Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Mark Mackenzie

Members
  • Content Count

    270
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

33 Good

About Mark Mackenzie

  • Rank
    Established Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1,408 profile views
  1. Mark Mackenzie

    Blenheim camouflage

    In the 45 Sqd history, 'The Flying Camels' by Jefford, dated photos of their Blenheims are given: On 4th August 1939, they are overall Dark colours of low contrast; On parade on 13th September 1939 they are painted in strongly contrasting Light/Dark colours; Then in early 1940, and in fact throughout 1940, they are shown back in the low contrast Dark colours. The author puts this down to experimentation, quoting the early AVIA documents. With the Singapore Vildebeest in mind, perhaps looking in Middle-East documents for answers to the colours that some researchers on this thread advocate, and are adamant occurred, is not the right place and the answer might be found elsewhere in RAF documents for another theatre such as Far-East, Far-West Frontier, Malta?
  2. Mark Mackenzie

    Blenheim camouflage

    David, the November 1940 AMO orders the two tone brown scheme and it is described in the letter I mentioned in August 1940. In the past Mark H has wrongly tried to implicate the error in the Aug 41 AMO as evidence for dark green in early 41. The tropical land scheme is two tone brown as described in corrected AMO. It’s name was not changed only the colours it represented.
  3. Mark Mackenzie

    Blenheim camouflage

    The August 1940 letter clearly identifies what camouflage schemes (both unofficial and official) were in use at that time. There are no Dark Green/Mid Stone schemes listed in any of the published RAF documents for the period from mid 1940 until August 1941, but for the same period a Dark Earth/Mid Stone scheme clearly exists. Now you are suggesting a Blenheim in early 1940 is painted Dark Green. When I have asked you for the evidence you have indirectly pointed me towards an error in an August 1941 AMO and said that I am being illogical for not understanding why this would happen. You have then thrown it back at me that the Dark Earth/Mid Stone scheme was not official for 1940. You manage to side step the main issue in every single post (both in this thread and past threads) namely, why a mistake made in August 1941 applies to aircraft in 1940 and early 1941? Can we have constructive debate rather than what has happened in this thread and previous threads.
  4. Mark Mackenzie

    Blenheim camouflage

    As I understand from past comments in older posts, the August 1941 AMO is the evidence being purported for a Dark green/Mid Stone Scheme in early 1941 and 1940? That is why I pointed out the dates were wrong and that is why I posted it in response to your post. The August 1940 letter clarified camouflage colours for the purpose of identifying aircraft and was not an order. If any aircraft preceding that date by months, were in Dark Green/Mid Stone, then I find it very hard to believe that this letter did not identify them as such.
  5. Mark Mackenzie

    Blenheim camouflage

    On the 25th Aug 1940, in a Middle East letter "Aircraft Camouflage and Identification", the colours are described by aircraft type as either "Dark Green and Dark Brown" or "Dark Brown and Mid-Stone". Gladiators & Valentias were in the Brown/Stone scheme whereas Bombers and other fighters were in the Green/Brown scheme. No colour scheme of Dark Green and Mid-Stone is described at all for any aircraft. Both you and Graham are circumventing the post. That is you have not responded as to why you think and error in an August 1941 AMO (of two weeks duration) will have an effect on aircraft in operation prior to this AMO? That is clearly illogical and flawed (something you have accused me of). I would suggest that you admit to your mistake with regard to this AMO and find some other logical reason (if one exists) rather than trying to use this AMO.
  6. Mark Mackenzie

    Blenheim camouflage

    The Tropical Land Scheme was DE/MS because that was how it was described in the corrected AMO. That can not be argued. It is unlikely that any aircraft would have been painted in the incorrect colours, especially given that the chief maintenance unit responsible for overseas aircraft requested clarification on the AMO within weeks of it being published. Even if it did happen then that error has no effect on aircraft painted before this AMO was published. The RAF would have needed a time machine to paint the Blenheim with the August 1941 AMO because the photo of the Blenheim is dated 1940. I would note that both you and Graham are trying to propose a scheme for 1940 and early 1941, based on an error in an AMO of August 1941 which post-dates an AMO of Nov 1940 describing DE/MS. That is illogical and flawed. Do you understand why I object? Talk more about twisting history rather than going around a buoy because that is exactly what you are doing.
  7. Mark Mackenzie

