The original Kit Builder

Aye it is. If that's genuine contemporary colour film, the camouflage patterns would give a clue as to the date. The daisies in what's left of the grass and the background trees indicate that this was filmed in the England, too, however.

Although some of the film is genuinely shot in Malta, the vast majority of the aerial ahots are from the Battle of Britain, the Battle of the Atlantic and the Blitz. Some of the fighter intercept shots are actually from the film "The Battle of Britain". The DG/DE/Sky Mk 1a in the snip at the top of this thread are definitely operating from southern England and it looks very like North Weald from the little that can be seen.

Thanks for this. Strangely, I have never come across any of the variations of 'duck egg blue' you have displayed here. Indeed, my experience of it is that it is quite a bit lighter. It also perfectly matches the colour used by the studio to paint Star Trek, The Next Generation's Enterprise and that is what I used it for, along with matt 65 'aircraft blue', which is actually fairly close to the RAFM book's 'duck egg blue', though it would seem slightly darker.

There's a fair bit of evidence that there were two distinct shades of RLM 79, usually suffixed as 'a' and 'b'. One is the very yellow-orange sand colour, (type'a') and the other is a much browner shade, (type 'b'). I am uncertain of the provenance of the second shade, but the first is the most often described in colour plates and photo's. It is likely that this would be the shade you would be right to use. I have never seen a colour photo' showing the browner shade, but there are images of 109's in the desert that appear darker than normal. Humbrol matt 93 looks reasonably close to the shade applied to British tanks using the early two colour desert scheme. According to the Humbrol Colour System, the darker 79 can be mixed as follows: 40 parts Humbrol 24, 37 parts Humbrol 73 and 17 parts Humbrol 150. Unless Hornby have changed them, of course.

Jon, that would tie in with the timescale, (as I recall it) of the combat report.

I remember reading an RAF combat report of one of the early, (possibly the earliest) actions against an FW 190. The pilot completing the report distinctly described the 190 as being green and grey. It was some time ago and I don't recall the details sufficiently for reference purposes, but I saw no reason to discount this description, as such details are well known to stay with someone involved in something so intense.

Outstanding, but where's the ship?

They're only making sure that non-license fee payers aren't stealing our stuff!

The He 115 was a three seater sea-plane with a range of about 1200 miles. They were also used by the Norwegian Naval Service, the Swedish Airforce and, ironically, the RAF. The aircraft was a twin engined machine, somewhat larger than a Bf 110.

Used to work on these, before University Air Squadrons were civilianised and the horrid Grob Tutor came along. Even had the kit and it is a little gem, which you've brought together beautifully. One minor thing, though. RAF Bulldogs didn't have the steps fitted, in order to save weight, money, or something else. This lead to a challenging assault on the wingroot for the vertically challenged and the subsequent cracking of the skins, giving rise to a rather heavy and costly repair and modification. Oh well!

Funnily enough, I've recently commented on the WWII board that I find it amazing how even well documented and relatively recent aircraft have many fine points of detail wherein there is much room for discussion. Nice to see it runs to more up-to-date items, as well! Like Pete T, I've hads the dubious privelege of working on Harriers at St Athan from T2's and GR3's right through to GR7 and 7A and I've also been a Harrier Taxi-pilot on the Dummy Deck at Culdrose and I have never seen a British Harrier where the inner part of the intake, behind the aux doors, was anything other than light aircraft grey or, more recently, white. They do certainly get dirty, however, and I have seen great variation in the application of the paint.

Man, your shed is bigger than my back garden and there're more kits in your stash than in my local hobby shop! Love it and your output is great, too. Well done.

Now, see. I have a tin of 'old' Humbrol 90, which is an almost exact match for Tamiya's XF 71, (much different to the lid of the jar, BTW) and an equally old tin of H 23 duck egg blue which is exactly as advertised with no leaning toward the green end of the spectrum at all. In fact, if is more like a pale RLM 76, like the chip in the Humbrol Colour System folder published way back when the 'Super Enamels' came out. Isn't it amazing how much even relatively well documented and recent information becomes worthy of discussion and argument as ideas and perceptions change?

First rule of combat at extended ranges; never engage with tanks on. Even if it's a hang up. Mind you, I can't imagine any Spitfire could outrun anything more than a CR42 or Ar96 with a 90 gallon tank fitted.

