Jump to content

Lee Howard

Members
  • Posts

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Somerset

Recent Profile Visitors

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

Lee Howard's Achievements

New Member

New Member (2/9)

65

Reputation

  1. No, it's bare metal that has discoloured/mildly corroded unevenly making it appear patchy. Think how long it would have taken to paint each of the many wires a Swordfish had. In wartime. When supplies, time and the life expectancy for aircraft (and crew) were all short. Painting wires would, I suggest, be a luxury that could be ill afforded.
  2. So that aircraft's paint was applied in 1933 then? Impressive. Tiger Moth wires are incomparable to Swordfish wires. People tend to underestimate the size of a Swordfish. While you might succeed in getting paint to stick to shorter, less flexible wires on a Moth, good luck with trying that on the ones fitted to a fish.
  3. Landing wires and flying wires. They're not painted. Ask yourself about the practicalities of doing so. They're only around 0.5" - 1" in chord, several feet long and very flexible. The paint wouldn't stick. They were (and are) just bare, dull, steel.
  4. The updates are all featuring in the vastly updated and improved second edition of 'Fleet Air Arm Aircraft 1939 to 1945' which I've been co-authoring with Mick Burrow for nearly 20 years. We're getting very near to closing it down ready to commence laying it out in book format, but being in full time employment it's fitting it in around life and also trying to capture as many updates as possible. This is highly unlikely to ever get to a third edition. Hence why I'm trying to persuade everyone to help chip in with any updates/leads on logbooks etc, seeing as the original (littered with errors) edition is still so greatly referenced on this site and others.
  5. @jaw Thanks. Details for me and the project are at the following link: https://www.fleetairarmoa.org/news/fleet-air-arm-aircraft-1939-to-1945
  6. @Grey BeemaYes, I'd already got it as JT676 in our updated lists. However, Showell's log is one we never managed to catch up with and sadly he has since passed on. If anyone has a contact for the family, I'd be interested to hear (via PM). @iang what codes are you needing tie-ups for?
  7. The photos of T8191 you refer to are almost certainly from its days with RNHF at Yeovilton during the 1970s. This was a modern application of camouflage, replacing its original RN scheme of silver overall with dayglo patches. As such, it shouldn't be regarded as anything other than an over-exuberant and ill-informed application. Tiger Moths in RN service retained their RAF schemes during the war, other than some that carried special schemes, such as dark blue overall applied to P4709 at RNARY Fayid. I don't recall having ever seen an Oxford in TSS.
  8. I'd suggest you go look at XT761 (still in her original finish) and you'll see the clear difference between the nose/tail (BS381C-537) red and the roundel (BS381C-538) red. The Wessex SAR markings were introduced by Naval Service Modification (NSM) 3241. The Sea King SAR markings were introduced under NSM/SK/3472 - also Gloss Signal Red.
  9. Sea Kings and Wessex had Signal Red, not Cherry Red (which was only applied to the roundels). The dayglo that preceded Signal Red on the Wessex wasn't 'orange' it was Dockerblaze Red-Orange, as stated at the top of this thread.
  10. New heavyweight hardback tome due out from Air-Britain shortly - currently at the printers.
  11. CAFO 640/40 states 'First Line and Fleet requirements aircraft are camouflaged in accordance with Camouflage Scheme S.1.E., ...Training aircraft are to be painted yellow on the under surface of the main planes, and on the underneath and sides of the fuselage. The upper surface of the main planes and fuselage is to be camouflaged.' S.1.E is described in CAFO 1719 as being 'Camouflage consists of five colours, i.e. dark slate grey, light slate grey, extra dark sea grey, dark sea grey, sky grey.' CAFO 1951/43 describes Temperate Land Scheme as consisting, '...of two colours, i.e. dark green and dark earth'. It still notes that non-operational aircraft are finished in TSS upper and yellow under. CAFO 618/45 is the first to mention TLS, stating, 'On the instructions of the Flag Officer concerned, the temperate land scheme (dark green and dark earth) may be used on the upper surface of non-operational aircraft whose duties are mainly confined to flying over land.' I looked at CAFO 750/42 but it is CAFO 618/45 that appears to be the first to mention TLS and yellow for non-operational types. Hope that helps.
  12. Any particular instances (in case we've overlooked it - which I would like to think we haven't)? Not in photo captions, as these will all be different (and checked), but if there's something specific in the text, I can double check. I wouldn't want anyone picking this up once we've gone to press...
  13. RN T.20s we’re built with non-retractable tailwheel assemblies (there are no doors for a start). The tailplane had a greater span than the single seaters and the periscope was fitted between the cockpits to allow the instructor to see the front cockpit. G-RNHF was a heavily modified aircraft: cockpit gutted of British equipment and replaced by American kit, canopy tunnel a different shape, no rear cockpit headrest, F104 hydraulic wheel brakes and American wheels, retractable tailwheel to name but a few mods. After the loss of the original WG655 in 1990, ex-Boscombe Down VZ345 was the last T20 in anything like original configuration. Sadly I doubt it will be rebuild to stock condition.
×
×
  • Create New...