Dad's Fairey Barracuda III - more razor saw action...

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

This is going to be a slow build, because I really want to get it right.

Based on the Special Hobby 1/48 Barracuda, I am planning to build this aircraft:



It is a Fairey Barracuda Mark III, PM 933 / N6L, of 810 NAS, and it will be depicted as it was when flying from RAF Beccles in Spring 1945 on anti-E-Boat patrols off Holland and Belgium; I was electrified to see that this very airframe is one of the profiles in the Barracuda From The Cockpit book - but note how battered the nose is, in particular. This is a weary veteran!

The photo above was actually taken a couple of months later (though the aircraft is unchanged), when the squadron was working up with HMS Queen before setting off for the Far East, though they never got further than the Irish Sea as the Bomb was dropped first (my Dad always used to claim that the bomb had nothing to do with it: they heard he was coming, so just gave up). The Pilot is my Uncle, Ted Hartwell, and the Looker my Dad, Bill Morton (both, alas, no longer with us); their TAG (when flown, which was rarely) was Leading Airman "Tex" Northover. [uncle Ted married my Dad's sister after the war].

For obvious reasons I want to make this one good; though the aircrew are no longer around to see it, my Mum is and it will be a present to her.

I have two copies of the Special Hobby kit - one the bog standard Mk II, and one the 'Hi-Tech" Mk II/III - the latter obtained at the weekend via eBay (which at least solves the ASV radome issue). I also have a CMK Merlin III, ready to be modified into a Merlin 32 (following some excellent advice from Britmodellers over in the WWII discussion forum). The Bren Gun Barra II/III detailing kit has been ordered, but not yet arrived. It probably seems wasteful to some of you on here to have 2 kits, but the second kit was bought as an insurance policy to allow me to make the wing fold etc modifications right, with some back-up available in case of disaster. Makes me feel more comfortable when doing radical surgery, anyway!

I plan to build it with wings folded and at least one engine cowling open - probably both - with maintenance work going on. I have a different picture of Dad's, taken of a 744 NAS Barra at Maydown in 1946, which has given me some ideas for the diorama aspects. There is also a great pic on p44 of Barracuda From The Cockpit, of an aircraft being worked on at North Front, which has given me inspiration.

This will not be a speedy build, because I am working on others at the same time - for instance I plan to do the Gazelle in which I did my first rotary solo for the Helicopter GB starting in a couple of weeks, and something else (not yet decided) for the slightly later FAA GB. The Barra, being a labour of love, will be the thing I turn to occasionally for slow-time relaxation, and might take months!

One plea; if anyone has any reference material which shows the engine installation, open cowlings or whatever, than I'd love to see it. I have the aforementioned book (which has some good shots in it), I have the Flight cutaway drawings, and I have photos of the FAA Museum nose (both with and without the restoration which is currently going on), but there doesn't seem to be much else around that shows the engine bay. I may have to make educated guesses, but I'd rather model from evidence if it is available.

Edited July 24, 2013 by Ex-FAAWAFU

[mackem01]

Good luck with a very worthwhile build.

[Martian]

This should be an epic build! Can't wait to see how it comes along.

Martin

[bigbadbadge]

Great subject and great to here the backround, very interesting, good luck with the build I am sure you will do them proud.

All the best

Chris

[Seahawk]

Interesting: can't recall having seen a Barracuda with Night undersides before but most of the anti-E-boat aircraft (Swordfish, Albacores) were finished at least partially in black.

As regards photos of the engine installation, pop down to Smiths and get the latest Aeroplane Monthly Collectors' Archive on Fleet Air Arm Aircraft of World War 2: page 69 has a large (half-page) clear photo of a Barracuda's engine undergoing maintenance.

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

I don't think the undersides are Night - I think that's just the way the 70-year-old photo has scanned; if you look at this one, taken what looks like only a few seconds earlier (judging by the relative bearing of the frigate below)...

...it shows up better.

The fuselage sides seem to be Night - there's a clear demarkation line (for instance just above the N6L) where the camo stops and the dark colour starts. But there's also another line, most visible under the nose, and in this second photo also on the underside of the wing / wing fence.

Whoever did the profiles in the Barra From The Cockpit has come to the same conclusion; they show a reasonably standard camouflage pattern on the upper sides, then Night on the slab sides of the aircraft, and what looks like Sky undersides - but it's all pretty dark.

More research required, I think!

The edges of the dinghy stowage are also very prominent in these shots - I guess someone had just done some routine maintenance on the dinghy and then re-sealed the compartment.

