sanguin

Well, we Brits used 'mark' numbers to differentiate upgraded versions, some Europeans used 'serie' in the same way, suffixes of A, B, C etc also worked well. Block numbers are a more recent innovation. However, 'tranche' offers a 'je ne sai quoi' that all of those miss. The 'Mk google' version of the venerable OED on line: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/tranche What more can I say? John Apologies for the thread drift, but the heat has gone to my senses.

Ah, but 'tranche' is so much more exotic and expensive-sounding... John

Tony, Sturtivants' 'RAF Flying Training and Support Units' book has one BAFO picture, taken at a wintry Lubeck in 1948 of a Dakota C.IV KG770. A rather dull three quarter image from front port side, bare metal with an anti-glare panel in black and the angle shows no markings details at all. It has an astrodome and the 'approach aerials' on the side of the nose. The history of the unit lists a wide range of aircraft types from Anson to Valetta C.2 via Spitfires of various types. Dakota Mks III and IV are on the list with only KK200 given as a serial. It was one of those almost 'ad hoc' units so beloved of the services. Formed 15/7/45 from the 2nd TAF Communication Squadron as the British Air Forces of Occupation based at Buckeburg was elevated to Wing status on 10/10/45. It must have been quite large as 'E' Squadron was renamed Air Division Comm Sqn which operated out of Gatwick until 7/9/46. The Wing reverted to Squadron status 22/9/47 and was absorbed into the 2nd TAF Communications Squadron at Buckeburg in 1/9/51. The wheel had, as so often in the military, turned full circle. The facts are thanks to Sturtivant, Hamlin and Halley whose book is such a labour of love, the opinion is my own. Sorry I can't help more, there must be more information and images out there somewhere. I suspect that black and white pictures of miscellaneous types on airfields from that period exist but without any attribution to the BAFO squadron. John

This Britmodeller link below may either help or hinder. My copy of 'The Squadrons of the Fleet Air Arm' from ?1984 contains no Whitley images, but the codes list at the end of the book Gives Whitley VII Z9379 as WOX. The drawings at the end of the book show yellow, white or red codes for shore based aircraft; yellow predominates amongst those illustrated. John

Thanks again to you all for enlightening us. Now we all know it's only after the ground crew have done all of their preflight checks that our fighter pilot hero is allowed to swagger out to 'kick the tyres (tires) and light the fires'... So a bit of detail in the air brake recesses is now called for. but that is a fair swap for covering the wheel wells. John

Brilliant! The link to that video should be on a sticker on every F-86 kit. That would prevent the elderly from spending hours of indecision looking at still pictures and failing to decide what the hell was going on. Thanks again, John

Gentlemen, my thanks to you both for responding and special thanks to Tony for sharing his technical knowledge with us. Over many years of browsing and using this site I am still in awe of the knowledge of others. The incidence of 'duff gen' is is rare and always given with the best of intentions; those that know the facts will then usually correct it and we all learn. One of the many joys of Britmodeller. My request was because having looked at many pictures of Sabres on the ground there seemed to be no concensus, particularly with the large nose wheel door. Clear images of the central main wheel doors are commonly less visible but the few I have seen also had either 'up' or 'down'. I must admit that most pictures seem to show the air brakes extended, but not all. It was this mixture of positions that provoked my question. As to the slats, I must confess that to be honest I never really noticed which must be a sign of old age and being unable to cope with both wheels and wings at the same time! So the main doors are either open or closed together, the airbrakes can be open or closed without any reference to the undercarriage doors and the slats may be left open or pushed closed by the ground crew. Hydraulic bleed down is not a relevant factor but it is the attention of the pilot and ground crew that makes the decision. That makes the build a bit easier for me, then. Anything for a tidy aeroplane and fewer fiddly bits to paint. John

My thanks for such a clear and prompt response. All a'dangle it will be. John

This may resemble the old discussion about Mustang hydraulics, but I seek some help. I want to build an F-86 Sabre, probably civilian, on the ground. Can anybody give me advice on the normal 'aircraft parked' position of the undercarriage doors? Lots of pictures do not clarify the situation... The main wheel doors are often hidden behind tanks but seem to be hanging vertically almost on the centreline with the smaller doors attached to or very close to the main legs, However the main nose wheel door has the dimensions of a barn door. I have seen one comment that it retracted as soon as the nose wheel was lowered as it destabilised the aircraft in yaw on the approach. If this is true then I assume it then bled down, like the airbrakes, when parked. So is a parked F-86 usually seen with it all hanging down as the hydraulic pressure falls or are at least some of the doors manually locked in the up position? All advice gratefully received, John

