Hornet133

Buz, The 3 images showing Jowett by the nose of an airframe with a 'Roo' are https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C331256 https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C331257 https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C331258 C331258 is the least useful of the three, the other two show the nose art in much more detail, which shows it is not the same airframe as 'F' (reportedly) that I posted above. If that is OK-F with the cover over the cockpit it is likely FR273 in that timeframe (May 43). Code letters are known for all the airframes you listed on Doug Norrie's serial listing, but like you I do not have any images of the Port nose that I can identify to any of the airframes you listed to see if they have artwork or not. Steve

Well RAAF CAC Sabres and RAN Skyhawks both carried Sidewinders and both are quite a bit older than a Strikemaster so it is not impossible. However I also think it is just a publicity shot.

Canadian Goose serials were Mk. I (2), (Serial Nos. FP471, FP473), Mk. II (29), (Serial Nos. 382-397, 796-798, 917, 924-926, 939-944), for a total of 31 aircraft. So '392' would fit, something starting with '2' is not possible. I will leave it to you to decide.

Hi Buz, Are you referring to this IWM image (I acquired a print from them when I was in the UK back in the 80s). Various people have claimed this is 'F'. Now it 'may' be, but it could just as easily be a 'P' or the cockpit cover may come a different airframe completely. However the 2nd image of the Starb side of FR273 does show a similar demarcation position of the lower surface colour so that lends some support to the theory, no Kangaroo but I would not really expect one to Starboard. But this is not the airframe in the Jowett images. The Kangaroos are completely different, look at the raised right hand foot on the 'Jowett' Roo, and where the demarcation line of the under surface colour runs thru the Roo, much lower on the Jowett images. There were many different Roo airframes as earlier mentioned. Steve

I do not know which airframe that Jowett was photographed with as due to the angle, where we cannot see either the code or serial (hopefully Buz may know when he catches up) but it is possibly not FR242. Jowett was likely photographed with 'his' machine, but pilots flew whatever was available for a mission. FR242 Mk. III (P-40K-1-CU) OK-◊ 26/09/42-19/12/42 Flown out to 53 RSU at El Magrun. Carried the name 'Kathmay' beneath the cockpit. OK-Z 25/04/43-21/08/43 Hit by ground fire during armed recco to southern Italy. F/O. H.A.C. Jowett RAAF baled out and captured. POW Interpreting the above it means that it was with 450 Sqn in 1942 as OK-Diamond (being one of F/Lt Frank Schaaf's airframes). The image I attached of it below shows it not carrying a Kangaroo then. On 19-12-42 it went back to 53 RSU for some sort of work on it (Buz 'may' have the details). It came back to 450 on 25/4/43 not long before the AWM images were apparently taken when it was coded OK-Z and stayed that way till it's loss with Jowett on 21/8/43. Did it have the 'Roo' at that stage, I do not know. Possibly it is the same machine but possibly not. Sword included decals for OK-<> in their 1/72 scale kit SW72064. Note on the decals they give the serial as RF242, thus you have to cut them apart and re-arrange as FR242. Do not miss the name 'Kathmay' below the cockpit either. The decals appear to a lot more accurate then their sideview on the back of the box which has a number of 'problems' (letter too small etc). Steve Mackenzie

I have counted at least 12 airframes carrying the 'Roo' artwork from 450 Sqn by carefully comparing details. The majority are in Temperate scheme (although there are a few odd ones in the earlier Desert colours). Doug Norrie's list (he is the 450 Sqn Historian, well known to 'Buz' and myself) confirms Tim Forneau's 'Pete' as being FR811 OK-V. If you look closely at the AWM image you can see the 'V' under the lower lip of the nose intake. Bombs could be either Brit or US manufacture (both were used at times). Bomb loads on the Mk.IIIs were as given by 'Buz'. 1000 lb bombs were first carried by the Kittyhawk Mk.IIa (P-40L) airframes but they could only lift one (on the centreline rack with nothing on the wing racks). No P-40 variant could carry 1000 lb bombs on wing racks (those were limited to 500 lbs) but FX serialled MkIV airframes could carry 2000 lbs in total (1000 lb centreline and 500 lb under each wing). The FT serialled Mk.IVs appear to have been limited to 1500 lbs in total (I assume an earlier variant of the engine with a bit less power. The image of FR853 OK-D follows. One very important point to note is that the 'Roos' are a very light colour (either White or a very light Grey on all examples that have been seen). If your decals have them in Brown as is common, get better decals, as many artists (decals and profiles) are plagarising a profile from the 1960s which had them as Brown (too lazy to bother interpreting photos themselves). Steve Mackenzie

Keep in mind that your sources listed are basically all CASUALTIES. The majority of crashes were likely not involving a casualty thus not included in those figures.

@WLJayne I was the person who supplied the info for the DK Decals of this scheme. The 'Rabbit' (actually more a 'Hare') was on both sides per attached. I have no proof that the flag was on both sides as the door is open on both images I have of the Port side but it likely was. These were part of an extensive article that I did on 457 Sqn Spitfires in the UK in the IPMS (NSW) publication 'in miniature' issues 23/3 and 23/4 (available from ipmsnsw.com in the magazine link) back in about 2009. Steve Mackenzie

@rhagger Garry Shepherdson emailed me this morning before I caught up with your latest message to say that the serial is 42-10204, which equates to A29-190, which did take part in the mission in Film F01739 according to Geoff Sinclair's post above. While at first glance it 'looks' like 42-10104, enlarging the image shows a digit much more similar to the '2' than the '1' so I agree with him. Steve