Edited May 15, 2013 by Ex-FAAWAFU

[Seahawk]

The fuselage sides seem to be Night - there's a clear demarkation line (for instance just above the N6L) where the camo stops and the dark colour starts. But there's also another line, most visible under the nose, and in this second photo also on the underside of the wing / wing fence.

Think you're right. The wing fence didn't really look Night on the first shot either.

Interesting scheme which might tempt me as well. The sticking point I would foresee is that quirkily shaped "6" in the side code: maybe that nice Mr Freightdog will come to the rescue.

[tonyot]

It looks as if it had been operating with Night sides and undersides (which I`ve never heard of before, so very interesting!) while flying anti E Boat ops but that it has been repainted into a day scheme by applying Sky to the undersides and fresh Extra Dark Sea Grey and Dark Slate Grey has been applied to the sides, leaving the original colours on the upper surfaces in place looking faded in comparison.

I`ve been looking at photos of Barra`s from this unit for years and never noticed the demarcation line along the upper fuselage,....so well spotted! Once you know it is there it is obvious! There was also a Barracuda photographed wearing full D-Day stripes but I don`t have any other info.

Isn`t one of the Barra`s from this unit already featured on the decal sheet of the Hi Tech version of the Special Hobby kit,...I seem to remember seeing the odd looking `6' in the code but cannot remember whether it has been reproduced correctly or not?

One last thing,.....most of the Barra units working up for ops aboard Light Fleet Cariers with the BPF had their TAG`s rear guns removed to save weight and as you say the TAG was rarely carried for the same reason, this was because the performance of the Barra was marginal in the Pacific heat. Makes you wonder why they were sending them in such large numbers? After the war most of the Barra units aboard the Light Fleet`s swiftly converted onto Firefly`s.

All the best

Tony O

[Seahawk]

Sorry, getting off topic but...

I tell a lie, I have seen a photo of a Barracuda I suspected to be at least partially in Night before. There's a photo in the FAA Museum collection of a Barracuda III showing an apparent demarcation line running back from the top of the exhaust aperture with a darker colour below (ie exactly as for N6L). The way the light falls means you can't make out whether there's a demarcation line along the rear fuselage. Again there also appears to be the normal demarcation line running along the "bottom corner" of the radiator with a light colour, presumably Sky, below it. Again the wing fence (and the radome mount) look to be in Sky. With less confidence I'd assert that the wing undersides and tail struts are in Sky as well.

The aircraft (serial illegible: deep in shadow!) is in EIF markings (normal European with the red painted out, still with yellow surround to fuselage roundel) and coded J-L. It is being escorted by Corsair IVs with "B" tailcodes, making them 1851 Sq from HMS Venerable. The aircraft may therefore be from 814 Squadron (the other half of Venerable's 15 Carrier Air Group) though I don't believe the code J is attested for them, or anybody else apart from 846 Squadron (Avengers and Wildcats on Trumpeter).

Anyway, I put it down to a combination of a quirk of the light (panel line accentuated by sharp shadow?) and an over-active love of finding unusual camouflage schemes. Now I'm not so sure.

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

I've had these pics of my Dad's aircraft for years - since he died, in 1999, in fact - but it's only now that I have decided to model the cab that I've studied it really closely. I agree with Seahawk that this 810 aircraft, at least, is the normal EDSG / Dark Slate camo on top, Night sides and a lighter colour (assumed to be Sky) underneath. I'll have a play with the original scans in Photoshop & see whether I can shed any light on the tail underside & struts - I am 90% sure (from a better reproduction of the second pic above) that the underside of the wings is Sky, too.

Hope you're right about the 810 decals in the Hi-Tech SH kit; it hasn't arrived yet!

[Seahawk]

Ex-FAAWAFU

The engine photo in the Aeroplane Monthly book is the same one as appears on p.44 of "From The Cockpit 16: Barracuda", so you can save your money!

Tony

The 1/72 SH Barracuda III kit contains markings for MD965 N6C but the 6 has unfortunately been "tidied up". Maybe it was painted more tidily on that aircraft?

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

Maybe - but I'm building the 1/48 version anyway, so no matter. I may have to see whether I can make my own wonky 6 decals

Edited May 16, 2013 by Ex-FAAWAFU

[JOCKNEY]

Good luck with the build, it will be a very emotional build but so worth it.

Lots of people are behind you on this one, however remember it's your build so whilst opinion and advise might be forthcoming you you are not obliged to follow it.

Look forward to following this and might even be tempted to build the novo one with you although unlikely to the same standard as yours.

Cheers Pat

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

"More research required, I think!", said I... and it got a bit confusing!