This article may answer some of your questions, Brian; for PR pilots in WW2 go to page 28 onwards, but the entire paper is useful reading. https://www.aerosociety.com/media/4847/a-brief-history-of-flying-clothing.pdf Met Flight pilots had similar problems of long flights with repeated climbs to 30,000 feet, this shows a Mosquito crew: https://raf-pathfinders.com/1409-meteorological-flight/ As far as I can tell the amount of extra clothing that could be worn was to some extent limited by the size of the pilot and the cockpit. Also being able to easily get into and out of the cockpit was important... Electric gloves/waistcoats etc were dependent on the various electrical supplies in different aircraft. Looking at many RAF bomber crew photographs it is interesting that so many of them show most of the crew in Irvin jackets and boots but with normal trousers (doubtless with a few pairs of long johns beneath). Relatively few seem to show the whole crew in the brown Irvin jackets and over trousers. This may well have been to do with being able to move around in such bulky clothing and get through emergency exits if required. And for those modelling TAF Typhoons based in France, pilots were issued with army khaki battledress to replace their RAF blue which looked too similar to German feldgrau. How many wore them I do not know. I hope you find this helpful, John

Modellers may find this site of interest: http://www.moosemartyn.com/home.html It is the history, through letters and some logbooks, of a Canadian pilot who joined the RAF in 1936 and later transferred to the FAA . Compiled and put on line by his grandson as a family project it is a true labour of love and I think it deserves a larger audience. I met the grandson, Taylor Martin, by chance in Faversham and he told me about his grandfather. It was a rare pleasure to encounter a relative youngster who showed such pride and affection for his grandfather and the work he put into the on-line history reflects this. All of his non-family research was done from the internet as he was in Thailand for part of the time. I have given him more information from some of my books and this may appear soon as amendments or additions. Have a look and I hope you find it as interesting as I do. John

Having seen just a snippet of how to dismantle and then put together a real Phantom will stop me from ever complaining about making either the Fujimi or Airfix kits. The immense number of hours of effort that were given to turning a gate guardian into the stunning aircraft we can now see makes me feel really humble. I cannot now ever moan about building a model in the warmth of my own home. Brilliant work from all of the UAS team, thanks to you all. John

About 1530 this afternoon, a very low Chinook flying parallel to the A2 road between Canterbury and Faversham then heading up towards the Medway towns. Are the RAF earning a bit of cash by counting the potholes on this bit of road for Highways England? At a pound for each pothole recorded that would more than cover their fuel costs........ John

Port Dickson Green has a BSA ref 0f '/206', whatever that means. It also has an ICI reference of 'MM2006 15/11//63' and I don't know what that means, either. See: http://www.bsafiles.se/misc/BSA_Color_Codes.htm and it explains a lot, but not everything. The best place to get proper support will be a specialist company. My bikes never had the pleasure of a proper paint being applied, the nearest can of Hammerite or a 'similar' aerosol of some car paint sufficed. Rust was inhibited by oil leaks, one of the few benefits of Buying British in the 1960s.... However try this company, about whom I know nowt but they seem to be helpful: http://www.rsbikepaint.com/en-gb/contact.php They should be able to give you some information and probably sell you the correct colour of paint as well! Good luck and I am now boggled by the sheer range of paint colours used by BSA in the 50s and 60s. No wonder they went bust, their paint store must have been the biggest part of their factory! John

