Jump to content

NG899

Members
  • Posts

    619
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Shropshire

Recent Profile Visitors

3,630 profile views

NG899's Achievements

Obsessed Member

Obsessed Member (4/9)

337

Reputation

  1. Nicely done but with one small problemette… The fuselage roundels are one door too high. They should be aligned on the fuselage side view centre line door. Sorry to spoil your day but this is not the only Harrier I’ve seen with this error. ATB Nick
  2. The photo of 451 banking away was taken after the war in January 1983 after the SHAR colours and markings had changed. 451 has the original ADU-299 pylon adapters for the LAU-7A rails. Always remember… “Harriers are complex beasts!” @Collin, Yes, my build notes are available if you drop me a PM with your email in it, if you tell me the airframe you’d like to make I can provide other notes to help you with that. Cheerio for now Nick
  3. Underwing blue/red roundels confirmed under the wings on XZ451/006. Source reference: the late R L “Dick” Ward on the carrier’s return in 1982.
  4. On Invincible the demarcation between upper surface original EDSG and lower surface white oversprayed EDSG was very subtle. Look at photos from the time. The usual tell tales were white edges on some of the panels. Must photos are B+ W which picks up the difference more than colour film did. On Hermes parked aircraft had their nozzles 80-degrees down to limit engine windmilling with a broom handle shoved down the starboard intake as a brake, honest. On Invincible the blanking plates seem to have been used more so the nozzles were usually fully back on parked aircraft. Canopy, fit the frame to the fuselage and then attach the transparency, I use Klear for this, to get the best fit between windscreen and hood if you have the canopy closed. Will play catch up over the weekend. Nick
  5. The rear nozzles and exhaust shields soon get very sooty. Matt black for the nozzles, dry brushed over gunmetal works for me, while the exhaust shields are similarly treated with maybe their upper edges in natural or gunmetal. I’ve stood by these things and they are dirty! I know I’m joining this late, busy! Hope that helps Nick
  6. The Harrier SIG is still very much alive, in case you didn’t see us at SMW 2022 and last weekend’s Bolton Show. We just don’t have a dedicated website any more; too costly. Drop me a PM with your email and info shopping list in it and I’ll send you some things to help. Cheers Nick
  7. I’ve updated the guidance on the pylons, so please drop me a PM with your email in it and a summary of the other info you need and I’ll send you some pdfs. Cheers Nick
  8. Thanks for your help guys. For those who made it to SMW, you’ll have seen the results under the FRS1s and GR3s on the Harrier SIG’s “Harriers in the Roaring Forties” Falklands 40th Anniversary display. Calm seas. Nick
  9. Very many thanks for those, they are helpful. Drop me a PM with your email in and I'll send you some things back in return. Cheers Nick
  10. Good evening everyone, Any information to help with this would be appreciated. I know from printed BAe sources that the 'runway’ width on both carriers was 45ft, but... 1. Did that include the white strips at each edge of the strip? 2. How wide were the white edging lines, 8ins? (Judging by deck crews' boots on them in photos this seems a likely width.) 3. How wide was the black strip down the centre of the runway, 6ft, 6ft 6ins or...? 4. What was the diameter of the spot circles on Hermes 22ft? (There were no spot circles on Invincible at this time) 5. What was the line width of those circles, which looks thicker than the other deck lines, 10ins or 1ft? 6. What size were the deck numbers on both carriers? H 6ft 6ins? W 4ft 8 ins? 8ins stoke width? It would also be good to know what colour the green sections of Hermes' deck around the island were. I know they were not RN Deck Green, Middle Bronze Green BS381C:223 has been suggested. Many thanks for any help. All the best Nick (I'm also posting this in the Cold War aircraft modelling area.)
