Jump to content

Dave Swindell

Gold Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dave Swindell

  1. So there's still some hope then? New tool A340-600 is on the way from EE, wouldn't be surprised to see them follow up with the rest of the family - you might need to re-mortgage the house though....
  2. Lots of Mosquito radio fit info on the following thread (and in some of the included links), including a drawing that shows the type 62 mounting frame from the front Photo of what is believed to be Oboe apparatus installed in a mosquito http://www.mosquitocrash.com/Bleskensgraaf/Oboe apparatuur.JPG Found on this Dutch page http://www.mosquitocrash.com/toestel.html And more on Oboe here including another annotated internal shot of Oboe in a Mosquito https://mraths.org.uk/?page_id=2848
  3. No it's not, its just a link..... at least for me and quite a few other people It does seem to be security settings - I can open the photo's in a separate tab, but I get a Not Secure warning if I do. They won't hot link through to Britmodeller.
  4. Thanks for your prompt reply Colin @ColFord, that all makes sense and was along the lines I was thinking. Seat wise, as per manufacture with sutton harness Presume the leather rubbing strip would be similar to this fitted to a hurricane seat (couldn't find a suitably equipped mustang photo) One think I hadn't considered was the aircraft being received without radios, logical if the intention was to fit british sourced equipment before issue. However from the likely radio fits I've found for the Mustang III, they're the same or near identical boxes with different internals, so at 1/72 scale I don't think I need worry about the designation on the data plates....
  5. No idea on photo ref, a quick google didn't throw anything up. The colours have some logic, Shell house colours are red and, yellow. BP green and yellow, Shell Mex & BP Ltd used red, yellow, green & white. Without refs and assuming interpretation of b&w photo's I'd say there's room for interpreting one of the shades as yellow, possibly the registration
  6. No problem James, 35 years at sea and I've learnt far more than I've ever needed to know
  7. No, don't thinks so. Registered to Shell Mex & BP Ltd 6/2/35 https://cwsprduksumbraco.blob.core.windows.net/g-info/HistoricalLedger/G-ADCF.pdf
  8. Hi Alan You are of course correct, that photo isn't Derfflinger, its the battleship SMS Kaiser, with SMS Friedrich der Grosse astern, arriving at the Norwegian town of Balholm for the unveiling of the statue of Fridtjof the Bold on the island of Vangsnes, donated by the German Emperor on 31 July 1913. I'm not an expert on the German Imperial Navy, nearly all my naval references are Royal Navy. I just googled Derfflinger and picked a couple of images to illustrate my point on flags without really looking at the other details, it is a cracking photo though! Regarding rigging the Jackstaff, the jackstaff itself is very often not permanently rigged, being rather prone to damage if taking it green over the front, it would be rigged or stowed by the focsle party going in/out of port. Jackstaffs often have a decorative truck at the masthead (usually a crown in the RN), check what your drawings show for Derfflinger. This will have a sheave or pulley hidden inside it for the halyard to pass over. Each end of the halyard has an Inglefeild clip on it, and the Jack has a clip on the top, and a length of rope with another clip on the bottom. The clips on the flag are attached to the clips on each end of the halyard (forming a continuous loop up and over the pulley/sheave in the truck) and the jack can then be run up the jackstaff. The bottom section of the halyard can then be fastened to a cleat on the bottom of the jackstaff. The length of rope on the bottom of the flag serves several purposes, it secures the flag when rolled up and stowed, it enables the signalman to attach it to the halyard the right way up in the dark or with it still furled, and if it's secured around the flag correctly the flag can be hoisted into position in a furled state, and then "let fly" with a sharp tug on the lowering section of the halyard. This wouldn't normally be done with a jack, but is sometimes used when signalling - a preparatory signal would be made giving the order, then a separate signal flag would be let fly to signal when to execute the order. Below photo shows a bunting tosser cleating the halyards after hoisting a jack, note the Jackstaff is removable and has a crown for an ornamental truck at the top
  9. Thanks for that Laurent @silberpferd the links take a bit of trawling through but have loads of useful info. From your info I get the following serial batches for the wooden Shick-Johnson seat P-51B-1-NA BuNos between 43-12113 & 43-12492 RAF Serials FX848-FX972, SR406-SR411, SR413-SR414, SR417-SR419, SR420-SR421, SR432 P-51B-5 BuNos between 43-6333 & 43-6712 RAF Serials FX973-FX999, FZ100-FZ147, FZ149-FZ197, FB100-FB124 P-51C-1-NT BuNo 42-103019 to 42-103078 RAF Serials FB125 - FB184 This appears to tie up with the introduction of the rear fuselage fuel tank as commented on here by @Terry McGrady That just leaves the question of whether the seat was replaced with another style when passing through RAF MU's prior to issue. Was the Warren McArthur seat compatible with:- a) fitting a Sutton Harness b) a seat style parachute pack rather than the back style parachute Most references say RAF Mustangs were refitted with Sutton Harnesses, and the seat stye parachute was general issue, would these be standard on Mustang III's? @ColFord has given some good info on RAF Allison Mustangs, may I ask if you've got any info on the above please Colin? The radio fit is often quoted as being changed for British equipment, but I'm not too sure on this as the SCR522a set appears to be a standard fit on the B/C. As this was an American build of the British TR1143 which was further improved and built in the UK as the TR5043 I can't see a need to change the whole system if the required frequency ranges could be set.
