Dave Swindell

Can't see any photos in the linked thread, or others on the site you've linked to recently Mike - text, banners, avatars etc, but no pictures? Main purpose to keep the oil and oil cooler warm enough to allow the engine to turn over when the starter is engaged. The coolant was ethelyn glycol, basically anti-freeze, so even in the arctic the cooling system wouldn't freeze. With the oil cooler part of the radiator on the hurricane, warming the coolant will help starting, but the reason for heating is to stop the oil plugging in the cooler. Not all lauches resulted in loss of the hurricane, some were able to divert to land ashore after dealing with the threat. IIRC, only one pilot was lost after a launch.

Aren't those radio altimeter aerials?

@PhoenixII Paul, fading was in hindsite an unfortunate choice of phrase, i was referring to the loss of definition between the red and white in the photograph and not to any weathering that might have occurred on the actual aircraft. The reproduction of the red as a very light grey is almost certainly down to the way the photograph has been produced, film type, filters used, developing etc. Though not common, this effect isn't unusual in B/W photos where red roundel centres are difficult to distingish from the white ring The photo of G-AGLV was taken at Hurn before the first Lancasrian flight to Australia, it would seem logical to me that an aircraft prepared in the UK would have the markings prevailing at the time applied, ie red white and blue to C proportions, rather than SEAC colourswhich would generally be applied in theatre. Later photos of lancastrians generally show 3 equal size stripes as per photo of G-AGLF, note here the reversal of the tones where the red stripe is very dark and the blue stripe, registration letters and speedbird are much lighter due to differences in photographing methods. @Sky dancer The photo of G-AKGU looks to me to be the same style marking as G-AGLV ie red, white, blue with thin 2 inch white stripe. The nose, flash, kangaroo and lettering all appear to be the same tone as the dark blue of the fin flash, lower stripe and registration so i'd say dark blue rather than red for these. The camouflaged LB30 also shows a slightly thinner blue stripe both on the fins and below the registration consistent with C type proportioned 3 colour stripes. Both photo's, although of low resolution, do appear to me to show a lighter area in the fin flash where you would expect the thin white stripe to be. Whilst i don't recall ever seeing civil SEAC 2 blue stripes before, i can't say for certain it wasn't done, and the LB30s would be more likely than the Lancastrian to have their stripes overpainted. My feeling though is this is a photo processing effect lightening te red stripe and not overpainting with Indian blue. Given the very dark shade of grey seen for the known dark blue portions I would expect the rest of the stripe to come out a darker shade of grey than shown if this is indian blue.

The photo in your link shows standard red/white/blue stripes. The white is the thin 2 inch stripe associated with C type markings and is just discernable on the fin flash. The red is very washed out. On the stripes below /aft of the registration the white stripe is not obvious with little or no contrast between it and the red stripe, but you can tell its there by the relative thickness of the stripes. The lower /aft blue stripe is slightly thinner than the combined red and thin white stripes next to it. Where only two colour stripes were used ( eg red and blue only on upper camouflaged surfaces ) the stripes were of equal thickness.

I'm sure you're right, the brain is currently addled with jetlag, hence the question marks in my original post. I've been looking into doing an early B2 and trying to decide whether to man up and do the leading edge flaps or wimp out and keep the kit fixed droop.

Lancastrians had a completely remanufactured fuselage, it wasn't just a case of removing turrets and fairig over the holes, especially the rear turret. The fuselage taper in profile was different (shallower) ahead of the tailplane on the lancastrian, so any conversion that just replaces the turrets with fairings is wrong.

Except the last 7? built, which had the later fixed droop leading edge from new, so if you want anearly B2 but don't fancy modding the wing leading edge you can still do it as per the general's advice, you just need to get the right serial no. Away from my refs atm. ottomh, XM706-XM712?

Also available in 1:700 - still doesn't solve the seaslug problem though, unless Peter Hall could be persuaded to scale down his 1:600 set.