I started looking a bit more closely at my Dad's logbook (which Mum only gave me a couple of weeks ago, which is when these photos fell out), and it made me ask a few questions. All the stuff I put in my first post about Dad & Uncle Ted being on 810 together, flying from Beccles in Spring 1945, was true... but when I came to look at the logbook, all the 810 aircraft were marked as 2-something [2P, 2L, 2C etc], as below (this scan is of a later page, because it is clearer).

On that basis, N6L doesn't look like an 810 aircraft. I had identified it as such based on a profile in the wonderful "Barracuda From the Cockpit" book (shown for reference only):

The same book does, however, show a Mark II with serials that match the logbook (again, for reference):

Then it got weirder - the Hi-Tech Special Hobby kit arrived, I opened it, and the (only!) scheme for Barra III that they include is... guess what: N6L, but not the aircraft above; N6L / RJ903 of 744 NAS, flying from RNAS Maydown in 1946. When Dad left 810 at the end of 1945, he moved to 744 as Senior Observer (as a 21-year-old S/Lt!). So maybe these photos aren't of an 810 cab at all, but a 744 one.

The only way I was going to solve it was to adjust the photo contrast to see whether the aircraft is RJ903 or PM933.

I did this, and eventually managed to read the serial number - you may or may not be able to read it from this, but trust me, it's definitely there and legible when you zoom in on the original:

It is definitely, without any doubt, RJ903. I looked in Dad's logbook for the 744 period (a year later), and there it is: N6L, on the very last sortie he flew in the RN before he was demobbed (plus another one a couple of weeks before).

[Note, incidentally, the pitifully few hours he had in total; I'd amassed well over that before I went front line. He finished his whole career with just over 300 hours total, having flown front line on active service for over 15 months. They were sending these guys out on real operations with unbelievably little experience.]

So there we have it. The aircraft is going to be N6L / RJ903 of 744 NAS, RNAS Maydown in May 1946.

But that doesn't solve the colour scheme issue, of which more soon!

I am a very lucky boy; 2,500 Barras built, of which almost 900 were Mk IIIs. Special Hobby pick just one of those for their Mk III decals, and it turns out to be the exact airframe that I have logbook and photo evidence of being flown by my Dad. What are the odds?

Edited May 19, 2013 by Ex-FAAWAFU

[Miggers]

Wow!!

Now that is brilliant research.

It makes cracking the model and getting it historically accurate all the more satisfying WAFU.

With you all the way on this one mate,the Barra was a much unloved work horse of the Fleet.

[Seahawk]

Great stuff! Afraid I tore off down the avenue of wondering where I had seen other photos of N6x coded Barracudas without thinking to query the correlation with 810 Sq: doh!

Looking forward to your further thoughts on the colours.

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

Basically, I think the upper of the 2 profiles above (the 810 N6L one) is correct: normal EDSG / Dark Slate Grey camo uppers, then Night sides, then Sky underneath. There are 2 clear demarkation lines...

... one above the N6L / leading aft from the exhausts, and the other under the nose / across the top of the ASV radome. I know it doesn't look like Night in this pic, but bear in mind that I have adjusted the contrast considerably to be able to read the serial.

A couple of photos of a different aircraft (N6B / ME254), presumably taken on the same sortie (first photo again significantly adjusted). The upper one shows the lower demarkation line clearly under the nose, and is also better under the tail; you can see Sky under the roundel and astern of the radome, all the way to the tail.

... show that this squadron had re-routed the dinghy lanyard to avoid the serial numbers; this was done on later Barracudas. [Compare it with the 2 profiles above. where the lanyard goes in a straight line across the serial - this was more normal for earlier aircraft].

Finally, for completeness, the only other Barra picture I have, which is of my Dad's course graduating from RNAS Arbroath on 747 A Flight in March 1945:

My Dad is the one immediately to the left of the airscrew (i.e. on the starboard wing root); Uncle Ted is immediately to his left as we look. Ted was a couple of years older than him, and had been a Petty Officer Pilot in Swordfish before being commissioned. [i especially love the two matelots skulking in the background, trying to pretend they're invisible (visible under the port Fairey-Youngman flap); the only surprise is that aren't smoking!]

Edited May 19, 2013 by Ex-FAAWAFU

[Seahawk]

Firstly, great photos: thanks for sharing.

I don't see any "black" areas on N6B. Do you?

The photo of N6L is very interesting. On all Merlin Barracudas there is a panel line running aft from the top of the exhaust aperture and, as I've said, I've been inclined to discount the apparent colour demarcation as the light catching that. But the line along the rear fuselage is another matter: I just can't honestly explain it as anything other than a colour demarcation.