I have not been able to find any reference to a saluting Gannet at Eglinton (HMS Gannet) or Ballykelly. However if you want something a bit different, the accidental 'clipped wing' Gannet was an Eglinton creation. Gannet AS1 WN349 from 719 NAS at Eglinton probably flew into turbulence from the Gannet in front when pulling out from a rocket-firing dive over the coastal range at Minearney, Northern Ireland This neatly removed both of the folding wingtip sections of the Gannet at the fold line. Thankfully Lt Eric Taylor kept control and successfully landed it at Eglinton. He and his crewman were unhurt. This was in November 1958. It is mentioned here: https://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?122110-Carrier-Aircraft-Wing-tips-up-in-flight There is even a very nice picture. Coded 'GN' on the fin and '550' on the nose (but just '50' on the lower part of the finlets) it was broken up for spares in early 1959. This neatly solves the 'fold or not to fold' question but still keeps the wingspan reasonable..... As an aside, the Eglinton SAR Dragonfly went out to lift the wing sections from the mudflats next day. Lt Cdr Meadowcroft, the senior helicopter pilot, saw his winchman connect the line to the strops that were already around the wing. He put on power to start the lift and nothing happened; adding more power meant the load for the winch by the port door had to be balanced on the cyclic. The wing was full of mud and water, making much heavier than it appeared. Full power produced no result other than the nose suddenly dropping, so the winchman, without first telling the pilot, used the emergency cutter on the cable. With the load gone instantly, the Dragonfly rolled hard to starboard and crashed onto the mudflat a few feet below. Neither winchman nor very surprised pilot were badly hurt in the crash. Exit one Dragonfly, WN498, and one chastened winchman, I suspect. This tale comes from "Flying from Derry' by Guy Warner of the Ulster Aviation Society, a very interesting book and well worth reading. Naval flying has always been 'interesting' and Guy tells his history very well. John

Oliver, The best place to look is on model shipbuilding websites like Steel Navy. The USA, Japan, Italy and Germany all made different catapults to launch reconaissance aircraft from cruisers and battleships. They were all different in design. Look for etch brass in 1/700 or 1/350 scale that can be used to detail Royal Navy (or Royal Australian or New Zealand Navy) cruisers that have the etch for making catapults. They are few; Gold Model did make an etch set in 1/700 back in 2004-2005 with the parts for a catapult. It is long out of production but there are images on Google. I have not ever seen any proper drawings, but have seen models. British catapults for cruisers and battleships all were made of steel; angle iron, like cross braced framework. Very little smooth sheet steel was used. Also each catapult was served by a crane to lift the aircraft onto the catapult trolley. I hope this helps, mt apologies but I know no more. John Oh, try this link here on britmodeller, 1/350 etch with some catapult parts for HMS Belfast: And also so the same "Maritime reviews' and then 'Aftermarket' is a similar etch for the battleship HMS Queen Elizabeth.

I do not know of any drawings, but there have been a number of catapults built by both modellers and model engineers over the years. This link will give you an RN training film on catapulting a Walrus with a lot of information: Aagh! Self-loading youtube.....oops. I have searched Google with no success in finding drawings so far, but there must be some combination of words in the search box that will succeed! John

How about something just slightly more exotic for your proposed repaint? The Harvard from 500 (County of Kent) Squadron as shown on the Freightdog 'Weekend Warriors' decal sheet may look more interesting to both the general public and enthusiasts. The sheet is for sale on certain sales website: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Freightdog-Decals-1-48-WEEKEND-WARRIORS-Royal-Auxiliray-Air-Force-1948-1953-/130760309857 I cannot find a 'non-copyright-infringing' link that shows the three-view as well as the actual markings; it is also available in 1/72 from Freightdog or Fantasy printshop. This is a link to the only on-line image I can find of this aircraft: https://biblio.co.uk/book/harvard-t2b-fx432-r-500-sqn/d/319022176 The Auxiliary Air Force boys get very little coverage from the aircraft restoration movement and it would be rather nice to see a Harvard flying that has proper squadron markings. Disclaimer. This suggestion is in no way related to the fact that I was born in and now live in the County of Kent, it is just coincidence! As to the 1/72 CMR resin conversion set noted above, it features the longer canopy, long external exhaust and i think the small dorsal dome shown on the box. I had this set years ago, it was fine but i vaguely recall some comment later that the canopy framing was slightly wrong, although that may be just brain fade on my part. Edit: the brain fade isn't as bad as I thought. This is worth a read if you are building a Harvard IIb (or even IIa?): John

Be not afeared. This was on Britmodeller in 2010: It works. Well, it worked for me. I painted with a brush as I went and cleaned the joints before gluing. Tedious, but building Takom Mk V tracks was worse...... John

