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. :)


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,432 Excellent

About Seahawk

  • Rank
    Completely Obsessed Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

8,416 profile views
  1. Yes, mornings aren’t the same without the sound of 4 RR Conways powering a heavily laden tanker out west.
  2. Not sure that A6M5 props were painted with red brown primer. A brown, yes, red-brown primer no. Here are some words I lifted from a post on BM by Nick Millman on 10 Aug 2012, in the context of discussion of the then-new Airfix A6M2. Note the last sentence. "Just a bit of further clarification on props that might be useful to kit builders - and Tamiya have a new 1/72 A6M2 out in September. Early A6M2 props had polished natural metal blades with matt red-brown paint on the rear of the blades (some sources also say matt black) to eliminate glare and either two or one red warning stripes at the tips. The spinner was painted aluminium over red-brown primer. This distinction is important as there are plenty of models that depict both the blades and the spinner as polished natural metal. From late 1943 props and spinners began to be entirely painted in a dark brown paint with a single yellow warning stripe although some Nakajima-built examples had an aluminium painted spinner and brown blades. It is difficult to be certain about these colours from the photo of Tsu-134 but as it was an operational trainer flying in 1944 it is open to possibilities. Line ups are not much help because they show a variety of spinner colours in the same unit. The main possibilities therefore are:- Aluminium spinner with nmf blades Aluminium spinner with dark brown blades All dark brown One of the common modelling myths is that the props were painted in the red-brown primer (which was a red-oxide paint close to Humbrol 100 - approx between FS 10076 and 30109). Some might have been but the contractor applied dark brown prop paint was a different colour entirely - closer to FS 20059."
  3. Must be a major culture shock. White middle-class kids with inappropriate names doing all kinds of stuff that would have Health & Safety frothing at the mouth (sailing without lifejackets!) completely without responsible adult supervision or preliminary risk assessments. Tell me when you get to the one where they try smelting copper. Second-hand or are they still in print? Having visited the Stiperstones not too long ago, I have a similar hankering to reread some of the Lone Pine adventures.
  4. Colour photo of the artwork for the first Admiral Prune on p.39 of Roger Freeman's The RAF of WW2 In Colour: generally grey with pinky-maroon scarf with yellow dots. Cap badge similarly yellow detail on a pinky-maroon ground. Bomb symbols in yellow except for last one in top row of 20 which is grey/white (for a daylight raid). Only one bomb in the 2nd row.
  5. Nice to see one built up. Agree your gripes re the wing fit and especially the instructions: lots of parts but no indication of which are for which version - hence my plea elsewhere for photos of the rear cabin of FAA's ECM.6. There are ome useful photos in the Walkround section once you work out what you're looking at!
  6. NB the photo in the Swedish link does not depict EF369 MG-Z: it is just an illustrative (and atmospheric) photo of a Stirling crew. The same photo appears in colour on p.26 of Roger Freeman's The RAF of WW2 In Colour. The caption reads "Sgt Leonard A Johnson and crew walking beneath the nose of Stirling N3676 "S" of 1651 HCU (Heavy Conversion Unit) at Waterbeach while the ground crew run up the engines." It is one of a series of colour photos taken at Waterbeach by Charles Brown on a Press Facility Day on 29 April 1942 (in fact most genuine colour photos of Stirlings that I can recall derive from that shoot). Freeman reproduces ten and attributes them either to the IWM or the RAF Museum. I assume the caption above draws on the IWM/RAFM captions.
  7. Try poking “HMS Furious” into the title box on the abebooks.co.uk website (resisting attempts to autocorrect to “he’s”, “his”, etc): UK dealer currently offering both Warship Profiles at £5 each.
  8. A "like" is not enough. Superb modelling and painting: utterly convincing. When I think of the bodge I can make of a 1/72 model,....
  9. Wonderful! Put me down for 2 sheets please. PM to follow sometime later this evening.