But, but, but!

1. What would be the point of going to the trouble of overpainting the sides (which, in TSS, are already pretty dark anyway) while leaving the very light sky undersides untouched? NB also that RJ903 wasn't completed (ready for collection by ferry pilot) until 19/7/45, ie after VE day, so it's not done previous service on anti-E-boat patrols.

2. NB that, whatever colour the apparent dark area is, it's still light enough to contrast with the Night Black of the serials.

I'm not discounting your views, especially since I've no better ideas of my own (and like an unusual FAA scheme at least as much as the next man) but I feel there are still some unanswered questions. But that's makes research so fascinating.

[tonyot]

Sorry, getting off topic but...

I tell a lie, I have seen a photo of a Barracuda I suspected to be at least partially in Night before. There's a photo in the FAA Museum collection of a Barracuda III showing an apparent demarcation line running back from the top of the exhaust aperture with a darker colour below (ie exactly as for N6L). The way the light falls means you can't make out whether there's a demarcation line along the rear fuselage. Again there also appears to be the normal demarcation line running along the "bottom corner" of the radiator with a light colour, presumably Sky, below it. Again the wing fence (and the radome mount) look to be in Sky. With less confidence I'd assert that the wing undersides and tail struts are in Sky as well.

The aircraft (serial illegible: deep in shadow!) is in EIF markings (normal European with the red painted out, still with yellow surround to fuselage roundel) and coded J-L. It is being escorted by Corsair IVs with "B" tailcodes, making them 1851 Sq from HMS Venerable. The aircraft may therefore be from 814 Squadron (the other half of Venerable's 15 Carrier Air Group) though I don't believe the code J is attested for them, or anybody else apart from 846 Squadron (Avengers and Wildcats on Trumpeter).

Anyway, I put it down to a combination of a quirk of the light (panel line accentuated by sharp shadow?) and an over-active love of finding unusual camouflage schemes. Now I'm not so sure.

I know which photo you mean and I came to the same conclusion, I`ll have to go and have another look now!

Cheers

Tony O

[occa]

Just to throw this in, the color of the sides is clearly lighter than the roundel blue on every photo.

Can it be really night therefore?

Edited May 19, 2013 by occa

[tonyot]

Firstly, great photos: thanks for sharing.

I don't see any "black" areas on N6B. Do you?

The photo of N6L is very interesting. On all Merlin Barracudas there is a panel line running aft from the top of the exhaust aperture and, as I've said, I've been inclined to discount the apparent colour demarcation as the light catching that. But the line along the rear fuselage is another matter: I just can't honestly explain it as anything other than a colour demarcation.

But, but, but!

1. What would be the point of going to the trouble of overpainting the sides (which, in TSS, are already pretty dark anyway) while leaving the very light sky undersides untouched? NB also that RJ903 wasn't completed (ready for collection by ferry pilot) until 19/7/45, ie after VE day, so it's not done previous service on anti-E-boat patrols.

2. NB that, whatever colour the apparent dark area is, it's still light enough to contrast with the Night Black of the serials.

I'm not discounting your views, especially since I've no better ideas of my own (and like an unusual FAA scheme at least as much as the next man) but I feel there are still some unanswered questions. But that's makes research so fascinating.

I`m quite perplexed too,...it could be a coat of matt varnish to prevent the sides from shining and therefore giving away the position of the aircraft to surfaced submarines? The sides do seem duller (and darker) than the upper surfaces? Just a thought, especially as the previous use of night and overpainting it with fresh EDSG/DSG now seems to have been discounted, especially as it also appears on other unit aircraft too. Maybe it was a CO`s `fad'?

Cheers

Tony O

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

Firstly, great photos: thanks for sharing.

I don't see any "black" areas on N6B. Do you?

The photo of N6L is very interesting. On all Merlin Barracudas there is a panel line running aft from the top of the exhaust aperture and, as I've said, I've been inclined to discount the apparent colour demarcation as the light catching that. But the line along the rear fuselage is another matter: I just can't honestly explain it as anything other than a colour demarcation.

But, but, but!

1. What would be the point of going to the trouble of overpainting the sides (which, in TSS, are already pretty dark anyway) while leaving the very light sky undersides untouched? NB also that RJ903 wasn't completed (ready for collection by ferry pilot) until 19/7/45, ie after VE day, so it's not done previous service on anti-E-boat patrols.

2. NB that, whatever colour the apparent dark area is, it's still light enough to contrast with the Night Black of the serials.

