All the Hurricane questions you want to ask here

[StevSmar]

23 hours ago, JackG said:

Question about the blast tubes - the green portion  coloured in the diagram below, is that what is visible in the photo, or is part of the blast tube cover (door), or is it a separate piece that connects one to the other?....Jack

Nice details of the guns!

 

My guess is that the part you've highlighted in green is part of the blast tube cover.

 

Here's the blast tubes fitted on a MkIIB:

 

Looking into the blast tube door:

(This is a Canadian Hurricane).

 

As to how the blast tubes connect to the blast tube door- no idea... If I find a photo I'll post it.

 

[Edit]

The photo above is a bit misleading, the riveted ring is on the spar, not part of the blast tube door. Here's a photo looking into the blast tube door (hope it makes sense...)

Edited October 8, 2020 by StevSmar
Photo was misleading, posted another to explain

[JackG]

Steve,  thanks for posting, particularly the last photo to address any misinterpretation.  One thing is for sure, the blast tube is a smaller diameter than the gun port opening, since it must fit through the hole of the spar.   I would agree with your guess about the green coloured part in the diagram.  It seems to be some form of 'collar' that slipped over the front end of the blast tube and kept it in place. 

 

The other curious detail,  are that raised dimples at the 6'oclock position in the gun port openings.   In the photo below,  the same area are holes.   Could be how the collar is attached/locked on to gun port cover?

 

 

 

In the photo below,  the detail that I've labelled as a collar, looks to be just slightly stepped in from the gun openings:

 

 

 

regards,

Jack

[StevSmar]

 

@Troy Smith Following on from our discussion on the fuselage frame colour. A friend of mine approached Hawker Restorations on my behalf and they advised that it’s their belief that all the original metal aircraft parts which have passed through their shop were silver.

 

Along with the parts I have, and Hawker Restorations access to original parts, this makes me conclude that the fuselage framework of the Hurricane was only ever silver and no other colour.

The interior cockpit decking of the Hurricane is undoubtably “Grey Green”, but that’s all we can conclude unless original parts are found showing “Grey Green” was extended to other areas of the fuselages interior.

 

Hawker Restorations also indicated that the colours of their restorations are at the discretion of the owner and if the framework is requested to be made with a non-authentic colour, then this will be what is done. The reason an owner would want to do this is for serviceability and airframe longevity- selecting a paint type that provides maximum corrosion protection. This is why you’ll see some interior metalwork on Hawker Restorations aircraft finished in a green colour that’s like the deckings “Grey Green” colour.

[StevSmar]

@JackG I think I’ve got the answer for you on the pesky blast tube:

 

 

 

 

 

It looks like the blast tubes fit inside the rear end of the gun blast door.

 

As for that weird fitting which attaches the front of the blast tube to the cross brace, my bet is it’s got something to do with allowing the guns to be aimed and also preventing the blast tubes from dropping down when the gun blast door is removed?

[StevSmar]

@JackG now to the other mystery which I accidentally opened up.

 

Heres another view of the dimples which are in the Canadian built Hurricane’s Gun Blast Doors at the six O’clock position:

I wish I’d noticed them when I was talking the photos and I would have had a closer look.

 

I think that the blast tube would have been attached to the Gun Blast Door using only a slip fit. Using screws would have made it cumbersome to remove the Gun Blast Doors. That’s what I think is also being shown in the Fabric Wing Hurricane photo you posted above- a slip fitting.

[Troy Smith]

1 hour ago, StevSmar said:

they advised that it’s their belief that all the original metal aircraft parts which have passed through their shop were silver.

 

AFAIK, the only Airframe that passed through their shop that is of relevance is KZ321.

 

From what I have posted this is true for MOST Hurricanes built, except 

 

The batch built at Austin Motors,  which there is film of, does not look like aluminium paint.

 

The last 3 batches built by Hawker's at Langley,  which are listed below.

 

The Airframe serials in question.

 

Block 8, Eighth Hawker Produced Block

Serial Range KW696-  KZ612 (16) Total 1,200

The eighth production batch by Hawker Aircraft Limited, at Brooklands, and Langley. To contract 62305/39/C/Va, powered by Rolls-Royce Merlin XX and 27 engines. The aircraft were delivered between the 20th November, 1942 and the 19th April, 1943. Average rate of production 7-8 aircraft per day.

