Wez

Why would you do such a thing, it's incomprehensible!

Just want to say to those that were confused as to what each GB and STGB covered, @Enzo the Magnificent did post a brief summarry of each in his first post once the poll was set up (see embeddeded in this post), so there's no excuse for not knowing... ...just sayin' right

I didn't feel the need to change the title because I fully understand what SEAC/CBI stands for. How else would you describe it? The war in the Far East (insert dates).

Yes, a Winchester Spitfire Bridge dual combo?

I love peas me, even the mushy ones. When I was a kid and we used to go out playing in the countryside, we used to eat peas straight out of the pod from the fields.

Fishfingers, garden peas and home-made chips

Quite right too!

I supported the SEAC/CBI GB from the beginning but then to me, the subject matter was obvious. I'd certainly support this GB again if it were proposed for next year.

It would at least help to get the overall shape and general arrangement correct

I have to disagree with you Dave, the Manchester was a disaster operationally and was rapidly superseded by the Lancaster and equally rapidly forgotten about by the RAF. The Lincoln was a more successful aircraft and saw export success BUT, it's largely unknown publicly. The last time I was at the Cosford Museum I heard a number of people refer to the Lincoln as a Lancaster in fact one old boy was so incensed when he saw the aircraft captioned as a Lincoln claiming the museum plainly didn't know what they were talking about and the aircraft was a Lancaster, it wwas a good job his wife read the blurb about the aircraft and gently corrected him otherwise I'm sure he would have dragged an unfortunate member of the museum staff to the spot to get them to correct the sinage. The Lancaster is well known in this country because it appears at flying displays, even the Wunderful Mrs Wez knows what a Lancaster looks like. I could see a number of punters being disappointed modeller having been given a Manchester/Lincoln having been gifted it in the mistaken belief it was really a Lancaster. As for the Spitfire Tr.9, I bought one but only because I'm building it as a gift to one of my oldest friends who was bought a flight in one as a retirement/birthday present. I suspect the success of the kit is not because all of those that have flown in one want one (although I'm sure my mate will), but because of familiarity. If you live in the south of England you can routinely see one of these Spit's flying around from Kent to Dorset thanks to flights out of Biggen Hill, Goodwood and Lee on Solent. There are plenty of others elsewhere in the country. Invariably, if you see a Spitfire on the local TV news, it's one of these two-seaters giving a flight to a WW.II veteran. This is the reason why I think the Tr.9 has sold well.

These are quite sensible options, there's the Elvington composite and Canadian (?) rebuild for the Halifax, if they were to do a Hunter an F.1/4 version based on their previous research that would fill a gap (as would a T.7). If they were to replace the Ju-88, one based on the A-5 variant would be sensible and thus avoid competition with the Revell A-1/A-4.

Ooh! Good start! Good luck with this one.

Nice one, welcome to the GB and good luck with it.

Great work there Alan, the PRU Blue really suits the Lightning.

Bomber Command used tractors, crew transports etc, there's nothing to stop these getting built in a Bomber Command GB.