torqueofthedevil

Bit late to the party - not much WiFi access at the moment! Here is an excerpt from a current crewman logbook. https://i.postimg.cc/0yvh2mB7/IMG-20210410-143310.jpg To me, the answer to the question is which column the words appear in (I don't think this is stated categorically in the previous posts). Assuming that it's in the Aircrew Duty column, then I would suggest that he was operating a radar screen of some sort, as others have suggested. I would be interested to find out why a Dakota had a radar fitted - weather avoidance, perhaps, or possibly for finding ships if the Dakotas were ever used for maritime patrol in the Far East to augment the usual types. With respect to FatFlyHalf, I don't buy that theory: I suspect that if he was the 'screen' for a new Radio Operator, the entry would read 'Screen Radio Operator', and more importantly, if he was qualified to teach or mentor new arrivals, there would probably be more than just one such entry. But I can't say with any certainty! If however Screen Op is listed in the Flight Details column, then that opens a whole new can of worms. I don't have any useful suggestion for what a 'Screen Operation' would be. I hope that helps slightly. I don't think we will ever know for sure.

I don't think that the winch was fitted during the Afghanistan years due to any serious intention of using it - the aircraft was too precious and probably wouldn't have the performance anyway in those conditions. I suspect the airframe(s) just happened to have a winch fitted when sent out to theatre. The hot refuel technique you mention is called HIFR (Helicopter In-Flight Refuelling) and the winch does indeed have a key role in that. From my limited knowledge of it, the fuel flow vs burn rate was usually a concern, with pump pressure varying from ship to ship, and the best way round it was to keep hover height to a minimum. On many occasions, the same wind which makes the sea too rough for a landing also helped reduce the power required to hover - but then wind drops much quicker than sea state!

Sorry folks, late to the party. I can't help with the camouflage colours (so many sensible ideas put forward already, few of which we can ever prove right or wrong!). All I would say is I respectfully disagree with the suggestion that JV44 repainted its aircraft (touch-ups perhaps, but I mean major camouflage application). Apart from the practicalities of doing so, the lack of any individual marking on the aircraft in question strongly suggests to me that it arrived looking like that and didn't change. Any military unit, however desperate the situation, will try to put numbers on things, partly for traditional reasons but also to avoid tactical confusion if all the aircraft/vehicles look the same. Therefore, I surmise that if JV44 had the time and resources to apply a full camouflage job, they could also have applied a tactical number. Even if it wasn't a perfect neat marking with a contrasting outline, anything is better than nothing - as we have seen with the slightly wonky swastika on a 262 tail in this thread, plus the freehand werknummern on various Bf 109Ks etc. Of course, having one aircraft without a number doesn't matter...or even several, provided that the camouflage varies, as we all agree was the case in the Luftwaffe in the closing stages of the war. But painting all the aircraft in the same camouflage and then not adding tactical markings? That could be the case, but it doesn't sit easily with me. Knowing the situation when JV44 was in existence, I would say it is more likely that the aircraft were used in whatever state they arrived in, with little interest in (and little scope for) modification to appearance or anything else. But who can say for sure?

If it's a Sturmbock, the cowling guns would be removed I think?

Sorry, that was a poor attempt at humour. The cabin of the aircraft is very cramped for the crewmen, hence my suggestion to use the wrong scale of crew figures to make the point

Just make sure that you put 1/48 scale crew in the 1/72 model. Or 1/32 crew if you make a 1/48 kit!

Very useful, thanks to all who have contributed (saved me starting a new thread!). I have a can of Badger Airbrush Cleaner - is that any good for cleaning Alclad or should I stick to cellulose thinner?

Thanks everyone, all good ideas! Using the Airfix one is probably the most straightforward if Trumpeter don't respond.

Thanks @lunarhighway I'll drop them a line. I haven't found any after market replacements - I had a look before starting the thread. I know what you mean about scratch building, but I think I would end up wasting a lot of time creating something that didn't work. The sliding part of the canopy and the wing light covers would be manageable, but the windscreen would be a real challenge for me. Thanks again for your reply.

Good evening everyone, Does anyone have any recent experience of getting hold of spare parts from Trumpeter? I have had a 1/24 Hurricane in the stash for ages (as in getting on for 10 years) and I was thinking of finally starting it...but when I opened the box, there is no sign of the canopy sprue. I have no idea whether it was present when I got the kit and I have since lost it, or it was missing at the time of purchase and I didn't notice. Either way, I need to get hold of a replacement...any tips or experience would be welcome. I've never needed to contact a model company before! I'm not even sure this is the right place for this thread but I couldn't see anywhere obvious.

Well yes, but they were no more than 10 years old at the time! The decades which followed took their toll!

Six out of the 19 HAR3s made up the Falklands pool of airframes. By about 2005, they were all gradually painted yellow as they passed through depth maintenance. The matt grey paint usually looked pretty tatty (presumably harder to clean than the gloss yellow) so you will have a field day if you like weathering!

Thank you @MDriskill, fascinating to see.

More fantastic information, thank you all!

Thank you both, very useful information! Much appreciated! Stunning build, sets the bar very high!

Good morning all, I am starting the Nichimo 1/48 kit which has been in the stash for many years. The instructions are almost entirely in Japanese, and I can make out no clues as to the colours required for the cockpit and undercarriage bays. Please could someone give me a steer?

Yes, but I very much doubt it. Any maritime aircraft is treated carefully, even the parts which aren't meant to have direct contact with the water. And at the time this aircraft was pictured, the Germans were still some way off the desperate 'throwaway culture' which was evident near the end of the war. As to the original question about RLM 66 vs 02, it's whatever colour you think it is based on the pics, not whatever a decree from Berlin might have required. Small remote factories might have had several reasons for not complying.

As well as the engine differences, how about propeller types? If the Lancaster IIs had alternative engines due to a shortage of the usual type, is it possible that (a) an alternative and inferior propeller was also installed or (b) that a normal Lancaster prop was married to the Hercules with disappointing results?

Two more for the list: Tutor and Prefect (in both cases, Avro and Grob). A can also be Air, as in HAR2, 3 and 3A (Helicopter Air Rescue)

The third Gene (or AC Alternator)! The other two, which every variant had, didn't stick out far enough to need a bulge

Yes, as above it creates space for the third generator on the back of the gearbox. No APU on the mighty King though! The Accessory Drive takes care of that

Presumably it was one of the numerous fighters redeployed from the Reich to France in the days and weeks following Overlord.

Thank you. NB the bulge is nothing to do with the engines, which are forward of the rotor mast; the American and British engines fitted neatly into the same space, with no external differences visible.

Histoire et Collections Planes and Pilots Vol 9 (ie the one about the Fw 190) has four colour profiles of 190Gs. One is the aircraft shown in the colour pic above, another one also in 74/75/76, and two are in winter schemes. The units are SG 2, SG 4, SG 10 and SKG 10. No idea how accurate any of this is!

Can I come please? As long as we don't get captured by the Russians...