  10. Hi Alan, I thought for a second you were coming over to the dark arts of ship modelling, but then I saw the figure models. The layout for this vignette sounds interesting, and could be justified for a couple of scenario's but not for what you are suggesting. Battle ensigns were oversize ensigns flown from the main signalling mast - big and high so everyone can see who you are. At any scale the figures would be relatively small and a good distance away from the battle ensign except in the moment of hoisting, but you're still going to loose the figures against the size of the superstructure and mast, or loose all context of the ship id you concentrate on just the figures and flag. The jack (flag flown from the jack staff - the flagpole on the prow), however is only flow at anchor or whilst moored alongside and not whilst under way. When entering Scarborough Bay the decks would have been cleared for action, crew at the guns or other stations and not on deck at risk from blast from the main guns. When entering or leaving port, or heaving up/dropping the anchor there would be an officer on the focsle to take charge of the anchor or mooring party, so there would be a rating and officer present there for the striking or raising of the jack - so you could link this to departing or returning from the bombardment. It would also solve your bow wave problem as the ship would be stationary. Derfflinger moored to a buoy, jack flying from jackstaff Derfflinger under way, no jack on jackstaff, or ensign at the stern, standard size ensign flying from signal yardarm on mainmast. This would have been replaced with the much larger battle ensign entering Scarborough Bay
  11. Well, the Arma Hobby Mustangs have landed and I've been doing a bit of research in view of building a couple of Mustang III's - which seat did the RAF use? The Arma Hobby kit gives two options, the Warren McArthur type and the (wooden?) Schick-Johnson type. For the two Mustang III's in the marking options the Warren McArthur type is specified. https://www.scalemates.com/products/img/6/9/0/1323690-65-instructions.pdf The Valliant Wings Airframe & Miniature on the P51A-C shows a 3rd type, a metal seat similar to the Schick - Johnson type. The illustration is from the British Mustang I/Ia manual (crown copyright) with a note suggesting it was applicable to most variants not using the wooden seat. Any guidance as to which seat would be appropriate to which Mustangs ?
  12. They don't , Chris, they call for Humbrol 30 Dark Green, and 90 for the wheel wells It's a Gift Set so all the colour call outs are limited to the paints supplied with the kit, so they're not very accurate in places https://www.scalemates.com/products/img/5/0/5/1185505-18-instructions.pdf @Spookytooth - Chris's given the correct colours for the aircraft despite what Airfix tell you in the instructions - your call on what you want to paint it though, it's your model
  13. You've quoted the incidence Dihedral is quoted as 4 degrees 43 minutes +/- 15 minutes on top of the rear spar - not a lot of difference, I know, but just for accuracy....
  14. Hot water or hair drier to heat it up and gently bend to shape, then dunk in cold water to set it. Test on scrap resin offcut first if possible!
  15. Whirling psychrometer Similar story - drydock in Hamburg, big football match that evening - not raining but doing exactly the same under the cooling water discharge so he could report humidity readings too high for painting that afternoon!
