mhaselden

I think the whole "camouflaged to look like a farm" is bogus. There's no way that dispersal layout could ever be confused for an actual layout of multiple farm buildings. It's clearly an airfield and those are clearly structures that support aircraft-related activity. As to the steel question, yes there would be a lot of steel in the concrete structure but I suspect, volume for volume, it would be less than an entire hangar made out of the stuff. Plus a concrete structure like that can be made very quickly based on a standard pattern, hence easier to erect...and, arguably, lower maintenance.

Bear in mind that steel was a strategic wartime resource used for manufacturing all sorts of armaments...concrete not so much.

The B339-23 can only be converted into a B339C/D or E by removing a section of the forward fuselage and other detail changes, depending on the variant being modeled. The 339-23 had the longer fuselage of the F2A-3 which must be shortened to match the length of the Dutch and British Brewsters which were based on the F2A-2.

Also beware that the upper wing roundels in both kits are shown as Type A which is incorrect. The camouflaged Vildebeests had Type B roundels on the upper wing surfaces.

Going back to G-EANV, it seems there's some doubt as to whether it was written off in the February 1920 crash, despite that being the officially-recorded fate. I've ordered Bowyer's book so I can take a look at the photos of the crash. However, is it feasible that 'NV was repaired and made airworthy again? The HP 0/7 was one of the largest, most complex aircraft in the world at the time and I wonder whether the repair facilities/resources were available in South Africa to effect such a restoration?

Looking at the records for EAQZ and EAPB, the latter was built from components and sold to India in June 1920. It seems like a distinct candidate for an extra airframe used in South Africa. One other note from my relative's logbook. On 8 May 1920 he flew a load carrying test which listed 15 passengers onboard (presumably the standard 14 per the spec for the 0/7 plus one on a dickey seat somewhere?). However, that detail means we can rule out the 0/10 and 0/11 designs as there's no way they could carry that number of people.

Many thanks, Lazy8, for that very detailed update. It certainly provided a lot more detail than I'd previously been able to find. While idly perusing Handley Page serials in airhistory.org, I came across the following on the 'G-Ixxx' page (http://www.airhistory.org.uk/gy/reg_G-I.html ): "Two HP O/7 (c/n HP-10 G-EAQZ and HP-12 G-EAPB) were sent to India in June 1920 for HPIBT. There is no record of their registration in India." I wonder if they may have been routed via South Africa. Given that my relative's last 2 flights were on 5 June, that would leave plenty of time for one or both aircraft to make it to India before the end of the month. Again, this is just idle speculation on my part.

Thanks for the insights, Graham. Sounds like I need to get hold of the Barnes book. If G-IAAA remained in South Africa, then it must have done so for several months...it's hard to build an air transport business if you don't have any aircraft.

Happy with all that...but then which aircraft was my relative flying on the dates mentioned in the OP? It can't be G-EANV because that was damaged beyond repair in February 1920, and it can't be G-IAAA if that airframe was in Calcutta in March 1920. It seems the only options are: My relative's logbook is incorrect (which seems odd given the number of flights he recorded and the details included in the records). The move of G-IAAA to India took place later than March 1920, as reported, which would be odd since it was apparently sighted in Calcutta. There was at least one other HP O/7 in South Africa in the period March-June 1920. Of the above, #3 seems the most likely...but I can find no record of an additional airframe, hence my original question.

One of my relatives flew Handley Page O/7s in South Africa as part of Handley Page South Africa Transports Ltd in 1920. Unfortunately, he only identified the aircraft type in his logbook (actually, mis-identified as HP O/400) with no serial numbers. Internet googling has revealed that O/7 G-EANV crashed on 23 Feb 1920, which precedes my relative's first flight in the type in South Africa. I also found this pic, allegedly of G-IAAA, replete with Commando Brandy advertising markings: (Source: https://www.key.aero/forum/historic-aviation/147305-handley-page-o-7?p=3431392) On a side-note to the above, there's something odd happening under the tail of this airframe as the close-up below shows (source as per above): Apparently, G-IAAA was seen in Calcutta in March 1920 which, again, precedes the first flight by my relative which took place in South Africa on 27 March 1920. So...do any of the Britmodeller experts out there have any other ideas of which airframe(s) my relative may have flown? His flights took place on: 27 and 29 March; 3, 14 and 20 April; 8 and 15 May (4 flights on the latter date, all local around Cape Town), and; 5 June (2 flights on this date). Since the HP commercial venture in South Africa folded in September 1920, info about this enterprise is extremely limited. Any and all pointers/ideas would be hugely appreciated, as well as any additional pics of these rare birds. Thanks in advance, Mark

Concur. It's an Ox-box.

