Jump to content

MilneBay

Members
  • Posts

    878
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

2,265 profile views

MilneBay's Achievements

Obsessed Member

Obsessed Member (4/9)

378

Reputation

  1. Well I must admit that to me the official British marking was for the first few years of the war a large yellow circle when an aircraft was viewed from the side and an oblique angle in the air. For the last pre-war year this was for all surfaces, no matter the viewing position. After the introduction of these changes this then became a thin yellow circle when an aircraft was viewed from the side and an oblique angle in the air circle.
  2. One thing I might add. Just be careful that you don't miss the little physical difference between the Seagull and the Walrus. The Walrus has an additional set of interplane struts at the inner leading edge of the wings, close to the engine nacelle. The Seagull V did not have these.
  3. Which one? Some years ago I built the Amodel camouflaged example - IIRC the refs I had suggested it was. However the Fury didn't see much service there. Only 3 apparently.
  4. That's a very impressive model. A question: Forgive my ignorance but what are those rectangular "fenced" compartments on the deck for?
  5. When the Frog kit first appeared on the market - way way way back I wasn't interested in the PV-6 so I used it for a scratched conversion to a Wapiti. Which I thought was more interesting. Now given that this transformation happened around 50 years ago I'm pleased to report that it is still on the shelf. However I did subject it to a rebuild about 20 odd years ago, so there it sits - not perfect but if you squint in a favourable light it looks like a Wapiti. I won't post a pic. But on the subject of the Everest aircraft about 12 years ago I built an original Frog Wallace as per the kit instructions. The rigging and the interior work were naturally the most difficult part, but unfortunately about 2 years after it was done I clumsily managed to destroy it. So this pic is all that remains.
  6. This is the Williams Bros kit I built about 30 odd years ago.
  7. Interesting and well done model. One thing I note is that the people in the little launch were probably drier than the monitor's crew
  8. Many many years ago back in the late 1960's I worked for the RAAF. I had a very very high security clearance which as far as I could ever work out had really nothing to do with the job I was doing. Regularly (this was during the Vietnam War days) I would receive ultra secret files with the raw data from RAAF bombing operations etc. Why, I have no idea as my job had nothing to do with mission planning or strike analysis. But because it was all so secret no one would ever tell me. All I know is that a messenger would come to my office, ask me to sign a form and hand me these files then disappear. A day or two later the same person would come, give me another form to sign and take the file away. This went on for some time. Then one day another messenger, equally uninformative, arrived and gave me a very large cardboard box. I signed the proffered form and he departed. Curious, I opened the box and in the pre-modern computer days I discovered it was a complete set of the punched cards which contained the parts breakdown for the Macchi trainers the RAAF was just bringing into service. Again I had no idea why I had received them - my job was in spares supply for civilian contractors and mainly involved arranging supply of parts to these contractors for the more sensitive equipment the RAAF operated. But the punched cards were a mystery because there was no accompanying instructions as to where I had to send them. And given the security rating there was no one in the section I could ask. The box of cards sat on top of two filing cabinets for about the next 15 months. Two cabinets because it was a very big box and because I could never find out what I had to do with them. Then one day there was knock at the door and a very red faced and cross RAAF officer stormed in, glared at me and exclaimed "You've got the bloody things!!!" grabbed the box and stormed out, still without any explanation. I had by this time, given the time I had worked for our glorious RAAF, come to consider that it couldn't be a serious organization anyway, so I took this episode as an indication of the ongoing in joke which only we who were involved would understand. Shortly after someone somewhere worked out that I wasn't the particular person with the very high security clearance who should be the recipient of all this unrequested highly secret information, and both the files, and boxes of punch cards, stopped arriving ........
  9. I would have thought that when the bullets started arriving was warning enough.
  10. Years ago I read an article by a British aviation journalist who had worked in the Hawker design office. His name escapes me but he said that he suggested to Sydney Camm that the Hunter would have been a more aesthetically pleasing aircraft if the fuselage section ahead of the intakes had been about 2 feet longer. He went on to suggest (tongue in cheek) that this was the reason why his design career at Hawker didn't prosper. When I read the article it struck me that this was why I never found the Hunter to be as aesthetically pleasing as others claim. It has a slight "no neck" appearance to me. To me it's a good looking aircraft but not quite the beauty that is claimed.
  11. Gentlemen I give you the AW Ape. Perhaps the most aptly named aircraft ever. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong_Whitworth_Ape
  12. That's intrigued me for years - I've put it down to an effect of light catching it at a slightly different angle to the rest of the wing. Could well be wrong though.
  13. I must admit that when I built my selection of Battle of Britain aircraft I tried to cover some of the proposed variations of Sky over the period. I admit that the hue chosen may not have been correct for a particular aircraft, in the strict sense of an accurate model, as it was more an exercise in trying to depict changes over time so earlier BoB aircraft had the most subtle differences while towards the later period the colour used on the models became more standardised. Correct or not I soon found that while the broad concept of Sky as a colour (to my eye a very pale yellowish green grey) seemed to be apparent the variations were quite numerous. But then it was an exercise surprisingly lacking in scientific data but remarkably backed by anecdotal "data"
  14. The top unglazed part, was able to be lowered inside the bottom section. This was to allow the turret to rotate as required. It's up to you how you want to position it. For convenience sake I placed the turret with the guns down and facing aft with the section raised. However in operation its position was linked to the turret rotation, as was the rear faired section, so those factors will define how you want to depict it. All the pics show these in various positions so its up to you.
×
×
  • Create New...