  16. 109 Sqn operated some BIV's equipped with Oboe, this was fitted in the nose and the nose windows were painted over as you say. Airfix show clear nose panels for their option, I'd go along with that unless you find photo's to the contrary. or evidence it was fitted with Oboe. I'll have a scan through my refs and see if I can spot any. A quick google picked up a couple of photo's of BXVI's credited as 109 sqn at Wyton with mostly clear windows Edit - these are all BIX's with non pressurised cockpit and needle props, not BXVI's, but it shows 109 operated with both clear and painted windows, and black or MSG undersurfaces (Night or day roles) They also appear to have regularly painted the aircraft ID letter on the bomb aimers window irrespective of whether the rest of the windows were painted out, so it's likely that ML957 had a dull red D painted here. Bomb aimers panel possibly painted? The bomb aimer's panel is painted out with code A on this one Definitely painted! ML907 HS-B J with MSG undersides https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=1845817792234468&set=g.1614750728754586 The last one is from 109 Squadron & 582 Squadron Pathfinders Facebook group, if you're on FB its an open group, it might be worth a trawl through their photos - I only had a quick look and found a couple of useful photo's of target indicators I needed for a Mustang build I'm planning. Another error that I've just remembered after looking at the above photo's - the air intake on the inboard sides of the nacelle below the exhausts (not the ones that appear on both sides) is B35/TT35 specific, remove them (one each engine) for a BXVI
  17. Hi Steve, I'm really glad to hear that, as I thought I might have put my foot in it there. I was part way through typing a PM to my mate Alan @Angus Turaexplaining my views as he had asked, but since you've asked as well I'll post them here - please feel free to use or ignore any or all of my musings as you see fit and enjoy finishing your model as you choose, however, brace yourself, these are my current thoughts on the kit:- I was really looking forward to the Airfix PRXVI kit, but once it arrived and I’d had a look at it I was quite disappointed as it could have been so much better. It’s accurate in outline and the basic airframe is good, but there’s lots of little details where they’ve dropped the ball, missed things or given us clunky detail. Some of these have been addressed by a Freightdog correction set There’s the obvious and well documented TT35 bomb bay doors and rear fairing which is incorrect for all other marks – Smooth out and fair in, or use Freightdog replacement The tailwheel tyre is the plain tyre only seen on very early Mosquitos with the short nacelles and short span tailplane, instead of the Marstrand “anti-shimmy” twin contact type seen on all other marks, Vampire nosewheels etc. – included in the Freightdog set Airfix made a big deal about how the undercarriage had been cleverly designed to be built up and fitted after painting, but in doing this they’ve moved the undercarriage legs closer together, the main wheels are therefore 1mm (25%) too narrow. The legs have some rather clunky detail, including stubs on the bottom of the legs which are part of the museum axle stands and should be trimmed off. The tread detail is also rather exaggerated and could do with sanding back if you’re not replacing the wheels. Tamiya got the undercarriage correct, and with care, this can also be built up and fitted after painting. The complex nature of the undercarriage and the fine detail on it makes me think this would be a prime candidate for a single piece 3D printed drop in unit with as separate wheel. The cockpit rear shelf is moulded flush with the top of the spars on part A2, this area was in fact the top of the wing, so its too low by the thickness of the upper wing, and the rear bulkhead is consequently too deep. Tamiya got this right by moulding the shelf together with the rear bulkhead which then sat on top of the spar assembly Airfix give you a T1154 radio transmitter (G3) to sit on top of the rear shelf, if this was fitted it would always be accompanied by an R1155 receiver mounted sideways behind the pilot (as per Tamiya and many other Mosquito kits, but missing in this kit) I doubt however this would have been an appropriate fit for BXVI. This was a W/T (morse) setup and used a trailing aerial for long range comms. The trailing aerial on a Mosquito was on the right-hand side of the cockpit and went out of a mast below and behind the entrance door – unless this mast is present it’s unlikely a T1154/R1155 setup was being used. Instead of the R1155 receiver Airfix give us a (rather undersized) Type 62 Gee display unit (G14). This was used for long range navigation and would be more appropriate for a BXVI, however when this was fitted the Gee receiver and other associated connection boxes would be installed on the rear shelf instead of the radio gear, which was now installed in the rear fuselage and controlled remotely. Gee is usually associated with long whip aerial(s) on the rear of the canopy or rear fuselage. The Pilot’s seat is moulded solid on top, it should be a bucket seat to accommodate the pilots parachute pack The control column yoke is rather over sized and the observer’s seat is missing the folding upper armoured screen. The flat canopy top section shouldn’t have the offset frame over the pilot’s seat, it should be a light internal frame on the centreline – only the canopies with the astrodome blister had the internal frame