@Courageous Stuart, if you do find loads of space, I can start you off with a really good looking Seaslug launcher

Haven't seen the Skytrex offering, but as you say I doubt it would be any better. A good start for etch improvements i think would be White Ensign's Type 42 set, should cover pretty much all the radars, aerials, ladders, doors, railings etc you need. Your main problem though will be the seaslug on the stern, not sure where to go for any improvement on that.

I've got a couple of their earlier kits unbuilt as yet. Multimedia, pressure cast resin, white metal, etch and decals Main hull and superstructure is cast resin, no bubbles or warping. A lot of the deck detail is included in the main castings, some of it simplified eg aztec stairs and solid boat davits. Smaller parts such as masts, guns, boats etc are white metal, reasonably well cast but with part lines and some flash Etch is just generic railings, flight deck safety nets and main rotor for helicopters Decals pennant no's and funnel badge if appropriate. If you look at it as a reasonably well detailed wargaming model, you won't be disappointed. Detail is better than an 80's plastic kit, but not up to that of the recent kits by Flyhawk etc. Some detail is simplified, some is overscale, but they'd be a good introduction to multimedia, the finished model should look the part and be quite "robust". If you're looking for finescale, then if it's the only game in town it would be a good starting point to add aftermarket replacements such as radars, guns, ladders etc. If there's other kits of your subject out there, there may be a better bet for a finescale model, it depends on what level of detail you want, how complex a build you can manage, and how deep your pockets are. Horses for courses as they say.

Much as I'd like to see Sir Frank Whittle celebrated in this way, this is doomed from the outset as the first criteria is Scientist. The Science behind the jet engine was all discovered and well established before Sir Frank Whittle was even born, and to my knowledge he made no further scientific discoveries. He had the engineering knowledge, foresight and tenacity to take established scientific and engineering principles and put them all together to make the first practical turbojet engine. That's invention and innovtive engineering, it's not discovering something new, its developing something new from what you already have. Brilliant Engineer, yes. Scientist, I'm sorry, No.

Having looked at the Tamiya instructions and trawled through my Mosquito references, I'm quite confident that part C-26 represents the tailcone with Monica fairing but no Monica radar fitted. This area is not well photographed, the one you picked is one of the few that does clearly show the area behind the fairing is actually dished in. The Tamiya 1:72 kit has the fairing as just the front bulged part scabbed on over the standard shaped tail cone, I think this is a compromise to eliminate the need to mould 2 separate tailcones. If you look at this in profile you therefore see the standard tailcone outline behind the bulged fairing. However with the dished section behind the bulged section as moulded in the 1:32 kit, if you view in profile you get a small but noticable notch in the "fair" lower fuselage line thus:- Once you note this you can spot it in any photo that shows the bulge and is taken at a low enough angle, eg ML926/G on p22 and HR632 on p32 of Model Data File, The De Havilland Mosquito A Comprehensive Guide For The Modeller. The fairing with Monica fitted is drawn on p113, this matches published photos. The Yagi aerial mounted on the extreme tail in the B Mk25 drawing on p68 is Boozer MkIII not Monica. Monica was actually retained on some NF30 nightfighters after it was realised German nightfighters could home in on it, they would fly straight and level with it switched on, wait for a nightfighter to be detected, then switch off and pull round hard 360 degrees to get on the tail of the nightfighter and hopefully pick it up on their radar. Whilst looking through my books I did note photos of TA series Mosquitos (delivered during the same period as SZ976) and TE series (delivered later in 1945) with Monica fairings fitted, so unless you can find a photo, it could be with or without, your call.

The story according to the french is halfway down this page, with more photo's

Sounds like you're describing the Monica tail radar warning receiver fairing. Monica was introduced in mid 1942 and ordered to be removed in mid 1944 after it was found German nightfighters could actually home in on it. Although the radar was removed, the fairing was often left in situe on Mosquitos. Aviaeology research is very good, but the profile illustrating SZ976 with the fairing may be the result of using a generic profile. SZ976 was delivered between 4-1-1945 and 23-3-1945, at least 5 months after the discovery Monica could be used to home onto by the Germans, so I very much doubt that this was ever fitted. Without a photo it would be dificult to be certain, photo's of other SZ series Mosquitos would help give an idea whether they were ever fitted with the fairing.