I know almost nowt about this particular vessel but I do know just a little bit of history. Nothing is ever simple once the military get involved. The RASC ran the boats that were used by the War Department for all sorts of purposes. In this case they were High Speed Target Towing Launches that were used to allow coastal gun batteries to train at shooting high speed targets in estuaries and near ports/harbours. The RASC had a number of these. For reasons best known to a desk wallah somewhere, one group was named the 'Battlefield Class' and all of the boats in the class were named after battles fought by the British army. However, the first eight were ex RN MTBs built by Thorneycroft in 1942/43. They were 75ft 6inches long and were passed to the army after they developed cracked frames. Thorneycroft then supplied further Battlefield Class boats that were only 69 ft long with a completely different hull; I have not got a number delivered for these. Then British Power Boats supplied some more, still part of the Battlefield Class, that were very similar to the RAF Hants and Dorset High Speed Launches. They were 68ft long and Langemark was one of these boats. So that is all I know. If Langemark is indeed original then it is a unique survivor; a 69ft Thorneycroft boat called Amiens survived in 2012: http://www.nationalhistoricships.org.uk/register/1337/amiens-rasc I would like to think it is still intact. I hope this helps, the entire history of military coastal craft is still not properly resolved and i hope someone else can fill the gaps (caverns!) then I have left with my little bit of knowledge. The RASC operated a weird array of boats, many of which are poorly documented, used for all manner of things including minesweeping! John Just out of interest, pre WW2 my father went school in Cobh, one of the Treaty Ports in the south of Eire, his father was in the Garrison Artillery baed on Spike Island which had a few coastal guns. Commuting from the island to the harbour and back was courtesy of the RASC and an old steam pinnace or puffer called Winstanley. This trip was enlivened every week or so by the old IRA sitting on the hill below the cathedrals taking the odd potshot at the funnel and keeping the crew on their toes. Can anybody tell me any more about the Winstanley, please? Oh,the Royal Arsenal in Woolwich had two large and specially built barges called Gog and Magog. These were designed to transport large gun barrels for trials and proof testing at Shoeburyness, I believe. Any information on those would be nice. Thanks again, John

Very nice, Bjorn. That looks like an excellent build, the Broplan vac forms can be of varying quality, one or two of mine were very thin in some places and thick in others. You have made a very nice job of a rare kit. I like the 'pre-fields and meadows' camouflage scheme, great to see it modelled so well. Take a bow, sir. John

Martin, it is another of those strange greens that looks different in different lights. When first applied it seems to be a rich glossy olive in bright sunlight, but brown under a cloudy sky and then faded (as if 'chalked'), very non-reflective and worn away in use. This covers the F-104 but I believe it is the same paint applied to the Super Sabres and Drakens: http://www.amarc.dk/index.php/feature-articles-mainmenu-28/15-f-104-modelling/50-royal-danish-air-force-f-104-starfighters I believe the same colour of paint was used on most Danish military vehicles and even some coastal vessels at that time. John

Martin, I cannot find any plans, but this link: https://www.ole-nikolajsen.com/album dk.pdf is an excellent source of images of Danish military aircraft. The same author also has a good English language PDF of the history of Danish military aviation, I recommend both to those who are interested. Scroll through to page 236 of the link and have a look at the F-100 section. Page 244 shows the best 'above oblique' shot of the pods on an F-100F. It is interesting that so few Sabres have them fitted, most do not. Have no other information on who manufactured the pods or how effective they were. Nor do I know anything about better afterburner cans....I hope the pictures help, though. John

The G S.A.P. is a Gun Sight Aiming Point camera, most seem to be US issued as Bell & Howell 16mm item with a standard 3inch lens which is sort of 9cm. Presumably these were replacing the Meteor cannon so that they filmed whatever was in the aircraft gunsight. All the pilot had to do was spot a small supersonic model, track it, close up as it slowed and then film it. Easypeasy! And the Meteor had enough difficulty finding the Mosquito before the model actually launched..... Men was men in them days! John

Page 41, paragraph 4 of the Cranfield report found by Ross above describes the Meteor cameras: Though the parent aircraft was well provided with cameras for recording the early stages of the test vehicle flight it was not thought likely that any of the later stages would be thus covered. Accordingly a much faster aircraft, the Meteor IV, was detailed to formate with the parent aircraft until the release and then to attempt to follow and photograph the.test vehicle for as long as possible. The Meteor was equipped with five forward-facing G.S.A.P. 9-ram cameras housed in the gun positions. I would assume that this would make them difficult to identify in anything other than a view from the front three quarter. Unless a good image appears at some time, it looks like a fairly normal Mk IV. John