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. :)

iang

Members
  • Content Count

    751
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

iang last won the day on September 19 2012

iang had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

432 Excellent

2 Followers

About iang

  • Rank
    Obsessed Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Brighton

Recent Profile Visitors

2,993 profile views
  1. or 5. - I had a senior moment. The sequence refers to KD695:143/X
  2. iang

    RN Jeeps on HMS Formidable 1945

    I've searched for the digital version without success. I have the original in a photo album compiled by a crew member, but all my photos are packed away at the moment and I can't get at them. I'll repost when I can - probably after Easter.
  3. Yes, I've a sequence from the crash onwards. I can't remember if I have the photo of the wreck in the sea or not, but I have seen a photo of this.
  4. KD244:143/X was stripped and swung out by crane, rather than being pushed off.
  5. The two 1770 Squadron Fireflies were S/281:DV119 (Stott and Ward) and S/276:DT941 (Thomson and Miller). These two Fireflies took off from Indefatigable at 07.45 on 12 April on a DUMBOCAP to rendezvous with, and provide cover for, a USN Mariner on ASR duties off Yonakuni Shoma. I have both Firefly combat reports as well as Indefatigable's Report. Neither are unambiguous with respect to the weapon loading, but my reading of the documents suggest 20mm canon only. If RPs were carried (which I doubt), they certainly weren't fired. Given that there were 20mm canon feed jams noted in the Combat Reports, if RPs had of been carried, I'd imagine they would have been fired. The two Fireflies were quickly relieved by additional 1770 Fireflies, so drop tanks may not have been carried either, though logically you'd expect they would have been given the mission. For information, other 1770 Fireflies involved in attacks on shipping and shore targets on 12 and 13 April were all equipped with 8 x RPs, not bombs.
  6. iang

    1/350 HMS Exeter (1939) - York class cruiser

    You don't need a Seafox. Exeter never carried one: Osprey, Fairey IIIF and then Walrus. At the time of the River Plate, Walrus were carried before being ditched.
  7. iang

    HMS Queen Elizabeth

    Is Bristol the last RN Falklands ship?
  8. iang

    (Another) 1:48 Blackburn Skua

    Nick, that is a very nicely finished Skua. The black and white IFF markings and camouflage look spot on. As a depiction of L2988 during the Konigsberg attack, however, you would probably have been better leaving the code off entirely. 803 Squadron had a well-documented practice of colour coding the individual aircraft letter in accordance with section colours. If L2988 carried an individual aircraft letter (F), it would likely have been blue, as Lucy was flying No.1 in Blue Section for the Konigsberg attack. The original Admiralty documents for the Konigsberg attack, however, identify aircraft by their section (colour) and position number only (no individual aircraft letters given). I also have copies of all of 800 and 803 Squadron’s Combat Reports while shore based in March /April 1940 (including Lucy’s) and Skuas are only identified by their serial number or by the section and position number. This strongly suggests that they were still uncoded in early April, as later in April during operation DX off Norway, Admiralty reports identify 803 Squadron Skuas by by their individual aircraft letter. Certainly A6F is incorrect for an 803 Squadron aircraft at this time. 803 Squadron was shore based before being allocated to Glorious for operation DX off Norway (from 27th April). To complicate matters, at the same time, a detachment of 803 Squadron also operated from Ark Royal during operation DX. Ark Royal had its own Skua squadrons: 800 squadron coded (A)6x and 801 squadron coded (A)7x. It is likely that he carrier code (A) was not carried. If the ex-Glorious 803 Squadron aircraft were coded, they could have been coded (A)8x, which is sometimes how they are depicted. Equally, they could have retained Glorious’ codes, but there are no known photographs from this period of Glorious' Skuas on Ark Royal. Cheers, IG
  9. That is some project. The method is very interesting - what software are you using?
  10. iang

    FAA Corsair - dimensions for markings help

    CAFO 1099 June 1945 mandated that code marking on Royal Navy aircraft were to be Sky or Medium Sea Grey. Interestingly, Morris opines the pale blue codes found on Corsair KD431 a local mix for "Sky", but found no written documents mandating pale blue codes. Two observations on this. First, the service application of Confidential Admiralty Fleet Orders often pre-dates the relevant CAFO issue date. Secondly, practice among BPF units was not uniform. On Formidable and Implacable, white codes seem to have been consistently used, whereas Indefatigable and Victorious used codes that were clearly not white throughout their BPF deployment (as in the case of JT633 pictured in a previous post). On these last two carriers, there may have been a difference between fighter and bomber squadrons, though this may just be because of a lack of photographs from the same time period. Here is a good example on non-white codes on Indefatigable's 820 Avengers. I believe these are photographed during Operations off Japan (i.e. after CAFO 1099): Pale blue, Sky, or Medium Sea Grey? I have quite a large number of examples of non-white codes, but establishing chronology is still a work in progress.
  11. iang

    New Ship Related Releases

    They look great.
  12. iang

    HK Lancaster ?.

    I think you mean there are just over 39 inches in a metre (39.37).
  13. iang

    1920s Fleet Air Arm carrier flight decks

    None of the British interwar carriers had wooden decks - they were all steel decked ships.
  14. iang

    Hellcat NF.II - Help please !

    This might help the guessing game: Tantalisingly close to being able to read it. My best guess is (KE)157. I think the first numeral is "1" and the last "7" The second looks like it could be a "3", which doesn't fit, or "5", which does. However, in the past I have found that when it is not possible to read a serial, my best guess has been revealed to bear little relationship to the actual serial as revealed by, say, a clearer print.
  15. iang

    Hellcat NF.II - Help please !

    There has been a thread on FAA Hellcat NF before. The above photo is 892 Squadron, HMS Ocean 1946, though the War ended before her intended deployment with the BPF. I don't know the serial of O5C and can't read it from the very good print I have of the photo above. I have some clear photos of several Hellcat II NF on HMS Ocean. I believe that the codes evolved from 5x to O5x and I have examples of each . One or two of these show serial and code together, though in each case I'm not certain of one letter or number of the serial - including 5D (JZ951 or JZ955), 5B (KD125 or KE125) and 5R (JZ957 or JZ967). I also have a nice photo of 892 ranged showing O5K (assume JZ910), O5L (assume JZ911), O5D (either JZ951 or JZ955), 05C (unknown) and 05S (unknown), which was 20mm cannon armed, and 05H (unknown). These aircraft carried the aircraft letter repeated on the wheel cover in white, with serials in the standard position. Generally, C type roundels on the upper-surfaces of the wings (though O5C may not) and C1 on the fuselage sides.
×