Jump to content

Fortress Mk. III


Recommended Posts

That's a real stunner Paul, beautiful model!!

I'm just wondering what I should build next :hmmm:

You could always finish my Coastal Command Fortress II for me....!! I know what you mean about B-17's being a slog, I started it for the long finished Battle of the Atlantic GB on here & have just managed to get the fuselage halves together....!! :rolleyes::lol:

Once again, really lovely Fort you have there!

Keef

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a beautiful build, Paul, but there seems to be one small detail you may have missed. In his book 'A Thousand Shall Fall', Murray Peden, who flew with the Fortress III with 214 Squadron, states that the lower part of the pilot's side windows were painted black as an anti-searchlight measure. I can't find my copy of the book, but Peden says that this measure, together with flying with the pilot's seat in the lowest position did provide a measure of protection against glare. There was also a photograph printed in the book showing that, I seem to remember, the lower third of the window was painted. I don't know if every 214 Fortress had this, but I think that Peden implied this.

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the kind words everyone!

That Flying Fortress looks brilliant in the 100 Group markings, Paul! I rather fancy a go at one myself. Did you use any conversion parts (I believe Paragon used to make a set) for this ECM version? It would look great next to a Luftwaffe KG200 example.

Regards,

Jason

Thanks Jason! The Paragon set isn't widely available anymore, so I just scratchbuilt all the extras. The Radome under the nose is from a Lancaster. It's not quite the right profile for the Fortress, but it's close enough!

I really like it! Very nice scheme, it looks great in RAF camo & a very tidy build. BTW - do you ever question the worth or the sanity of Eduard internal PE sets given whats visible when all said & done?

Thanks Prop Nut! To be fair both the kit and the Eduard sets were review samples and both were great fun to use, so I haven't thought about the visibility issue :)

That's a beautiful build, Paul, but there seems to be one small detail you may have missed. In his book 'A Thousand Shall Fall', Murray Peden, who flew with the Fortress III with 214 Squadron, states that the lower part of the pilot's side windows were painted black as an anti-searchlight measure. I can't find my copy of the book, but Peden says that this measure, together with flying with the pilot's seat in the lowest position did provide a measure of protection against glare. There was also a photograph printed in the book showing that, I seem to remember, the lower third of the window was painted. I don't know if every 214 Fortress had this, but I think that Peden implied this.

Dave

There seem to be pics of aircraft with and without this feature on the 214 Squadron webpage. You're probably right, and there's a fair chance that the small windows in the nose should be painted over as well, but then I wouldn't be able to see any internal detail at all! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, but then I wouldn't be able to see any internal detail at all! :lol:

The way I build kits this would probably be an advantage!

Great build, though, a Fortress does look good in RAF colours. I may have to build one myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a great build, looks really good in RAF colours, it reminds me that I have a 1/48 B-17 in the loft with the Paragon set and a set of decals ! one day maybe.

Cheers

Dennis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wrote to the RAFM at Hendon a few years ago asking if they would consider repainting their B-17G into these colours and converting it to represent a 100 Group aircraft and the EW role in general (it is in the Bomber Command Hall after all) as there are two other B-17`s in the UK wearing USAAF markings only just up the road at Duxford, but they were not really up for it! I also asked if they would consider repainting their B-25J from totally annonymous USAAF colours to represent either a Free French or Free Dutch Mitchell Mk.III used in the last year of WW2 to help celebrate the fact that Free Europeans flew with the RAF during WW2, but again, they didn`t like that one either!

All the best

Tony O

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, Paul, that's great!

I have a Revell B17 in my stash, but also an Airfix (actually a reboxed Academy) one, too. After reading your WIP and seeing the final result I've decided to build a 214 Squadron Fortress III myself. I'm going to use the Airfix / Academy kit and scratch anything else.. I've checked and the Revell Lancaster BI / BIII H2S radome fits (I know I'll have to deepen it). I haven't checked diameters or anything but I'm considering using a cut down Lancaster 'cookie' to form the basis of the 'Jostle' box.

One thing - may I ask your advice please? The ball turret aperture: how did you fill it, please? A heads-up would be most welcome. My thoughts are to 'plank' iot inside & then again externally, making good with Milliput. But I'd love to know how you did it!

Thanks for a very interesting WIP.

Jonny

Edited by Jonny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wrote to the RAFM at Hendon a few years ago asking if they would consider repainting their B-17G into these colours and converting it to represent a 100 Group aircraft and the EW role in general (it is in the Bomber Command Hall after all) as there are two other B-17`s in the UK wearing USAAF markings only just up the road at Duxford, but they were not really up for it! I also asked if they would consider repainting their B-25J from totally annonymous USAAF colours to represent either a Free French or Free Dutch Mitchell Mk.III used in the last year of WW2 to help celebrate the fact that Free Europeans flew with the RAF during WW2, but again, they didn`t like that one either!

All the best

Tony O

That was a great idea, Tony. What a shame the RAFM doesn't see it that way. Duxford does adequately highlight the sacrifices made by the USAAF / USAF by allocating a whole hangar so I see no reason a representative RAF Fort. shouldn't be in what is after all known as the RAF Museum Bomber Hall. The work of 100 group isn't represented there at all, so far as I recall (last visit mid-January!).

How long ago did you ask them? It may be that minds have changed ...

Edited by Jonny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...