Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Olmec Head

Members
  • Content Count

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

9 Neutral

About Olmec Head

  • Rank
    Newbie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Great Britain

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks Tony for another excellent set of photos and for explaining the two different door types for the Whitley. I hope that the thread will have generated interest in the Whitley and PTS. The contributions have certainly broadened my knowledge. So I think that I will go with this one as a build:
  2. As a slight diversion, there seems to have been two types of door for entering a 'para' Whitley. The first is a downward hinge door with integral ladder and the other was the more usual top opening door with lean too ladder (which I presume was the usual ladder ued in the bomber verson and as per the Airfix kit.) I would hazard a guess that the pictured door was a mod with a stronger and better ladder for ladden paratrooper access. and I have found a picture of the other entry hatch:
  3. As a slight diversion, there seems to have been two types of door for entering a 'para' Whitley. The first is a downward hinge door with integral ladder and the other was the more usual top opening door with lean too ladder (which I presume was the usual ladder ued in the bomber verson and as per the Airfix kit.) I would hazard a guess that the pictured door was a mod with a stronger and better ladder for ladden paratrooper access.
  4. Here is a rather ropey Whitley V (from the Arnhem Jim site: And this is probably the same a/c from the port side emplanning: As Tonyrot says this one looks a bit tired.
  5. Again thank you all for the excellent pictures particualry the further Whitley pictires from yourself Dogsbody. Tonyrot - I did look at your Whitley Airborne build previously Tony, it made me think about doing a PTS Whitley (if nowhere near as well). The No 1PTS link is very useful as well thanks. I did subsequently think about the PTS aircraft 'ownership'; i.e were they operated by the School as their aircraft or did the various Airborne roled transport squadrons like 297 Sqn etc fly in aircraft for live parachute training or alternatively were they long termed loaned to the school by sqns?
  6. Thanks to Stevehnz for the heads up about airliners.net, I'll be aware next time. And to Dogsbody for the Whitley Pics, Its good to see the ramrod straight RAF PJIs in the last colour photos. And finally, my original picture should now load.... (not from airliners.net!) I So all black with no a/c ident letter,
  7. Olmec Head