  11. Good morning chaps, @Sundowner14 - You're right about why tanks would not be left on mother. I'm definitely not infallible on this or any other subject! Indeed new things about the Falklands Harriers keep emerging even 40 years on. I believe the port tank on XZ997/31 in the first photo above had its originally light aircraft grey undersides painted Oxford Blue (BS381C:105) or RAF Blue Grey (BS381C:633) as used on RN Lynx and Sea Kings; what looks to be a small black C on the fin ahead of the flash is (expensive?!) sealant applied around the rectangular panel there. The photo was probably taken before a sortie on 13 June, XZ997/31 flown by Wg Cdr Peter Squire with Flt Lt Mark Hare in XZ133/10, the pair launched at 1430Z on an LGB attack this time using an FAC with a Laser Target Marker. The attack profile was a 30-degree loft using an Initial Point behind the forward line of troops. The FAC illuminated the target too soon causing the first bomb to fall 400 yards short, but the second LGB hit the target - a Company HQ on Mt Tumbledown. Unlike his leader’s LGB armed GR.3, Hare’s XZ133/10 carried CBUs, and he followed up his leader's attack with a successful CBU attack. The pair returned to Hermes at 1530Z. Later, Jerry Pook carried out another successful LGB attack in XZ997/31 later in the day, this time on a 105mm gun emplacement on Mt Tumbledown, accompanied by Flt Lt Mike Beech; the identity of his GR.3s is not known. Cheers Nick
  12. Selwyn - My references have the UK PWII using the Mk.13 1,000lb GP bomb with dimensions of 3,680mm (146ins) diameter 420mm (16ins). I trust that info tallies with your references. Charlie and Johnson, as far as I know, SHARs only operated with 100-gal tanks and max 3x 1,000lb bombs during the Falklands War. In 'bomber' mode their usual load out was 2. Only the initial strikes on Stanley airfield by HMS Hermes' FRS1s on 1 May and a few of their other ops, plus those planned attacks on helicopters on Mt Kent by 801 on 19 May, had the FRS1s loaded with 3. Compared with 2x 9-Limas for CAP the carriers would have had to move closer to the islands to launch the heavier FRS1s or GR3s armed with bombs, then moving away from the islands to the east once more after launch to safeguard the carriers from SuE strikes. I've always understood max bomb load to be 3. Burden et al in "Falklands the Air War" have never mentioned five bombs being carried, nor have any other authors. I'm sure John Shields would have mentioned it in his recent analysis "Air Power in the Falklands Conflict". I have asked if the FRS1s ever carried the the M L Aviation Ltd twin store carrier seen on early Harrier GR1s (included in Airfix's 24th scale GR1/3 kits) the answer is "No". Had they done so, then they could have carried 5x 1,000lb bombs IF their all up weight had still enabled them to take off safely from the carriers' ski-jumps... Hope that helps, good luck. Nick
  13. PM me with your email address and I’ll send you a few helpful thingies. Cheers
  14. And the question which needs to be asked is.. On the starboard side, which side of the fuselage roundel was the GZ and which side was the L? The only two contemporary photos I've seen which show the starboard side of 32 Sqn Hurricanes during the BoB, one of which is the one of GZ-Z landing, the other being of GZ-B, show the GZ aft of the roundel, not ahead of it on the starboard side. The B+W line up of Hurricanes in Troy's post I believe shows the full-size replicas at the Hawkinge Museum, so are not contemporary. Where's Sherlock when you need him...? Cheers Nick
  15. The GR3s had been washed prior to shipping south on the Atlantic Conveyor and were frequently washed on the deck of Hermes to minimise saltwater ingress, so were fairly clean by comparison with RAFG or Wittering based GR3s. Unlike the Sea Harrier airframes, the GR3s contained metals which saltwater just loves to corrode rapidly, hence the extra care given them. With reference to the photo above of XZ989/07 after its accident at the FOB, the darker areas around the wing access panels are (bath) sealant applied to keep the briny out. Panels around the nose and fuselage were also treated this way as seen in the photo of XV789/32 here: https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/harrier-vs-mirage-iii-how-the-british-were-so-successful-against-the-argentinians-in-air-air.375305/ The scuff marks on the wings are from boots. XZ989 had non-regular placement of the red Xs on the engine cover panels, as you can see in the photo. XZ988 probably had them in the same position as 989.
×
×
  • Create New...