christian Boehm

Here I am back Some other remarks about building 1) about the omitted escape hatch with circular window behind the bomb bay , I add them on both Mk I and IV ; see these exchanges https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235043655-blenheim-fuselage-underside/&tab=comments#comment-3139002 2) On the kit's front cowling rings , you will find - first 2 bulges covering the exhausts tubes - on them a small and fine hollow tube Studying dozens of pictures I didn't find these 2 fittings anywhere, exept on canadian built Blenheims and on some restored museum planes . So I deleted it all Anyway it's nor on my planed RO ° P Blenheim Mk I and nor on my planed 14 squadron MTO Mk IV see this film : https://youtu.be/dz2wGymCE_U 3) About the 14 squadron , the plane "W" Z5893 had the chin clear fire post but the plane "N" had the compact FN 54 ; I have good shots of both Again note the Z5893 was the "W" plane (and not the "N" like in Xtradecals sheet) ; the "N" was Z7631

…. following , sorry Hi Chris and Joe You're right Both underside rear firing posts are included in the H clear sprue ( Mk IV kit) specially as H2 for the "chin" and H7 for the FN 54 ( the last one has of course to be painted) And a part D7 comes for for the chin but it's very crude , without open space to Inside and, for me, inadequate Our above discussions were only about how operating of these posts were in the cockpit Inside range. About the FN54 compact one, the Wallace Clarke book is very useful but for the chin post , Chris's docs (dogsbody) broughtabove were goldworth ! christian PS : I will come again to you all later about other detail kit's imperfections I realized

Hi Chris and Joe You're rigfht both underisde re

yes Dogsbody I was just reading with attention Walter's text and watching with high interest his drawings I agree totally with you Dogs and congratulations to Walter for sending this message It's interesting to know , for the theory , which and how companies set out this gunnery. Was it FN or Bristol , ok, but that's a second hand question And , considering the modeller's practice , I also minded that simply sticking a blister under the noseopening was not the way. So I finally see what I have to do on the kit : a credible hole in the hatch Under the blister , setting ammunition box, asf ; the pictures show all you need And finally, about Walter's Drawings , it's just an example that google is fantastic but never perfect ! Above that comes the modeller's chating , with their docs stools, through good forums as ours , not ? thanks +++ christian

(… sorry gone too fast) … wrong interpretation . The only FN 54 was the compact one and the real Builder is Bristol , not FN ; You will find the proof in Wallace Clarkes book on british armament. Eventually and although these photos show the shape of the gun mechanism , it remains obscur how the cockpit floor ( actually the escape hatch part) was amended to permit sighting an,d firing I think I will pearce a small opening range with a sight column Inside the cabin ( (I read this column was telescopic for the FN 5' ; it must be the same for this one …?) Christian

Thanks Larumivi That's exactly what I had ( in that bbok) and why I thought there are (54 and 54A Fraer nash) posts. And Graham is riht : this is a wrong interpration

Hello all again First I have really to apologize …. Ivor is totally right : the Blenheim engine cooling gills are not separated by gaps when open. I was totally blinded by the usually separated gills on main planes and didn’t watch enough seriously the pictures. So now I found on my docs the gills covered by a thin plate in any case. Thanks a lot Ivor. Secondly sorry again for too less research and thanks to Graham and Selwyn Again you’re right. I opened my Wallace- Clarke -turret boo k again and found on page 35 the actually Bristol chin turret , false named Frazer Nash 54A in other publications; as well I founded it on Beaufort docs ‘ specially good shots in Bruce Robertson Ian Allan book) , although , as I read, it was rarely set on this aircraft. There is a drawing showing how the operator had to lie down to sight and fire (after folding his navigator seat as I believe) I will try to fit the turret as faith I can on the kit. So thanks to all for helping ! I am happy to travel to Telford in 2 weeks ( third time , always amazing experience)…. Christian