offset to clear the blister. The two horizontal frames and the vertical frame aft of the side bulges/blisters are also incorrectly shown as external frames, they are internal only. There have been comments that the frames are rather heavily done, but they don’t look too bad to me for a pressurised cockpit canopy. Earlier non pressurised canopy framing wasn’t quite as thick. The propellers have the correct blade shape, but they’re rather plank like and could do with thinning to give an appropriate aerofoil section. After the hype about the ease of fitting the undercarriage after painting, Airfix give us 3-piece exhaust units that need care assembling and fitting before closing up the nacelles, they’re accurate in shape, but I would have thought single piece units that could be fitted after painting would have been more in line with the earlier philosophy. The firewalls E17/F17 leave a large gap at the bottom, they should seal off the whole of the front of the nacelle with domed cavities over the top of the undercarriage leg tops – a common omission on most mosquito kits. A single part to fit here shouldn’t have been difficult to design. The intercooler intakes under the propellers are moulded with a gaping hole into the nacelle interior, they could easily have been moulded closed with a roof to the intake and a representation of the intercooler at the back. Conversely the carburettor intakes are moulded blanked off right at the front, they really should be open for a couple of mm to represent the intake. A lot of 2 stage Merlin Mosquito’s were fitted with a fuel cooler on the stbd side of the fuselage below the wing, this is missing from the kit parts. It is difficult to see in most photo’s because the engine nacelle blanks it, but there’s an excellent photo of one of the kit subjects 8K*K / ML963 taken from directly behind in flight where this is clearly visible. A large number of Mosquito’s featured a concave/convex fairing under the tailcone including 8K*K / ML963. This is missing from the kit. The fairing is often noted in connection with Monica, this is now thought to be incorrect and it’s thought to be associated with Type F Infra-red identification/signalling equipment. The part included in the Freightdog set I’ve only identified fitted to one particular Mosquito, possibly a trials installation, it doesn’t represent the fairing seen on most Mosquito’s which includes a concave section at the rear going into the tailcone. Not a shortcoming of the kit per se, but given the bulged bomb bay was there to enable the carriage of a 4000lb cookie bomb, it would have been nice to see one of these included to show this off.
  18. Apologies Steve. I didn't intend to kill your enthusiasm. The new Airfix kit is the best 2 stage Mosquito kit out there, it builds up quite well and except for the noted bomb bay is accurate in outline. The Mosquito is one of my favourite aircraft, and my initial enthusiasm for this kit was dampened somewhat by quite a few simplifications, minor errors and omissions that most people won't bother with unless they're looking for a really accurate model, if you want an OOTB build don't fret about these, just go ahead and enjoy it. Alan, Freightdog have mentioned a PR34 as being a possible subject for a conversion set. I'd say it's also a distinct possibility for a future Airfix release, it's not in this years announced releases but the kit has a sprue C with Mk XVI (TT35!) parts on it, but no sprue D so there's something planned for the future.
  19. XA927 First Flight 29/12/56 Remained with Handley Page at Radlett for test flying and RAF familiarisation until 15/4/58 RAF Cottesmore 10 Sqn 15/4/58 Major Service 3/7/62-18/10/62 15 Sqn 20/5/64 VS. RAF Cottesmore 8/64 ex 10 Sqn To Handley Page for K1 conversion 17/9/64
  20. New bomb bay doors, fairing, tailwheel, undercarriage, cockpit interior, canopy, propellers, exhausts, firewalls, missing fuel cooler. You're just left with the basic airframe with pretty much the rest of the kit needing retooling.
  21. I don't see your logic here Colin Model companies don't care who buys their models, as long as somebody buys them. Doesn't matter whether it's little johnny sticking it together in an afternoon, a hobbyist or enthusiast building it or stashing several, or a collector buying one of each, as long as it sells. Higher prices for limited editions are more to do with the higher costs per unit than charging a premium price to a collector. If nobody bought kits for the stash or a collection, kit sales would drop dramatically, those limited editions would disappear and your standard kits would now be the limited editions, prices would rise and choice would diminish, followed by a hike in second hand prices due to lack of supply. The current vast choice and relatively cheap prices of some kits is largely available to kit builders because of collectors and stashers, who in turn provide a steady supply to the second hand market
  22. A high wing loading helped, giving a much smoother ride in low level turbulence. A smooth ride helped crew efficiency and reduced airframe fatigue. The penalty was a high landing speed and the fully blown wings/flaps needed to help mitigate this.
  23. But the bailing out drill was to open the doors into the fuselage, retrieve the parachute, close the doors, clip the parachute on, rotate the turret, open the doors and bail out, so parachute stowage in the fuselage doesn't rule out the story. Agreed, probably apocryphal, but there's usually an element of truth behind these stories.
  • Create New...