I'm not discounting your views, especially since I've no better ideas of my own (and like an unusual FAA scheme at least as much as the next man) but I feel there are still some unanswered questions. But that's makes research so fascinating.

I know, I know! That's why it's confusing - and I know that it is notoriously hard to judge what a colour really is from its apparent "darkness" in B&W photos.

So no, I am not wedded to Night - but there is certainly something (and I don't buy the ingenious matt varnish idea, not least because in the N6B pic the tail is shining like a good 'un). Though 744 was an ASW training squadron (I was amused to see from the log that Dad spent a lot of sorties experimenting with sonobuoys and struggling with noise from the sea state... just as his son did 40+ years later when ripple flying across the Atlantic on exercise with 820 in Sea King 5s).

Speaking of N6B, with the photo in its real state (i.e. without the contrast adjusted), there is the same clearly visible demarkation line, particularly going back from the exhausts:

It is visible further aft, but not as distinct in this photo, and it's the line showing further back that makes me dubious about it just being a panel line. Anyway, if you compare with a pic with the nose panels off, the line by the exhausts isn't quite aligned with the panel; it looks an inch or two lower. Plus even on the nose it crosses at least two panels...

So, in short, I just don't know. There was clearly something going on with this scheme, and it is visible on both aircraft. But I share the reluctance to just go happily for Night.

Maybe it's another question for the Friends of the Museum; it would at least put me in contact with living Barra drivers! (And the book, which was only written last year, has accounts from at least 2 men who must have served with Dad at this time).

Believe it or not, I have actually done some modelling as well; one wing is safely sawn into folding parts. Photos later - but still happy to hear theories about side colours as well!

Edited May 20, 2013 by Ex-FAAWAFU

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

P.S. I am starting to incline towards thinking it's a trick of the light. I'll do some further explanation later when I am not in a hurry to get to work, but I've started looking at every Barra picture to see whether anything similar shows up anywhere... and it kind of does, but only at certain angles. The "line" coincides with the point where the curved uppers become slab sides, so I my current theory is that it's to do with the way the light reflects.

More later!

[tonyot]

If you look at the `night? demarcation line' it runs underneath the fin so the quote "I don't buy the ingenious matt varnish idea, not least because in the N6B pic the tail is shining like a good 'un" doesn`t really hold water as the fin is obviously still in the original EDSG/DSG finish.

Towards the end of WW2 Bomber Command applied glossy paint to the undersides and sides of its bombers to help reflect search lights so it is not beyond the realms of probability that the Fleet Air Arm experimented with the opposite, ie matt paint/varnish, to try and cut down on reflections during daylight over the sea?

Anyway,....whatever the case actually was, I`d be very happy to know the true case for this conundrum!

Cheers

Tony O

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

Not sure I follow your reasoning (or do you mean the "Night" line also shows up in the shadow of the tail/fin? If so it makes perfect sense). ... but, to me at least, it seems unlikely that a single squadron experimented with an odd colour / finish scheme, but no-one has ever mentioned it until we spotted it in a couple of old unpublished pics! Not impossible, but I am not convinced - especially (as you have already pointed out) as they kept the Sky undersides. If they were experimenting with a lo-vis scheme, wouldn't they go the whole hog and do the underside as well? It's a very clever idea - and by no means impossible... but at present I am not buying it!

Edit: Just re-read this, and it doesn't come over very well; please don't think I am just dismissing your helpful suggestion out of hand. It is more that at present I am not buying anything odd. You and Seahawk both started from a position of having looked at lots of Barra over the years, and therefore being suspicious of apparently "odd" colour schemes. I was initially swayed by the published profile of the 810 cab (on the assumption that surely they must have some evidence for this?) - but now that we have definitely established that this aircraft is a) not 810 and was actually delivered (from Boulton Paul) after VE Day, I am much less inclined to believe in the wacky. Wartime experiment / local application / hangover from E-Boat campaign I could just about swallow, but a year later it feels to me a lot less likely.

I think it is a combination of the angle and the light (& B&W photos). When I get home I will scan a couple of other photos that I think support this - in the mean time, since you clearly know your way around a Barra, my theory is based on the fact that in some shots the change of angle (from curved uppers to relatively flat sides) shows up as an apparent change of colour... even in schemes where we KNOW that there wasn't such a change. Therefore... (and so on).

Still, since we're on, all this staring closely at Barracudas has thrown up another one: in the N6B pic from above

... what are those (relatively) shiny lines on the leading edge of the wings? Tape? There are three or four on each wing, and they appear to run over the demarkation line between the camo upper wing and the Sky lower. Any ideas?

Edited May 20, 2013 by Ex-FAAWAFU