    Blenheim camouflage

    Graham, that is not the research that I did. The research that I did proved that the AMO was an ERROR that was corrected, and NOT whether it had been rapidly corrected or not. As I pointed out to you at the time, the name "Tropical Land Scheme" was not an error and was NOT corrected and therefore refers to the originally intended colours scheme of Dark Earth and Midstone given in the AMO. If it had referred to another colour scheme then the name would have been changed as well but it was not. Graham, an error in an AMO is never an OFFICIALLY PROCLAIMED scheme. Furthermore, a SINGLE account by a veteran which contradicts other veterans can not be assumed to be VALID as what you are assuming. We do not know what aircraft he was referring to or the circumstances. P40s, for example, were in a lighter shade of Dark Earth and Dark Green. Unfortunately, thanks to you and a few others posting heresy on forums like this, modelling companies are now publishing this as factual.
  8. Mark Mackenzie

    Blenheim camouflage

    That is not correct. B/W photos do not show colours.
  9. Mark Mackenzie

    Blenheim camouflage

    Given that a colour scheme of Dark Green over Mid-stone never existed I doubt it. (As has been pointed out to you in particular, numerous times in the past). Prior to the 1940 AMO of Nov 1940, SAAF documents describe the colours as Dark Earth/Light Earth.
  10. Mark Mackenzie

    Italeri Hurricane Mk.I Trop boxed with wrong wing set?

    The colour scheme is also rubbish. A Dark Green/Midstone "Tropical Land Scheme" is pure fantasy, both in nomenclature and colours.
  11. Mark Mackenzie

    36 Sqn Vildebeests - Serial/Code Letter Tie-ups

    Nick, NO WHERE have I claimed that the documents are exclusively mine. I'm just asking for some common courtesy from you, and that is to quote the original source, which was NOT YOU despite what you might publicly claim. Below is a print-screen that I took of the original forum post and immediately below that is your post. If you can not read the small print I can re-post it at a larger size, but I note you had no trouble reading it at the time. Regards, Mark
  12. Mark Mackenzie

    36 Sqn Vildebeests - Serial/Code Letter Tie-ups

    I'm not presuming anything. Here is the link to those exact documents (#63) in which YOU are a participant. Just because you RE-COPY them and RE-POST them does not obligate you from common courtesy and public decency. The same applies to the earlier documents that I originally posted on this forum and which you now quote.
  13. Mark Mackenzie

    36 Sqn Vildebeests - Serial/Code Letter Tie-ups

    The source was a forum post from me a while ago, as are several documents that were referenced. Of course he doesn't have to quote the source, however common courtesy would have been appropriate. That happens, When someone re-posts another's research, work without reference to the original.
  14. Mark Mackenzie

    36 Sqn Vildebeests - Serial/Code Letter Tie-ups

    Nick, It would be nice if you would quote your sources. I posted that same document a while ago on this very forum as well as several of the other documents that you now quote. Regards, Mark
  15. Mark Mackenzie

    36 Sqn Vildebeests - Serial/Code Letter Tie-ups

    With regard to your first post, you have NOT quoted any document in the archives accurately that I am aware of. I have seen the archive document that you refer to; it is NOT quoted accurately Furthermore, you have ADDED your own judgement which is where the distortion occurs. Post the document quoted correctly, i.e. word for word as it is reproduced in the archive file, then we can work from there. Otherwise what I have said stands true. With regard to the second post, it refers to YOU and MARK, where I am referring to a "judgement that can reasonably be expected from a majority without need for debate". The article written by Ian.H. was published before the National Archive documents became available with the "Tropical Land" scheme colour diagrams and other documentation. These same "Tropical Land" schemes were also at one time referred to as "Desert" schemes. These schemes were designed for Egypt, Aden and Iraq, where they were tested first. Egypt, Aden and Iraq are arid, desert countries. None of the schemes were "Mid Stone and Dark Green". This is NOT debatable it is a fact - all of this comes from the archives. It is not based on any assumption about the incorrect or otherwise use of a term.
×