Conversions :-

Instructional/Maintenance air frames - 12 aircraft.60 aircraft diverted to Sea Hurricane production and re-serialled NF668 - NF703 (36) and NF716 - NF739 (24).

Block 9, Ninth Hawker Produced Block

Serial Range KZ613 - LD999 (7) Total 1,184

Ninth production batch by Hawker Aircraft Limted, at Brooklands, and Langley. To contract 62305/39Vb. Powered by Rolls-Royce Merlin XX and 27 engines. Aircraft were delivered between the 18th April, 1943 and the 29th September, 1943. The average rate of production was 6-7 aircraft per day.

Conversions :-

Instructional/Maintenance air frames - 6 aircraft.

 

Block 10, Tenth Hawker Produced Block

Serial Range LE121 -  PZ865 (18) Total 1,357

 

Tenth production block by Hawker AIrcraft Limited, at Brooklands, and Langley. To contract 62305/39/Vc. Powered by Rolls-Royce Merlin XX, 24, and 27 engines. The aircraft were delivered between the 29th September, 1943 and the 24th May, 1944. The average rate of production was 5-6 aircraft per day.

 

Conversions :-

Instructional/Maintenance air frames - 79 aircraft.

Block 1/A, First Austin Produced Block

Serial Range AP516 - AP936  Total 300

Single production block produced by The Austin Motor Company, at Longbridge, Birmingham. Produced during 1941, powered by Rolls-Royce Merlin XX engines. All the aircraft in this batch with the exception of AP516, AP524, and AP530 were shipped to Russia.

 

 

 

 

Remember,  up until fairly recently if you asked what were the internal of a Hurricane painted,  the answer was Grey Green. 

Examples

The cockpit of P2617 in Hendon has been repainted Grey Green. (roughly, by brush)

The BBMF flight Hurricane are Grey Green internally.  I know eave been extensively rebuilt, but both are originally from the last Hawker batch.

There are reports the Science Museum Hurricane L1962, is Grey Green in the cockpit, and this was restored by Hawker's in the 1950's.

So,  there are reasons why this was thought.

 

This was also the same answer you got for Spitfire's, which also  changed their internal finishing.

 

Quick recap of  what I have posted on previous pages,

we have a colour production line shot, KZ295, various B/W shots, which do not show the distinctive appearance of aluminium paint,  and a cockpit photo of KX serial Hurricane in Russia, and a period colour painting,  which is notable for the observation of detail and colour.

KX289,  which shows grey green inside the landing lights, which is an airframe kept indoors since 1946, and then was painted externally for a museum display.  

 

this is the cockpit of the NASM Hurricane, LF686 

 

The NASM are noted for careful restorations.

 

"The National Air and Space Museum owns a Hawker Hurricane Mk. IIC bearing RAF serial number LF686. Hawker built this fighter at the Langley factory, near Slough, Buckinghamshire, just six miles from what is now called Heathrow airport, early in 1944. It was part of the last RAF Hurricane order for about 1,300 aircraft. On March 14, 1944, the RAF moved LF686 to No. 5 Maintenance Unit at RAF Kemble airfield for installation of operational equipment. The fighter was delivered to No. 41 Operational Training Unit at RAF Hawarden airfield in Cheshire on April 15, 1944. It served in this OTU until the RAF reclassified the aircraft a maintenance training airframe, number 5270M, on June 27, 1945, and transferred it to RAF Maintenance Command at Chilbolton, Hampshire, where it was used to train mechanics. At some point the original engine was probably removed. In July 1948, the RAF issued the Hurricane to No. 7 School for Recruit Training, RAF Bridgenorth. Another Merlin XX was installed and the fighter was placed outdoors, opposite the guardroom. Sometime later, the entire airplane was painted silver. In 1963, Bridgenorth closed its doors and LF686 moved to RAF Colherne for overhaul and storage.

During the late 1960s, the Smithsonian arranged to trade a stock Hawker Typhoon to the Royal Air Force Museum at Hendon in exchange for Hawker Hurricane LF686. An RAF transport hauled the fighter to the U. S. in 1969. Specialists at the Garber Facility began restoring the airplane in 1989 and finished the project eleven years later. The fighter is on display at the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center."

 

There are other airframes from these batches in preservation which may reveal more.

 

Hawker's switched to Grey Green for Tempests, and that Spitfire production also switched to Grey Green for all internals in late 43 or 44,  and this is not controversial.  

 

 

If anyone can contribute any material to this question, please post.