Hi everybody I am back with my Blenheim upgrading questions about building both Mk I and IV for replacement of my “old” Frog and Airfix models . Actually the “new” Airfix kit is quite a good one in many approaches but not so fantastic as one’s waiting for … See particularly the interesting option of closed or open cowl flaps: I choose the opens ones but was surprised by raising lines between each flap ; if someone wants engraved lines , that really must be these ones, not ? I had to engrave all flaps separations. About the Mk IV, I want to build a desert plane including specially the so called “chin” blister nose underside rear firing turret; it’s the Frazer – Nash FN 54-A model and there are some obscure things about this stuff. I admit it would be operated through the nose inside, as for the compact Frazer – Nash FN 54 (as indicated in the very good book “British Aircraft Armament – from Wallace-Clarke , page 131) But unfortunately this book doesn’t tell anything about the plexiglas FN 54A chin turret ! How was it inside the cockpit ? Probably the same telescopic periscop sight control column ? But it’s impossible to imagine a folding seat over that clear blister as on the compact turret, or … ? A photo on page 66 of Valiant Ed Airframe Album n°5 shows the extracted turret and doesn’t help a lot. Does anybody know more on how it looked like inside ? Thanks a lot Christian

Thanks Seahawk keeping researching I found that 14 squadron photos in desert included > yes the "N" plane but a photo on google shows obviously it's serial Z7631 ; and this one had the blister > also the "W" as Z5893 (and not "N" like in Xtradecals sheet) ; there are 90 % chances it had them as well

Hei Kari , wellome Finland ! Hello graham Thanks a lot I just wanted to check if I have to insert a clear round window after drilling , ang engraving this hatch Another lack of Airfix's Blenheim IV is the "Bubble" side window for the pilot (same lack for MPM kit although it's drawn on the box). I Don't know if it's in boxes of later Airfix kit issues This bubble was in place , as I know, on most following series , specially for the MTO I can tell the old airfix had it because I built it 30 years ago; and the Falcon clear kit does not. Not too difficult to make it scratch. Although I am french (!!) I don't want to make the "over-known" Mk. IV FAFL desert plane. Desert good photos of Blenheims are not too curent as I saw I plan to make the 14 squadron Z5893 in Lybia plane ( the squadron moved to Lybia after stationned in Irak) ; on a photo showing several planes in the air, unfortunately this window his hidden by the engines; The aircraft in front is Z5893 , actually "W" plane , and not "N" as on many profiles and even false decals.(see Xtra 72203). I suppose it had it …? christian

… gon,e too quick ! ….And to end my message , I curiously read in Airfram book that, for canadian built Mk, IV, this hatch was actually set on port (and not starboard) side... thanks for help Christian from Eastern France

Hello everybody I am on both airfix new tool Blen,ehims (Mk I and Mk IV) in 72 scale While studying the future black/white undersides of my Mk I, I saw , specially on cam drawings, a round Windows just aft the bomb bay (on starboard side). I searched them on the rare underside photos and found it only, but obvious, on the cover page of Cam&Markings Blenheim - Ducimus Ed N° 7. In Airframe album n°5 (blenheim); page 36 you'll find a picture and some explanations about it ; it's close to a small camera sight , included in an escape hatch Both escape hatch drawing and window are omitted on both Aifix kits. But it's easy to add them I have 2 questions to my ( specially british ! ) modeller friends: 1) ist it a window or an indetification light ? 2) were such hatch fitted on all versions ? And to end my message , I curiously read in airfram that this hatch w

Hi All thanks for help thanks john T for all your words ; I knew these pictures and a friend just loaned me Veryty's book thanks to Chris : your picture is an extract of War paint mag that I told in my first message. i think we could realize the decal although in 1/72 it is not easy Atv all, , about the codes, I am not sure if they were off because but I studied the photo again. I have it in different contrasts ;definitely most shots show the letter M between the 3rd and the the 4th airman from L to R So John ; I agree your words : "The photo in the book does not and I suspect that is down to either the books printing reproduction or the photo quality rather than the aircraft having the codes at one time and not having them at another." christian

quite nice and anyway better than the small drawing in war paint I think we'll use it thanks a lot Christian PS : I think the squadron codes were not applied to this plane only the "J" ; I have 2 good pictures of the plane I don't know how to send pictures through brit my mail is [email protected] ; just mail me if you want the shots

oups ! message went too quickly ! sorry Hi all I am coming again to my recently exchanges about a MkIII SD lysander (1/72) building. I project to make Hugh Varity's plane , the group captain of 161st squadron. This plane beared a nose motif : "Jiminy cricket drawing" I don't think any decal producer made that but a friend of mine is very good in shaping himself original decals But he needs a good drawing ; does anybody know a good one ? ; that one in page 27 of Lysander wart paint N°48 doesn't have a very precise shape. Diverse photos are of poor help. thanks ! christian

hello Roman I know the existence of that conversion kit but I don't need it ; I will use engine and cowling of my old Blenheim Mk I (frog kit) ; it is absolutely the same and I'm currently building the nice new airfix kit; otherwise, apart from the engine , I don't think there are much interesting parts ; finally for the "SD" version, I'm sure nothing is inside. Christian

