Dave Fleming
-
Posts
10,173 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by Dave Fleming
-
-
8 hours ago, Hornet133 said:
He sent me the image as he knew that I have always believed that 450 Sqn P-40N FX835 OK-Diamond 'No Orchids' as seen below is in a faded Desert scheme. While it 'could' be a VERY faded Temperate scheme, it is not my opinion that such is correct.
Steve Mackenzie
Interesting - couple of observations, especially on the roundel. The dark tone of the yellow and the relationship between the tones of the roundel blue/red are seen on quite a few wartime photos of RAF aircraft- it's obviously a certain film or film/filter combination that are producing the effect (Not sure exactly what's happening but one day I'll get the time to try and work it out. It's not true ortho because the yellows aren't black and the blues still have some body). One of the other characteristics of photos showing this effect is that the Ocean Grey element shows much lighter (I suspect due to it's blue component, similar to the roundel) so my initial reaction on seeing that photo would be that it's an aircraft in the Day Fighter Scheme (The sky band points that way too) .
-
2 hours ago, KRK4m said:
Is there no chance for Kitty Mk.IV in the Desert Scheme then?
None have been painted that way in USA and MUs in Italy only added DE to the Yankee OD/NG standard?
Cheers
Michael
Unlikely
-
On 29/04/2022 at 22:31, RidgeRunner said:
Which options, mate? I am interested in the PR nose
There aren't any in the kit, but (a) it has a separate nose and (b) the windows for the FR/PR nose are on the clear parts - I suspect there is a separate frame for the alternative nose for later releases
-
1
-
-
On 30/04/2022 at 08:22, Dave Swindell said:
There may have been exceptions, but I'd have thought most in service aircraft would have been repainted in the polyurethane paints by then, which meant light aircraft grey undersides as high speed silver wasn't available at the time in this finish.
The new polyurethane paints had a high gloss finish when applied, and there was a change from a dividing line on the leading edge of wings and tailplanes with the HSS undersides to a wraparound of the upper surface colours onto the underside with LAG undersides. The high gloss polyurethane finish with upper surface wraparound onto LAG undersides is clearly illustrated in @Dave Fleming's photo above.
Again, there may have been exceptions with the wraparound indicating underside colour, but it's a good guide if the colour isn't immediately obvious.
That was what prompted my question earlier about when the MATRAs came into service - LACG came in in 1966, but it's not going to have propagated immediately so there may have been some crossover
-
1
-
-
Yes they could carry the Matra pods. This is 1968, can’t recall offhand when the Matra type pods came in.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, I Dole said:
Ok, thanks.
No wonder it doesn't show up in pictures.
Hard to image why anyone thought it worth doing.
On the ASAC/HAS ones, it reduces a shadow on the under side
-
The demarcation is right along the line of the 'boat' hull along the lower fuselage. You can see it shown in the instructions below - the Airfix artist took this from the official RN paint scheme drawings
-
On 22/04/2022 at 20:32, Acinonyx Jubatus said:
Some observations from a five minute inspection of the sprues
Fine sprue gates to most parts, an improvement on previous airfix kits, however the third plastic sprue seems to have some problems
Main wheel hubs parts 19 and 20 appear to be short shot with a large flat at one side and not round as may be expected.
Flash appears evident around the two nose pieces
No upper sprue gates at parts 53 and 54 on the lower row of parts, main sprue seems to have a large take off towards those parts possibly indicating a gate to the part should be there
Would the lack of a sprue gate here lead to a short shot part ?
Hopefully this is an early pre production test shot and quality control at Airfix have noticed any faults and rectified them at this early stage
The wheels are certainly short shot, but hopefully that's just a correction - might even be the mould isn't finished (First test shot of the Jet provost lacked one pilot)
Not sure that is flash around the nose, so much as an artifact of the lighting; The 'missing' gates on 53/54 might just be protective pieces to stop those parts getting knocked off the runner, or they might be slide moulds or drop ins for a different variant
-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, RidgeRunner said:
I must be losing it, mate, as I cant see a FR.9 nose
No FR9 nose (in this boxing) but the F8 nose is separate and there are 3 clear parts that I assume are the camera ports for the FR9
-
2
-
1
-
-
Update on Workbench today - note separate nose, alternative ailerons, canopies and the clear parts for the FR9 nose windows! Although hard to see, both early and late (Deep breather) engine fronts are on the left hand side of the fuselage frame.
https://uk.airfix.com/community/blog-and-news/workbench/airfix-update-meteoric-proportions
-
4
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, VMA131Marine said:
There’s one other thing I noticed: the hole in the engine disc for the prop shaft is not centered. If you glue the gear case fairing to the engine before installing the engine in the fuselage and you line up the holes in the engine and gear case then the gear case will be seriously off-center in the cowl opening. I glued the gear case to the engine after the nose was all assembled so that the alignment is good.
Now you mention it it is a bit off! I keep looking at that engine thinking 'I've seen bit that before' - not sure what kit though!