 

 

[Geoffrey Sinclair]

6 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

Block 8, Eighth Hawker Produced Block Serial Range KW696-  KZ612 (16) Total 1,200

The eighth production batch by Hawker Aircraft Limited, at Brooklands, and Langley. To contract 62305/39/C/Va, powered by Rolls-Royce Merlin XX and 27 engines. The aircraft were delivered between the 20th November, 1942 and the 19th April, 1943. Average rate of production 7-8 aircraft per day.

Conversions :- Instructional/Maintenance air frames - 12 aircraft.60 aircraft diverted to Sea Hurricane production and re-serialled NF668 - NF703 (36) and NF716 - NF739 (24).

Block 9, Ninth Hawker Produced Block Serial Range KZ613 - LD999 (7) Total 1,184

Ninth production batch by Hawker Aircraft Limted, at Brooklands, and Langley. To contract 62305/39Vb. Powered by Rolls-Royce Merlin XX and 27 engines. Aircraft were delivered between the 18th April, 1943 and the 29th September, 1943. The average rate of production was 6-7 aircraft per day.

Instructional/Maintenance air frames - 6 aircraft.

Block 10, Tenth Hawker Produced Block Serial Range LE121 -  PZ865 (18) Total 1,357

Tenth production block by Hawker AIrcraft Limited, at Brooklands, and Langley. To contract 62305/39/Vc. Powered by Rolls-Royce Merlin XX, 24, and 27 engines. The aircraft were delivered between the 29th September, 1943 and the 24th May, 1944. The average rate of production was 5-6 aircraft per day.

Instructional/Maintenance air frames - 79 aircraft.

Block 1/A, First Austin Produced Block Serial Range AP516 - AP936  Total 300

Single production block produced by The Austin Motor Company, at Longbridge, Birmingham. Produced during 1941, powered by Rolls-Royce Merlin XX engines. All the aircraft in this batch with the exception of AP516, AP524, and AP530 were shipped to Russia.

This is the data I have on Hawker production blocks 8 to 10 and Austin 1/A

 

Block 8, 1,200 aircraft of which 192 were mark IV, the rest mark II.

 

Sea Hurricane IIC were ordered and built as such, in two batches, 36 in November and December 1942, 24 March to May 1943, not part of block 8 as such.

 

Block 9, 1,205 aircraft of which 186 were mark IV.

 

Block 10, 1,357 aircraft of which 144 were mark IV.  Serial range excludes Sea Hurricane IIC NF668 - NF703 and NF716 - NF739 and mark V prototype NL255. 

 

Block 1/A Austin AP849 to AP858 and AP880 onwards India and/or Middle East, with possibly one or two retained in Britain.  Austin started production in February 1941, with 15 built by end August 1941, 75 by end 1941, the remaining 225 built January to October 1942.  All mark IIb.

Everyone agrees Hurricane mark II were fitted with Merlin XX.  Hurricane mark IV are often quoted as having Merlin 24 or 27 engines, however production of each engine began well after that of the Hurricane IV.  The accident report for KX190 (the 28th mark IV in serial number terms) and the loss report for KZ607 (189th) both state the engine was a Merlin XX.  In addition the RAF Museum reports the final fifteen Hurricane IV produced all had Merlin XX engines.  The engine production report notes sixteen Merlin 24 built to end July 1943, versus three hundred and thirteen mark IV, of which one hundred and fifty two were issued to units, sent overseas or were in transit or had been lost.  The Merlin 24 were for Lancaster mark I, production of which resumed in September 1943.  The one hundred and forty one Merlin 27 began production in November 1943, after four hundred and twelve of the five hundred and twenty four mark IV had been produced of which two hundred and seventy were issued to units, sent overseas or were in transit or had been lost.  Rolls Royce reports all Merlin 27 were converted to Merlin 25 for use in Mosquitoes and that it is unlikely any Merlin 24 or 27 was installed in a Hurricane except for some trials, while Francis Mason in his book the Hawker Hurricane notes one of the mark IV converted to a mark V prototype was tested using a Merlin 27 in July 1943.  The conclusion is the mark IV used Merlin XX, like the mark II.  The Merlin 27 were meant for the Hurricane mark V, orders for which, according to the RAF aircraft census, totalled three hundred and eighty four as of end June 1943 with another 200 ordered in August, but all orders were cancelled in January 1944, and Merlin 27 production effectively ended in January as well.  One of the mark IV converted to mark V standard trialled the Merlin 32 engine and this seems to be a source of claims the mark V was to use a Merlin 32.

