think as with almost all of these, we can never really know. But as long as the scheme presented is plausible, then that's a good starting point for most modellers I think
  23. Those are very useful sources! Many thanks! It does seem like this has all of the parts that were added to the Emil in E-7 variants.
  24. It will but I think it'll look good even if brush painted. The other scheme in the box will be a bit less involved, but I'm trying to create as much variation and interest across the Emil range as we can :). I notice airfix has done this scheme as an E-7. Hopefully someone will be able to clear this up!
  25. Hi everyone, I'm trying work out some details about this aircraft. Some sources say it's an E-7, other an E-4. It was flown by Lt. Paul Steindl of II./JG54 in 1941. There is a lot of conflicting information on this aircraft, and as I would like to represent this scheme on our E-7 box, I want to make sure that it indeed is (or was converted to) and E-7. Also some schemes show it with yellow trailing edges, some without. It doesn't feature in any of the books I have, so if anyone can point me in the right direction that would be wonderful. Thanks so much all ! EDIT: I found another image below, it appears to be from a French book claiming that this aircraft was an E-4/B or E-7, and took part in Operation Marita in April 1941. Seems pretty reliable?
  • Create New...