Hello Ed thanks for the information copy if you have more for the interior ( including the additional middle position fuel tank , which was anyway included in every Mk III) , I would be interested ; I never succeeded to use the internal message system of britmodeller (I must be stupid ...) My E mail is :[email protected] Christian

thanks for the quick answer dave Anyway ,albeit the lysander' fuselage is quite large , seating side by side required quite skinny guys ! christian

Hello everybody I started building a Lysander – 1/72. It seems Pavla model is the most acceptable , although , as usually, crude and much work It has to be a Mk III so the cowling and engine replacement is planned But it also has to be a “SD” - special dutie plane. Actually this model will be on a diorama , with a lIzy landed at night in a field marked by the french resistance This diorama will stand in a brand new museum of the “secret WW2” museum in Strasbourg (France) My problem is : these planes kept 1 , 2 or even 3 secret agents inside . So I am sure the inside organization of the observatory stand was completely different I know the MG was away but was the over cockpit panel not taken off ? Sure because how to put 2 or 3 persons inside ??!! How is the cockpit space ? seats ? bench ? My docs ( specially war paint and 4+ monography) doesn’t help me for these questions Who could help ? christian

hello Martin thanks for the proposition I had a long time ago ( I am also over sixty) a subscription to airfix mag and kept a serie of RAF cam articles but a think the PSL is something different . Yes it would be very nice to send me a scan. i don't have your adress ; mine is : [email protected] kind regards

hello all I am building the new 1/72 airfix tiger moth and would not search complications, so i want to use the 10 EFTS 1940 decoration included; Anyway I have some doubts about the pattern It is obvious that in 1940 the fin was yellow but which cam pattern was used ? Airfix gives the "A scheme" but , if I'm right, these standardised schemes ( A and were adopted after 1940, not ? Would you follow the airfix proposition ? Documentation disapointed me ; war paint n°101 in which you can find quite only restaured planes photos and not even one war operation picture; Aircraft in detail was not a lot better My net researches about 10 EFTS moths was also poor ( I have one front view picture of plane 56 taking off but it's impossible to precise the cam) who could help ? thanks ! christian from France ( Club maquettiste Strasbourg)

oups sent too fast ! Mark your message with 3 possibilities sounds good and I also appreciate Graham's words : "you are the one who is going to paint it and live with it later" . That's a nice philosophical approach I will do my best Thanks and cheers christian

Hello everyone who share's my "hard answer" questions First I am impressed ( and congratulations) , Patrick about your courage modelling 5 samples of that machine ! What a nice madness we share .... I only did such things with Me 109s ! Secondly thanks a lot for to graham and Mark to be always at the step for this case (I read almost all your words of 2011) Mark your message with 3 possivbilituies sounds good and I also appreciate , gra

Hello everybody I finally could get a FRROM Vildebeest MK III . This kit is now very difficult to find on every 1st or 2nd market, specially for a "normal" price How to resist for a 36 or 100 squadron coat , one of the 2 units which made desperate raids against theJapanesefleet ? I am on the painting stage and then the dfficulties start... You would advice me to Watch what was said beetween march and novembre 2011 on this case. I know for sure : I read (not all ...) most of the chat exchanges which ( copied) cover more than 250 pages ! At the end, among all the experts who conversed,, I found no conclusion or synthesis. Finally I understood (did I well ?) : no certitudes exists about the use of Trop Sea Scheme specially at the time ofJapaneseattack. The other possibility is now the TLS ( as on Buffalos): dk earth and dk green So after going over the uncommon and attractive look of a model in Trop SS ( with about 0% risk to be wrong or right) and to be only at an approximation stage of the truth.( ...) , what would a "standard" british modeler friend choose ? thanks for your opinions, guys ! Christian ( french modeller for over 50 years)

good evening Graham I agree that this scan test , suggested by tony , has no "scientific basis" and iI don't forget your right remark about différences beetween ortho and panchromatic films (I am french and, of course, studied our most ortho WW2 pictures , that strong illustrate your words) ) but it was only a way to find arguments about the green shade (slate grey) is mostly ( with various exceptions mentionned by the commentators) being the lightest BW tone And on this theme , I learned something because, before this discussion, I thought it was the contrary thanks christian