 

Finally a question, anyone have a definitive list of Hurricane IId serials?  The RAF and Ministry of Aircraft production say 296 (with the RAF saying 2 were converted to other versions), I have 293 plus ambiguities.

[ClaudioN]

10 minutes ago, Geoffrey Sinclair said:

Sea Hurricane IIC were ordered and built as such, in two batches, 36 in November and December 1942, 24 March to May 1943, not part of block 8 as such.

As production dates overlap with Block 8, I am a bit confused.

Do you mean that 60 serials were deleted from Block 8 (becoming effectively black-out blocks) and aircraft were built separately, or that the Sea Hurricanes were additional to the 1,200 aircraft of Block 8? 

[Geoffrey Sinclair]

4 hours ago, ClaudioN said:

As production dates overlap with Block 8, I am a bit confused.

Do you mean that 60 serials were deleted from Block 8 (becoming effectively black-out blocks) and aircraft were built separately, or that the Sea Hurricanes were additional to the 1,200 aircraft of Block 8? 

Block 8 as defined is 1,200 aircraft, excluding the Sea Hurricanes NF668 - NF703 (36) and NF716 - NF739 (24).  There was no deletion of anything from block 8 for these aircraft, as Ray Sturtivant points out they were built under contract Acft/2719, a completely separate order.

 

Francis Mason in the serial listings of his Hawker Hurricane book states a number of KW serial Hurricanes were converted to NF serial Sea Hurricanes, which is not correct.  An example is the claim KW804 was converted to NF674.  So we note KW804 was a mark IV, Taken on Charge 23 May 1943, to the Mediterranean 27 September 1945, Struck Off Charge 29 August 1946, meantime NF674 was Taken on Charge at Donibristle on 14 December 1942, various deployments including on carriers, back at Donibristle in October 1944.

 

KW868 is supposed to become NF687,

KW868 IIc taken on charge 1 December 1942 but apparently converted to or delivered as IIb on 20 March 1943, to the Middle East 27 August 1943, struck off charge 29 March 1945.

NF687 taken on charge 14 December 1942, collided with a Hurricane near Bellochantuy, Kintyre, during a mock dog fight on 1 September 1943, killing the pilot.

 

In any case what is called block 8 is a subset of 1,500 serials between KW696 and LA144, which to me says the block/order should be 1,500.  This is followed by 1,961 serials between LB542 and LF774, and 39 serials MW335 to 373, which makes a nice even 2,000, then the 150 serials between PG425 and PG610 and the 112 serials between PZ730 and PZ865.  I would really like to see a layout of the later Hurricane contracts with Hawker

[StevSmar]

14 hours ago, Geoffrey Sinclair said:

...Everyone agrees Hurricane mark II were fitted with Merlin XX.  Hurricane mark IV are often quoted as having Merlin 24 or 27 engines, however production of each engine began well after that of the Hurricane IV...

I have a Hawkers drawing which shows how to convert a MkIIC to a MkIV. It will take me a while to find it, but I remember being surprised that it didn’t show changing the engine from the Merlin 20 to 24 or 27. If I recall correctly the only real change apart from the wings was to strengthen the radiator support brackets to accommodate the radiator armour and also the fitting of additional cockpit armour.

 

This supports your interesting post about the disparity between MkIV Hurricane and Merlin 24 or 27 availability.

Edited October 11, 2020 by StevSmar
Forgot to say cockpit...

[StevSmar]

@Troy Smith

Here’s a photo of PZ865:

Modern photos show it’s been repainted to a green colour.

 

Thanks for the great photo of LF686’s cockpit!

This photo is also of LF686:

To me, this looks like the modern White-Grey epoxy paint that’s used for corrosion protection. It wouldn’t surprise me if longevity trumped authenticity during their restoration.

[Troy Smith]

7 hours ago, StevSmar said:

Modern photos show it’s been repainted to a green colour.

 

 

it was built Grey Green. 

 

the gear struts are aluminium.  the framework visible, eg wing roots, engine bearers, is a matt mid grey tone, and is NOT SHINY.. like the UC legs, which are painted aluminium.

note also, the cockpit armour plate, and compare appearance to the visible tube work.

since they choices are Aluminium paint of Grey Green paint....