    No.1 PTS Whitley

    I am looking to build a Whitley paratroop conversion, but ideally one operated by No.1 PTS at Ringway. I have an Airfix Whitley V (actually the Coastal Cmd version, but who is counting). I do not really want to splash out on the Tiger engine conversion, so I am looking at a Whitley V as per the kit. Trawling the internet I found on Airliners.net: https://www.airliners.net/photo/UK-Air-Force/Armstrong-Whitworth-AW-38-Whitley-Mk5/1947574/L Sorry I couldn't get the photo to display! Which looks interesting and I think came from a book originally about Manchester Airport. The a/c code BD392 is a Whitley V, the other two are Tiger-engined IIs. I hope that I haven't infringed any copyright inadvertently. So I see BD392 as all black, with no a/c identification code letter unlike the other two which seem to be camouflaged and have ident code letters. Does anyone have any more information on PTS Whitley's please? Any possible nose markings that code apply to this aircraft? Another area is the ventral para 'door'. Again does anyone have any images. There was a Britmodeller thread from some time ago, but the attached images missed the door part! Thanks for any advice and suggestions.
  8. Just to say thanks to Gingerbob for the short history of XIVs, it was an excellent summation around lowback/ highback and c and e wing armament rollout and usage. I haven't seen such a useful synopsis before. As an aside I have several Aeroclub 1/48 Spitfire spine inserts, but to convert highback to lowback! Perhaps in a parallel universe...
  9. Dear Smithy, for Middlestone I haved just been using the Vallejo Model Air Middlestone 71.031. It appeared close to an old tin of Xtracrylic MS and sprayed on well. for Azure Blue I have again just used the Vallejo UK Azure Blue 71.108. This looked good to me, but I know that there are a lot of Azure Blue experts who may disagree with this after the hundreds of posts on Azure Blue sometime ago is anything to go by. I did lighten it with white quite a bit as it seemed too bright for me, but I am not knowledgeable on DAF colours and I wouldn't like to comment on the purpleyness! The new Vallejo Dark Earth looks good and is an improvement on the earlier 'almost matches'. The new one is 71.323 BS Dark earth and I prefer it to the old 71.0.29 which was dark. (Although you could use .029 as a base coat and then use .323 ontop as a lightener coat, if that makes sense.) Further, the new Vallejo Ocean Grey 71.273 looks good and I think is better than the Tamiya RAF Ocean Grey which I used before. But I haven't yet used it in anger. I have used their 71.307 MSG and again I liked it as it seemed lighter than the Tamiya RAF MSG equivalent. For RAF Dark Green and Sky I am still using the Tamiya colours . Although I usually airbrush, I also have to do quite a bit of brush painting to fix errors and model air goes on well, its smooth and usually blends in seamlesly to the airbrushed colour.
  10. I tried airbrushing the new acrylic Dark Earth (29). It seemed to go on well onto a few test scrap bits of plastic over enamel and other acrylic and bare plastic. I then tried it on a 1/48 Spitfire Vc over fully cured enamel Middele Stone (Xtracolor). I used a H&S .4mm head with low 1 bar ish pressure it sprayed well if fast and covered well with some tip drying. All good. I then used a 0.2mm head for some detail work again not bad but some clogging. After an hour or so it had dried well. But, oh dear I was cleaning off the salt wash on the enamel mid stone when I realised the water took the Humbrol Dark Earth straight off! Basically all the Humbrol came off without bonding to the enamel at all. Probably I should have left it overnight, but it didn't seem good that a paint should lift so easily and I cleaned the rest of as a precaution. Sadly I won't be using it again.
  11. Thanks to Smithy and Dave for providing some further use information on Pipsqueak. I have had a bit of a Google trawl on pilot notes air pubs for the various Spitfire marks and here are some of my tentative ideas and further questions: Early Spitfire Mark One: No Pipsqueak fitted pre-war and hence no remote contactor in cockpit. Spitfire Mark One: Gradual fitting of Pipsqueak over later 1939 and early 1940 with full equipment of airframes by late 1940. (bit of a guess on that timescale.) Spitfire II. All airframes fitted with remote contactor in cockpit during frontline Fighter Command Service. (It would be interesting if OTUs and other second line units operated Pipsqueak and if not would they remove the equipment and remote contactor). The PS and remote contactor seems to have continued alongside the new IFF systems. Spitfire V. Again, I would presume that all UK based Vs would have the PS system in place alongside the IFF systems. But Would non UK based RAF Spitfires been equipped with PS and the RC, i.e in the Western Desert , Med Malta and the Far East? And what about USAAF Spitfires in the MTO? Spitfire VI. PS and RC in place? Spitfire VII. In place over type’s operation service. Spitfire VIII. The pilot notes show the remote contactor in place. But: Would the system have been used in the Desert Air Force and Med? Would USAF Spitfire VIIIIs been equipped Would it have been used in the Far East and Burma? Would the RAAF Spitfire VIIIs been equipped with Pipsqueak? Spitfire IX. Pilot notes show the system in place. Spitfire XII: Pilot notes show system in place. Spitfire XIV: I could not find access to the XIV pilot notes, but I would guess the 1944 UK ADGB based aircraft were fitted - but with the system not continuing after late 44 with ops moving to Europe. Spitfire XVI and 16. The pilot notes for the XVI are combined with the IX, so it's hard to know if it is a XVI cockpit. From an early Britmodeller post by Edgar he stays that the XVI was not equipped from later Dec 44 which makes sense that the system would not be used when based in liberated Europe A Google search found me a Spitfire 16 (presumably Low back) manual from 1949 with no RC fitted in the cockpit. This would suggest that the system was not fitted in the post-war period. Spitfire 18: The SAM Modellers datafile book on Griffon Spitfires shows no remote contactor in the cockpit photos or diagrams, Spitfire 21: More difficult as the only image I could find was again the SAM book and the pilot notes reproduction did not show the full starboard cockpit side, but there could be a remote contactor box bottom edge. You pay your money and you take your choice! Possibly UK based late war Spitfire 21s had the system but not postwar. Again I think Edgar reckoned that the XIV and 21 stopped being fitted. Spitfire 22/24: Again the SAM book images show no remote contactor. Sorry but I did not look at any PR variants. All that for: do I put a little black box with a white and red circle on my 1/48 Spitfires!
  12. Procopius this news is most welcome. But it is to be balanced against the fact I have just bought 4 x Airfix 1/48 Spitfire Vb as investment that the the 1/48 Spitfire V market would soon dry up and these would become as rare as Airfix 1/48 Spitfire 1a s. But I doubt a stash of only 4 kits is even quantifiable as a stash.
  13. Firstly, I apologise to head it Spitfire rather than RAF fighters, but I am trying to understand the installation of the Pipsqueak system and the remote contactor as this worked in Spitfires. So, for the Pipsqueak system, I understand that this was a radio emitter which squawked a timed radio ident picked up by ground based direction finders to locate the aircraft. My technical knowledge is strained beyond that. The remote contactor was set for each time band for red leader, yellow leader, blue and green leader on the quarter segments. Image from the Spitfire Site (sorry its a bit big). The website http://www.duxfordradiosociety.org/equiphist/pip-squeak/pip-squeak.html explains this far better than me! And you probably know this from early forum posts on this over the years. My questions are: When was this fitted and to what aircraft? I am guessing that the rollout started from September 1939 onwards and that squadron leaders got first issue followed by section leader aircraft and then all squadron aircraft by the BOB. That is just surmise, so it would be good to see if anyone has any better ideas and references. I did find a Google reference to Pipsqueak for Feb 40: '28/02/40Crashed into North Sea in Spitfire Mk I L1051 went down into the sea, probably between the Outer Dowsing and East Dudgeon lightships, from where the last "pipsqueak" transmission was heard. ' The Pipsqueak system worked with the HF TR9D radio, so was it then adapted to work with the later VHF radio systems? All later Spitfires seem to retain the remote controller box, so I assume it was a still functioning system from later 1940 onwards and presumably fitted to all Spitfires as a standard item. I think I remember a post by Edgar that the Remote Contactor was not removed as a modification until late 1944 and then only for XVI, but I may well be misquoting him. I won't even start to ask about the fitment to Spitfires outside of Fighter Command and the ADGB area and to USAAF Spitfires that is too far! Now to watch the BBC programme on Hornby and Airfix, sadly much of it is about trains, I understand that there is a fight over trains this episode, which may make trains more exciting.
  14. Excellent comparison of both kits, the nose issue for the new Tamiya kit is a major shame. Do yo think that can the 'upper bulge' be sanded away do you think - is the plastic thick enough please? I am looking forward to the next instalment and the build. I have both in the stash. Oh and Airfix, please re-release your 1/48th Mk1!
  15. Having just got the book through the post, there are some issues that I have seen after a quick read through. One immediate one was that the Mk VIII ' reverted to original length ailerons' according to the book which is clearly not right. Further there is no mention of the wing fuel tanks installed in the VIII's - again a significant error.
×
×
  • Create New...