Gents, Many thanks for all the ideas. Sorry it's taken me so long to respond. The Combrig model looks pretty interesting. I suspect I'd have to buy 2 of them and somehow combine them to get the extra length....and that starts to get spendy if I try to hunt out the 1/350th scale versions (although that's the more interesting scale to me. Then again, at the rate I build models, it may take me years to get this project off the ground.

Realize this is an extreme long-shot (not least since the OP hasn't been on the site since March 2019) but any ship modelling experts out there in Britmodeller-land have suggestions for how I might make a model of HMS Argyll? A relative was serving aboard her when she ran aground in 1915 and I'd like to depict the ship as she looked....just prior to being wrecked, of course. My Google-fu suggests there isn't a decent model of the Devonshire Class cruisers (I did find a 1/1350th scale waterline representation but it looks basic in the extreme). Scratchbuilding something as big as a cruiser is probably beyond my capabilities so if there isn't a kit out there that can reasonably be converted, I may have to admit defeat. Any (printable and non-mocking) thoughts/ideas would be very much appreciated.

Concur that the different colour across the tope of the rudder is simply a trick of the light due to the angle of the surface facing the sun more than that immediately below the rib. If you look towards the tail on the second image, the colours above and below the rib get closer the further aft one looks until, right at the trailing edge of the rudder, they are virtually identical. As to the overall scheme, it looks like a real hodge-podge of touch-ups. Originally it would have been Dark Earth and Dark Green. When 47 Sqn started flying Wellesleys those, too, were DE/DG. I see little reason for a hand-me-down that still wear's its former unit's code identities (47 Sqn Wellesleys also had KU codes) to be repainted in Middle Stone. I think the effect we're seeing on this airframe is simply overpainting in new dope, probably dark green, in selected areas, probably reflecting patching.

THUM Flight Spitfires were overall PRU Blue. Spinner colour varied depending on the airframe. Specific colours aren't documented so you'll need to make a best guess based on the tonal values seen on monochrome photos. I'm not sure if the camera windows were retained or faired over. I've yet to find a contemporary image showing the under fuselage.

The colour scheme shown in the flypast matches the scheme shown earlier in the clip - the black port underside is visible in the earlier clip of the Hurricanes taking off. In late 1940, Fighter Command directed that the port undersides of wings should be painted black while the starboard wing underside retained the original Sky colour. The scheme wasn't around for very long but it is correct for an airframe operated in the period late 1940 thru early 1941.

I've been trying to find a photo of that scheme for years with no success, which is a shame because it's a really attractive scheme. The closest I came was this line-up of Persian Furies which appears to show colour applied to the wheel covers which isn't present in the company photos. If I squint really hard, I can almost make myself believe that the 6th aircraft from left might have a divided scheme with a different colour applied to the upper fuselage compared to the sliver bottom half of the fuselage...but I have no doubt that it's only shadow and that the aircraft, in reality, were overall silver.

The outline of the ship and the swastika would have been added after the Lutzow mission. The name "Wreck" may have preceded the mission or it may have been added just prior to the official photo as a bit of fun. Regardless, in 1/72 scale the nose art will be very, VERY small indeed.

This photo shows some interesting details and appears to confirm L9939 as AW-W "Wreck". https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/uk/raf/beaufort/raf-crew-by-beaufort-aw-w-l9939-1941/ Details here about the loss of L9939 in October 1941, which repeats the above linked image and directly associates it with the Lutzow attack: http://aircrewremembered.com/turner-godfrey.html

XIII Sqn painted their Tonka GR1a's in winter camo during a deployment to Norway in 1993. I have photos but, alas, they're not accessible right now. However, there's a side profile on this website which gives some indication of the scheme. There are some additional pics of the scheme on this Britmodeller thread:

And the cows get bigger, right? 😃

I agree misidentification is most likely in this case. Given that G4Ms were active in the area from 1942 onwards, it would be odd for the author to misidentify such a well-known type. I wonder if the aircraft might have been a Ki-49?

You're practically neighbours...er, sorry...neighbors. See? I'm bilingual.

I think the difference between G11 and G12 is not specific to a fighter or bomber variant. It simply reflects that some Blenheims had a portion of the front glazing overpainted. Here's an example of a bomber Blenheim with nose glazing overpainted:

When you say "inboard of the flap" do you mean inboard of the aileron? I'm not being pedantic...I just want to be sure I'm looking at the right part of the wing. I can see the gas patch just inboard of the aileron. AFAIK, there wasn't a fixed location for gas patches across all squadrons.