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. :)

Seahawk

Members
  • Content Count

    5,028
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,391 Excellent

About Seahawk

  • Rank
    Completely Obsessed Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Southwest

Recent Profile Visitors

7,729 profile views
  1. I did a little bit of work a while back to try and establish where the changeover from Temperate Sea Scheme (TSS) to Sea Blue Gloss (SBG) took place. You would be surprised at the number of photos in which I was unable or unwilling to be dogmatic as to which scheme was worn. I'm away from my references (principally Geoff Thomas' Eyes For The Phoenix (EFTP) and the Osprey RN Aces (RNA)) so currently unable to look at the evidence with fresh eyes but from the limited evidence amassed by the time I got distracted by something else, it seemed to me that JX758 was definitely in TSS (RNA p.76) and JX841 was definitely in SBG (EFTP p.213). Confusingly JX878 seemed to be in TSS (EFTP p.236). JX772, the aircraft of interest to you falls in the zone of uncertainty between JX758 and JX841: I have no reason to argue against its being in SBG. By the way, given the turnover of aircraft in the British Pacific Fleet and working conditions in BPF hangars, I would expect incidences of aircraft being repainted from TSS to SBG to be vanishingly small. The FAA started using aircraft in SBG because that's the way the factory was finishing them and the British authorities had agreed to accept them in that scheme. The issue of the rear windows behind the cockpit is unrelated. Here difficulties arise because so many photos show the cockpit hood slid back over the relevant area but I reckon JW723 definitely had them (The British Pacific And East Indies Fleets, p.67) and JX690 definitely did not (Squadrons of the FAA, 1st ed, p.388). So the windows disappeared before SBG came onto the scene.
  2. I asked David Hannant that very question a few years back. The short answer is "no". I can't remember the ins and outs: perhaps it was that the artwork no longer exists or that they were produced using technology incompatible with modern transfer printing techniques
  3. An ambitious undertaking. Hope you have factored in the necessary house extemsion. In your position I would have a chat with Ray Horwell of Fantasy Printshop (FP). https://www.fantasyprintshop.co.uk/about-model-decals/ FP are the printers behind quite a number of the smaller scale transfer producers. I found Ray very helpful when I was considering getting a batch of Yellow FAA code letters and numbers run off. If he can't help, at least you'll have a much clearer understanding of the practicality and cost of what you're proposing. Note that the website says minimum order is 25 A4 sheets, which is pretty reasonable since a lot of printers won't look at you if you're talking quantities of less than 1000.
  4. And I'm told Rosemary is threatening to sue for defamation of character.
  5. Some work colleagues knew a workmate was nervous of flying to the States so they kindly bought him a copy of "How To Fly A Jumbo Jet". Just in case he needed it urgently, like.
  6. Was this thing for real? Seems like it depended on about 2 hours' notice of an impending fighter attack and remarkable precision flying skills on the part of the intercepting fighter to position itself anywhere where the gunner might see it. One of those things that should have been rejected as not fit for purpose long before metal was cut.
  7. Are we perhaps overlooking something obvious? The top of a standard Whitley V tail turret projects significantly up into the airflow. The shape in post 44 is a continuation of the fuselage top line: therefore it is not a Whitley tail turret, at least not a standard one.
  8. I agree with you: a fairing with a black line at the front as per the photo of G-AGDY at post 34 and probably along the bottom as well. And would a Whitley V turret have been capable of traverse to a full beam position? Certainly that fairing/turret doesn't look the right shape for it.
  9. Not a fun task, especially in turbulence or a manoeuvring aircraft. See for example Rawnsley and Wright's Night Fighter, by a man who was there!
  10. Is there anyone out there who can explain to me why this "revisiting our amphibious heritage" stuff is not complete and utter nonsense, intended for consumption by those who neither know nor care? Saving 50p on the costs of repainting, on the other hand, does have the ring of truth about it.
  11. Kind of you to think of me but can't add anything this time, I'm afraid.
  12. For what it's worth, in that VE-Day +2 photo mentioned above, I can't detect any tonal difference between the upper surface colours of the YZ-coded GS Lancasters in the day scheme and the KC-coded Lancasters in standard DE/DG/Night in the same formation, so maybe don't go overboard on the lightness of the Light Green.
  13. I would welcome evidence to support that assertion. Certainly some Grand Slam (GS) aircraft were in standard camouflage (eg PD112 YZ-S which dropped the first GS in anger) but later aircraft (as far as my rummaging through references has shown, from PD114 onward) were in the day scheme. There are dated photographs showing day-camouflaged GRAND SLAM aircraft in action before the end of the war (and all GS missions were close to the end of the war). For starters 2 photographs on p.264 of the Red Kite book Dambusters; The Definitive History (Ward/Lee) show a formation 617 Sq put up 2 days after VE Day. All 4 GS aircraft (PD114 YZ-B, PD118 YZ-M, PD119 YZ-J, PD129 YZ-O) are in the day scheme and the book records their individual participation in a number of GS missions before the end of the war (indeed YZ-J was the OC Fauquier's aircraft and was originally intended to drop the first operational GS on Bielefeld Viaduct on 13 March). So, unless 617 Sq decided to spend the 2 days after VE-day in an orgy of aircraft painting, I think we can conclude that they operated before VE-Day in the day camouflage. What is certainly true is that the equation of the colours in the GS day scheme to Light Earth, Light Green and Ocean Grey derives from a visit the respected aviation artist C Rupert Moore made after the war when ex-617 Sq GS aircraft were being operated by 15 Sq on various trials. Here irresistible force meets immovable object: on the one hand Light Green/Light Earth and especially Ocean Grey sound improbable and AFAIK no corroborating painting instructions have ever been unearthed, on the other we have the eyewitness testimony of a trained aviation artist armed with colour chips visiting specifically to record colours for the painting of a 617 Sq GS Lancaster he was to produce for the dustjacket of Aircraft Of The Fighting Powers Vol VII. You pays your money and takes your choice. It's all thrashed out in the earlier GS Lancaster thread which I gather OP has already read.
  14. Eh, what? 207 Sq? Thought the next squadron was to be a FAA one, 809. Is this another round in the evil RAF plot to throttle FAA fixed wing aviation?
  15. Before splashing out on aftermarket, check out the bomb carriers provided in the Airfix Blenheim and Swordfish kits and the new Revell Halifax. Of those, you'll probably need the Swordfish ones to fit out your aircraft but for the Blenheim and Halifax they will be spare if you build with the bombdoors closed. DISCLAIMER: I haven't actually checked whether the parts are the right size or Mark: I just recall parts of roughly the right shape in those kits.
×
×
  • Create New...