chaddy

Hiya woody. Great to catch up with you! I found myself talking about modelling (and other stuff) on here rather than actually doing any. Also I've had a bit of an hiatus on the modelling front for a few years. However, during that time my stash never stopped growing. 🤣 My son bought me a kit a present awhile back and that got my enthusiasm back. I still pop in here from time to time for inspiration. Keep up the good work! 👍

If you look at interior photographs of Lancaster S-Sugar in the RAF Museum you will see that the hand rail down to the bomb aimers station is worn (and partly shiny) and 'black'. Closer examination of this will reveal small patches of what looks like yellow paint. Now whether this yellow paint was removed deliberately at some point in the aircraft's career, or it's just the wear and tear of a very well used aircraft is open to discussion. However, one would have thought wear and tear might only apply the top rail. I find it to dismiss, out of hand, the idea that most of the yellow paint wasn't deliberately removed.

It appears that yours doesn't seem to a number of sink holes around the MU turret that mine does!

Well done Ced! This has been an epic on the the scale of a Cecil B DeMille production. You've beaten this build into submission and come out on top. Excellent.

I see that the description on the decals is incorrect. 10 Sqn. were definitely not at Leeming in 'late 1943'. They were at Melbourne, and had been for some time. They left Leeming on 19 Aug 1942 when it was handed over to the RCAF.

Exactly right for a parked Halifax...oh wait! Yours is flying...

Indeed there is a small blister there. That is Mod 904. It seems to be located further aft on this aircraft than usual. It was usually position over the front edge of the small window in the bomb aimer's position. Presumably to allow him to follow the track of the bombs. It is a feature of aircraft with the perspex nose. See Merrick's "Halifax: From Hell to Victory and Beyond", for examples of aircraft with this blister in differing positions.

Fair enough. I think Ced has enough info now Unless he'd like me to post the combat report that 'proves' JB910 had the aforementioned blister.......

Michael The initial, unofficial, installation was carried out by Cheshire's squadron 76. The actual mod number for the perspex blister was Mod639B. Many MkIIs were retrofitted with the new fin and rudder assembly (Mod814) at their bases. The ones you refer to are probably those that had retained the perspex blister where fitted.

It's an observation blister. The original Merlin engined Halifax lacked poke and squadrons took all possible measures to reduce weight and generally 'clean up' the aircraft. One of these measures was the removal of the MU turret. At the same time they were aware of the problem of night fighter attacks from below and behind. You are correct to say that they utilised surplus side observation blisters for this purpose. Having removed the mid upper turret the surplus to requirements gunner spent his time lying on his belly keeping a lookout for enemy aircraft. That is the sole purpose of the blister. I had this confirmed by a F/E of 10 Sqn, who was on the squadron Feb 43 to Sept 43. There is even a Mod Number for it if I can find it in my records. Of course later improvements to the performance of the MkIIs (from late spring early/ 1943) allowed the installation of the lower profile MU turret, and the gunner returned to his original occupation. There is absolutely no doubt that JB910 had one such blister. There are a number of pics of 10 Sqn aircraft so equipped. There are also photographs showing MK11s with the new MU turret and the blister, (see pic). The only thing Im not sure of is if the likes of JB910 and JB911 left the factory with them fitted and the MU turret removed.

'Thanks chaddy - luckily JB910 is 'an early' and doesn't have the window or the bumpy bit. That's my story and I'm sticking to it! ' Unfortunately Ced the very fact that it is an 'early one' means that it does have the blister underneath. Apart from the fact I have an eyewitness account I also have the 'proof'..... Edit: There is a well known pic of JB911 at Elvington in July 1943 that shows the same feature...and on the aircraft on the ground, so......

Have you given any though as to how to deal with the perspex observation blister on the underside of the fuselage yet Ced? It can be see in the pic, just any of the H2S dome.

Here's another view. (Great, I seem to be handling this Flikr malarkey quite well now).

Just to keep the pot boiling and your interest in JB910 going (no backsliding and modelling a different aircraft). Sorry for the poor quality of the scan, but the copy I obtained from the RAF Museum wasn't that good. Herewith a potted history of the life of JB910:

Just trying this new-fangled photo sharing thingy out. Never had any props with PB!

That book ‘A Shaky Do’ is an interesting read, and a book I have in my collection. Highly recommended! It’s also interesting due to the fact that, in he extract linked to above (the Plzen raid), the bomb aimer on board JB910 that night was my wife’s cousin, Jack Hulley. The pilot was an Australian, Bill Virgo. At the time of the Plzen raid (April 1943), JB910 had no MU turret fitted. The MU gunner was acting as an observer of ‘below and behind’ by virtue of looking through a retro-fitted perspex blister mounted approx 6 feet behind the crew access door and on the underside of the fuselage. The picture published elsewhere in this WIP shows JB910 with the lower profile MU turret fitted. The crew is that of S/L Baird and crew. Baird was posted out of 10 Sqn in Late May 1943, so that pic can be fairly accurately dated as May 1943. Probably taken to mark his posting. Cheers.

I'm a bit late to the party on this, but enjoying catching up with the build so far. One thing that strikes me is that the forward port side lower window does not, apparently, exist on JB910 (and neither on the starboard side I think). Also the upper forward window appears smaller on the actual aircraft than on the kit. Cheers, keep up the good work.

Those two "circular thingies" are the "Z Equipment" mountings for "friend or foe" identification by aircraft fitted with "Village Inn" (AGLT) radar-controlled rear turrets.

If you are looking for a Canon 50mm prime lens, then check out this. It's Canon's latest. http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-canon-ef-50mm-f1-8-stm-lens/p1572990

The 1100D along with other "enthusiasts/consumer" DSLRs has a smaller sensor that a full frame Canon e.g. Canon 5D3. The comparative size results in a crop factor of approx 1.6x a full frame camera. Hence if you use a full frame (EF) lens on an APS-C camera you have to multiply the lens "size" by the crop factor. In the case above 50mm x 1.6 = 80mm. It's like having an 80mm (instead of a 50mm) lens fitted to you camera and the image will appear larger because the field of view is smaller. Birders normally use an APS-C camera because any given lens will give them more "reach". If you want to get more "reach" that's fine, but if you were interested in wide angle views it can be a bit of a drawback Canon EF lenses are designed for full frame cameras, EF-S lenses are for use with APS-C Canons. EF lenses can be used with full frame Canons and APS-C Canons. EF-S lenses only with APS-C Canons.

Remember that's an EF lens, designed for a full frame Canon. It's field of view will be the equivalent of an 80mm lens on your 1100D.

She's beaut to be sure

Top notch that Tony.

Looking good Tony.

I picked up one of these last week. Not my usual field of interest, but I couldn't resist. You've made a cracking job of that now I'm really looking forward to building mine.