I thought the anhedral thing was a problem too, but having had a good close look at Culdrose's air day a couple of years ago, (I work there) the real thing has a pretty pronounced lower plane droop, too, especially on the ground.

Thanks chaps. Now that I have some dates, I can make an educated guess.

I thought I'd come across something about this on here already, but I can't find it for looking. Whilst I was out the other day, my dearest lady made the 5 hour round trip to my 'local' hobby shop. I returned home to find the instruction sheet for Tamiya's new IX on the table (can't have the actual kit for another fortnight or so) and in perusing it, I noticed that only the postwar late IX has the pole type IFF aerial, implying that the other two have the old cable system. For the sake of my sanity, can anyone, (Edgar perhaps) confirm the accuracy of this? Please? Thanks.

Where there is the appearance of different shades, it is because the metal has been laid down with its grain lying in different directions. This means that two pieces cut from the same sheet and laid at right angles to one another will catch the light slightly differently, giving the impression of different shades.

MiG have also used a pale blue, not too distant from RLM 65 on some aircraft from the 15 up to at least the early 23's. Unless you can find pics of the actual aircraft you're modelling, I'd suggest going on the balance of your evidence: If most of your photo's show green, then go with that.

Don't be misled by modern restorations and renovations. The flap upper surfaces and the wing rebates on war-time Lancasters were black, as were the undercarriage bays, doors and legs and bomb doors and bays.

P-38's had them under the pilot's nacelle, behind the cockpit bulkhead. P-47's, 51's and 40's had them as did F4U-1's, Wildcats, Hellcats, Tigercats and Bearcats. They were also present on Dauntlesses, Avengers and Devastators.

I'd be inclined to agree with Edgar with reference to the rudder, though it does look as though the fin colour has been carried on up over the rudder mass balance horn. I don't think there are yellow tips to the prop blades, either. It might be, that having force landed, the prop was damaged and the new owners have repaired, or more likely, replaced them. If so, the prop and possibly spinner, may have been painted RLM 71, though the slight tonal difference lead me to think the spinner is black. There are also a couple of light areas to the top of the roundel, which might be chipped paint allowing an underlying colour to show through. If so, this would be yellow. The proportion of the roundel looks a little off, too, to my eyes. It may be that an earlier roundel has been overpainted. The finish does seem to be overall, though, as the underside is very dark and I can't see any demarcation. There does seem to be evidence of a pretty major engine failure. Apart from the smoke staining along the fuselage, there's also some evidence of it around the forward and lower edges of the cowling. Whatever the colour is, it's pretty glossy. See the reflection of the white of the fin flash on the tailplane. I don't want a fight about this, but I reckon it's either PRU Blue, or Azure. It certainly isn't pink!

I don't know of any instances specific to your request, but as someone who has spent over thirty years working on airframes, I can tell you that physical contact between an aluminium alloy wing, as on a Tempest and a sheet steel wing as on a V1, would, unless very skillfully done, (and I mean beyond the ability of the vast majority of pilots) lead to considerable damage to the alloy wing and grave danger to the aircraft involved. I have heard that the technique may have been to use the pursuing aircraft's wake turbulence to so destabilise the V1 as to topple its gyro, causing it to roll over and dive in. This is possible, but again, only the most highly skilled pilot would dare put his aircraft sufficiently close to another to disrupt it in this way.

The door remain functional in all Harrier variants when the IFR Probe is fitted. The is actually no way to secure them shut and the probe doesn't interfere with their operation or function.

I haven't a photo', but can describe it for you. The inside of the door was covered with a thin, hard panel, finished in light grey. In the centre of the panel was the inner handle, which was fitted to a disc about 6-7 inches in diameter and recessed into a reveal. The handle was a basic 'T' shape which came about flush with the inner skin of the door itself. The reveal was about 3 1/2 inches deep. The disc was marked with a curved double ended arrow around about a third of its diameter with the word 'open' on the clockwise end and 'closed' on the anti-clock end, as far as I recall. This arrow and text were very small, however and would be invisible in 1/72 scale. The edge of the door was a machined section, with four latching pins, two per side about half way between the lateral centre-line of the door and the start of the curved area at the top and bottom. Hope this helps.