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, VMA131Marine said:
On finding a helpful image, It took me a minute to realise that the reason the engine face looks wrong is because it has pushrods; the Centaurus is a sleeve valve engine and doesn’t have any.
It’s not a huge deal. Once the engine is painted black and the prop and spinner is in place only an eagle-eye will be able to spot the error, but there is an opportunity here for the aftermarket to provide something more accurate.That's funny! Looks like they have used something similar to a PW 1830!
On the real thing, the gap between the spinner and the cowl is so small you can hardly see what's behind it
-
5
-
-
There's a weekend edition of the mk VIII boxing coming in June too
-
17 hours ago, Lee Howard said:
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.
Thank you Lee! It must be CAFO 1951/43 that I saw referenced
-
4 hours ago, Dave Fleming said:
I'm sure it was @iang that first posted it, it might have been on the old FAASIG board
4 hours ago, Seahawk said:Dave, you've mentioned this Admiralty instruction several times now over the years. I'd be really interested if you ever find it. Best wishes.
Been back through my files (and searched several old boards as well) and I can't find the reference - I know I saw it, because suddenly all the camouflage tones I was seeing on late war FAA communications types made sense.
Unless someone else can come up with it, I'll shut up until I can get to TNA some day. (It might be CAFO 750/42 or it might be the later one)
Annoyingly the Royal Australian Navy have put all the AFOs upon their website but not the CAFOs!
-
9 minutes ago, Seahawk said:
Dave, you've mentioned this Admiralty instruction several times now over the years. I'd be really interested if you ever find it. Best wishes.
I'm sure it was @iang that first posted it, it might have been on the old FAASIG board
-
On 17/04/2022 at 17:26, dogsbody said:
This is the wrong place to reply, as this is on the AFV Page. It was moved to the proper WW2 Aviation page, as Julien states in Post #3.
Chris
Err, I'd have a look at the title bar at the top of the page Chris.....
-
I don’t have the reference to hand, but Admiralty Orders for second line types from mid-war were for TSS over yellow (in direct contrast to the scheme laid down in the AMOs)
-
32 minutes ago, VMA131Marine said:
I don’t think the Camel Comic has ever been done in 1/48th. Certainly there’s never been an injection molded kit before.
Freightdog/Blue max did a conversion set for the older Eduard kit, but it's the first time I can recall in a 'normal' kit - we knew there were other versions as the kits issued so far have had 'A' and 'D' sprues - this gives us the 'C', suspect the 'B' is a 2F1
-
1 hour ago, Giorgio N said:
A bit OT, I wonder why then Oxford Blue was chosen for the Lynx... isn't Oxford Blue closer to US Sea Blue ? Was Blue Grey found not ideal for some reason on the Lynx ?
That's something that's puzzled me for a long time! Oxford Blue is brighter/more blue that RAF BG, Post-War US Sea Blue is quite a dark colour, I think RAF B-G is closer
There's always the possibility it was because someone in the RN objected to their helicopters being painted in a colour called 'RAF'.....
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, junglierating said:
Out of interest would this be the same colour for pinger Sea Kings ....i.e.mk2 and mk5?
Yes, I beleive it was chosen as the nearest equivalent to US Sea Blue in the then MAP/MoS (can't recall which) range. (Ian Huntley wrote of a 'British' produced Sea Blue Gloss that was replaced by RAF B-G)
-
1
-
1
-
-
yeah, it's the nose part from their separate FR9 kit. It's not perfect (doesn't really have the shaped 'flat' either side of the camera windows) but it's not a bad stab at it.
-
2 hours ago, Jazzie said:
To be fair to the 41 sqn guys who painted more than just the Harrier with their special tails, they were using an auto paint that is so far removed from past technologies that there is very little difference to aviation paints these days.
Oh yeah, but it's an example that there are cases where non-aviation specific paint has been used
-
13 minutes ago, Graham Boak said:
These stories do go on. At the time of the Falklands War I was told that the Vulcan's underside as painted with tins of Dulux dark grey bought in the local Woolworths. Considering that the person who told me this went on to become Chief Aerodynamicist, I can only hope that someone gave him a proper briefing on drag matters at some stage. People just like good stories, particularly those who show the "little man" getting one over on "those who know better".
I'd heard 'applied by rollers bought at the local B&Q', which just slightly more plausible.
It may happen - when the USMC first took the AV-8B onboard a ship (VMA-331 on USS Bellau Wood) they found the paint on the composite surafces started to peel away (Nose, intakes, leading edges) so they were touched up at Subic bay with what an eye witness described as 'tank paint',And when 41 Squadron painted the tail of their anniversary GR7/9, they used what's claimed to be a BMW pearlescent white
-
1
-
1/72 New Tool Dominie, HS.125-400, and -125 series 1, 3
in The Rumourmonger
Posted
He'd need the rear fuselage fuel tank for the -400, but it's do=-able - there are wing differences too