Hi Rob, The airframe with Pluto chasing Tojo was AM-M as seen in the attached still from AWM Film F01739 (attached). Serial is unknown, Peter Malone does not have a serial match on his 77 Sqn listing. As for the P-40M. I discussed this one also with Pete Malone once. As you know Barkla flew A29-325, MP-R, with 86 Sqn, and had the Pluto emblem on the cowling of that aircraft. Pete said when A29-325 went to 1 RSU for an engine change in Feb 1944, Barkla then started flying A29-374 on a regular basis. A29-374 was later transferred to 77 Sqn. It is 'possible' that Barkla had the cowling with the Pluto artwork transferred to A29-374 when he took it over. I do not believe that the code is known on this occasion. Steve Mackenzie

Olmec Head This is the image showing clearly that the codes were outlined at one stage. I was busy at the time and only now have had a chance to upload it to web space as Britmodeller does not let one upload directly to the Forum as most sites do these days. Steve Mackenzie

79 Sqn did not usually outline their codes but A58-517 did have outlines at one stage (very clear image available). There are also images of it without. So you can omit the outlines if you wish.

'The most-commonly appearing result in web searches for NE-1s are dressed as BuNo.26358, allegedly attached to Airship Squadron ZP32 at NAS Moffat Field, California. ...... Are these BuNos guesswork ?' Possibly. Attached are the photos of the known airframe in that ZP32 scheme. As you can see it is actually Bu.No 26359 (whether 26358 was also in that scheme I do not know, but it is likely an error by the restorer). This first image is reputedly taken in 1942. Whereas the two others were taken in 1943. Note the Sqn markings have been upgraded to a later format. Steve Mackenzie

Yes the so-called colour image is colourised. They conveniently quote the IWM reference (CM 2808) for the original, which one can easily see on the IWM website is B/W. Whoever did it appears to have used Red in the national markings, apparently not aware that it would have been Orange.

Yes the Aussies originally used a Yellow colour on their Antarctic airframes (ignoring things like the C-47 which was left in Nat Metal). AFAIK the Brits used Orange on their expeditions (I will not attempt to quote exact shades, it looks different anyway depending on film, processing etc). I do not have any colour images of the two Austers VX126 and VX127 while they still carried their Brit serials (only B/W unfortunately) but have to assume they were in Orange per usual Brit practice. However I have lots of images of them after the Aussies acquired them and re-serialed as A11-200 and 201 and they are Orange in every single case. The first Aussie Beaver that went to Antarctica (A95-201) was originally in Yellow (same as previous types) but after we got the two Auster airframes they must have decided that the Orange was superior and it got repainted in Orange also (as were all the subsequent Beavers). No I have not seen the October 2023 issue of Scale Aircraft Modelling and what Paul Lucas wrote (we will likely not see that down under for a month or two). A couple of images of A11-201 in Orange colouring. Next we have the Antarctic flight of two Austers (only 1 in the shot) and two Beavers at that time with Beaver A95-201 still in it's initial Yellow scheme and the others in Orange. The next image shows one of the Austers in it's hangar. Note the wing from Beaver A95-201 leaning up against the wall still in it's Yellow colour (A95-201 was the Beaver that had the trial 'standing Roo' markings during that year's expedition. And finally a image from the 1958 expedition showing A95-201 now in it's later Orange repaint (and by then standard 'Roo' fuselage roundels. Steve Mackenzie

The categorization of the Vb into early/mid/late versions is nothing but a marketing ploy by Eduard. They invented the term which did not exist officially. Not the first time they have done something like that.

There was a number of photos of 38BG Invaders from 1946 in Japan on one of the Ebay seller's pages about 12 months ago. While many airframes had nose art, the only two images showing 'Dragon' noses are the 2 that I have attached below, all the others had plain noses. The photos on the link given above are fascinating, 3 more of 405th 'Dragons' plus one with a 'Panther' nose. The Wikipedia page at 'https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/38th_Bombardment_Group#Post-war_duties' makes it clear that they were short of personnel, thus it is likely that not many airframes got the full nose markings. This is clearly Japan, not Korea as the 38th did not exist during the Korean conflict. There is a partial serial visible of 'K' below. You might try the A-26 page at 'https://www.facebook.com/groups/565854913602010' to see if the administrator can give the full serial. He is quite knowlegable and helpful. Steve Mackenzie

And if you would like to change Air Forces then ALL 3 Sqn RAAF P-51s had unshrouded exhausts.

Being a match to the D&S 1/72 drawings only counts for anything if those drawings are ACCURATE. There have been comments over the years about a number of the D&S drawings NOT being accurate. No I do not have any info to check them one way or the other.

PatG There were six Sqns of LF.Mk.Vbs operating in two wings as part of 11 Group during the D-Day invasion. These were fighter aircraft and not 'Spotters or ASR machines'. They were still in service as the LF.Mk.Vb was 30 mph faster than the Spitfire Mk.IX at sea level due to it's specially boosted low altitude engine. Still very useful for low level operations.

The colourisation above is done with a programme which automatically calculates what it 'Thinks' the colours should be based on an algorithm. Sometimes it gives good results, other times it leaves a lot to be desired.

It would have been nice if they could have got the serial correct for Vengeance NV-S. The correct number was A27-248, they are repeating the hoary old error of it being A27-48 again...

Keep in mind that while on most aircraft the pilot entry is from the Port side, it is common for a ground crew person to assist the pilot with his straps while standing on the Starboard wing root. Thus the marking on both sides would not be unusual.

Agreed if it was built specifically for the Luftwaffe. But there were likely airframes built for civil use that were impressed later into Luftwaffe service.

As I said elsewhere, many civil Me-108s came from the factory in RLM 24 Dunkelblau i.e Dark Blue. I suspect that is what we see here.