  10. To add to the confustion, there is yet another stage in the evolution of this aircraft's markings. The old Monogram Close-up 24: Ta 152 has across its centrefold an A3 photo of "Green 4". No, it is not colourised (published 1990). The location is given as Wright Field and the date "late 1945". Essentially it is a the 2nd photograph in post 4 but with FE-112 in bold black characters across the RAF fin flash, a rather nicely rendered black and white Swastika at the top of the fin and a rather nicely rendered 4 (green with black border) forward of the cross. It appears to have been taken on the same piece of concrete as the other 2 photos with the same row of trees in the background but not necessarily at the same spot or at the same time. A major difference is that there is nothing like as much exhaust staining: the exhausts stand in a painted black rectangle with soot stains back from only the last two ports. At least 4 stages in the evolution of the aircraft's markings are apparent from this one photo: - factory delivery scheme: last letter J of Stammkennzeichen still visible - operational service: traces of a red/yellow Reichsverteidigung band just visible. - RAF ownership: German markings (except for the glimpses of the RVD band) obliterated by a coat of nondescript grey-green covering the area from the position of the 3rd Stammkennzeichen character back to just forward of the fin. RAF roundel in roughly A Type proportions where the cross would have been. RAF flash on fin, orientated so as to be vertical for an aircraft standing on its wheels. - US ownership: black cross with white outlines superimposed over the RAF roundel, completely obliterating the red centre. but leaving a lot of white. FE-112 in black across the lower fin, B/W swastika added to top of fin, green 4 numeral added forward of cross. The evidence from some of the other photos in this thread suggest there was more than one stage in the evolution of the aircraft's markings while in US hands. I find this picture confusing. If the idea was to restore it to something like wartime configuration, why slap FE-112 across the fin and why leave untouched the ghastly apology for a German cross partially obliterating the RAF roundel? The colours and style of the "4" are both convincing to me but look too fresh to be original: added at the same time as FE-112 and swastika? If so, why? In War Prizes (Midland, 1994) Phil Buttler identifies this aircraft as 170003 "believed to have been '6' of JG301 although later exhibited at Wright Field as 'Yellow 4'". It was at Freeman Field, Ohio, by 16 May 1946. BTW "White 4" in post 4 is not FE121 which was a Fw 190D-9 (source Buttler: War Prizes (Midland, 1994) and War Prizes - The Album (Midland, 2006).
  11. You are of course correct: I hadn't noticed that that sheet also has the earlier angular style characters as well as the post-46 rounded style.
  12. I note that "The tanks that were provided were unallocated, late 1943 models. Many were of December Pressed Steel Car production, and had such late features as "large" drivers' hatches and high bustle turrets." If forced to guess, I'd be inclined to think they did have the loaders hatch but, rather than speculate beyond what's contained in the Sherman minutiae site, I'll leave it to others who might know the answer. NB also "The 4/7 Royal Dragoon Guards and the Nottinghamshire (Sherwood Rangers) Yeomanry, which were both part of the 8th Armoured Brigade, are thought to have been equipped mostly or entirely with the 80 M4A1 DDs provided by the US."
  13. But, since it has a cast hull, it is not a Sherman III or a Sherman V. It looks as if it is one of the US-built conversions of an M4A1 (Sherman II). I can't beat the write-up in the link @SimonThas provided but basically the British couldn't turn out enough DD tanks to meet their requirements so the US did some conversions for UK use: they were all late production M4A1. Afraid I can't even see the "large chequered sheets" in the photo.
  14. I think I shall adopt this as my motto. Fine words to explain never finishing anything.
  15. Oh, the range of kits available will keep me happy for a long time (although a new R.E.8 and a B.E.2e would be nice). It's aftermarket transfers to replace the notorious Roden ones and those on aged Airfix Pups and D.H.4s. The frustrating thing is that I can see that some really good stuff has been done over the years but it's no longer available.: some of the Pheon stuff looks brilliant.
  • Create New...