 

7 hours ago, StevSmar said:

To me, this looks like the modern White-Grey epoxy paint that’s used for corrosion protection. It wouldn’t surprise me if longevity trumped authenticity during their restoration.

even if they did, they would then give a coat of the correct colour.  I have a book, Restoring Museum Aircraft by Robert C Mikesh, of NASM.

They are very careful in their work.  

 

And we still have this, 

 

as can be seen, aluminium is bright and shiny, grey green is not, and the tubes are Grey Green

 

this is a IID, probably KX171, at NII VVS

 

one point I'd not raised, this is listed in Air Britain as a IId (can @Geoffrey Sinclair confirm?) but has features usually considered for the Mk.IV, armoured  rad, cockpit applique,  and the 6Sq IID which are BP*** serials,  do not show these....

there are a load of photos, taken of this and another, KX305, again listed as IID in AB,  again, same features

here for more, including some handy detail shots

http://aviadejavu.ru/Site/Arts/Art7497.htm

 

time for bed...

[StevSmar]

@Troy Smith

 

Here’s a picture of LF363, digitally changed to Black & White:

The engine mount looks a similar colour to the fuselage frame. There’s a slight difference, but in my opinion not enough of a difference that one could be silver and the other grey-green?

 

Yet here’s the colour image of LF363:

 

In colour the difference is dramatic. It appears to me that it’s impossible to deduce a colour from a black and white image.

 

(I’m intrigued as to why BBMF painted the fuselage frame one colour and the engine mount a different colour, anyone have contacts at Historic Flying that would know?)

[StevSmar]

@Troy Smith

 

Heres PZ865:

 

And:

 

It seems to me that the reason the BMMF painted the fuselage frame green was for longevity, whereas they retained silver in the wheel wells because they’re much more visible and silver is the authentic colour? All conjecture of course.

 

In the B&W photos we’ve posted of PZ865, it’s absolutely impossible to know what the colour is.

 

We have lots of original metal parts which are silver. I’ve yet to see an original metal part that was grey-green though.

 

(Neat link to the Russian site with photos of the Vickors S gun. Thanks! I’ve not seen one disassembled before)

 

Edited October 12, 2020 by StevSmar
Poor grammar

[Geoffrey Sinclair]

Serial, mark, exported to.

KX171 IId Russia
KX172 IIc Russia
KX173 IId Russia
KX174 IId ACSEA
KX175 IId Russia
KX176 IId 
KX177 IId Russia
KX178 IV MAC
KX179 IV 

 

KX305 IId Russia

 

What is the possibility later IId received the protection upgrades based on combat experience?  The BP serials were being built in April 1942, the KX in December.

 

 

[StevSmar]

I just picked up a copy of Aviation Classics "Flying Survivors" special, it has an article on the Last of the Many- PZ-865/G-AMAU, as well as Portuguese Hurricanes.

 

The article is about PZ-865/G-AMAU in it's Blue and Gold racing colours.

Edited October 15, 2020 by StevSmar
Need new glasses

[StevSmar]

On 10/11/2020 at 5:55 PM, Troy Smith said:

...it was built Grey Green...

[For those not following the thread in detail, the above comment was in relation to the fuselage of PZ865]

A friend called the BBMF for me and spoke with several of their staff. The fuselage of PZ865 still has traces of silver paint on it rear fuselage.

 

The BBMF indicated that the fuselage has been extensively maintained and restored, however because of the complexity of the joints it's not been fully disassembled. Around some of the fuselage joints, particularly in the rear of the aircraft, traces of the original silver remain.

 

They also indicted that the formula of paint that was originally used is now no longer available due to environmental regulations, so a modern product has been substituted.

[Steven Smart comment on this- why they chose to repaint the fuselage in green wasn't asked. It seems likely that this is because the green offers better protection than a silver product. Maybe it's simply that overspraying the green in silver will be a maintenance headache as the silver chips off, this is why it's done only in the wheel wells of PZ865? LF363 being a recent rebuild, has the silver from the firewall forward as well as the wheel wells]

 

On 10/10/2020 at 6:14 PM, Troy Smith said:

...AFAIK, the only Airframe that passed through their shop that is of relevance is KZ321....

That's not what I meant. I meant that Hawker Restorations has had a lot of Hurricane parts come through their workshop (my guess is more than anyone has) and that they advised that to the best of their recollection all the original fuselage framework parts they've seen were finished in silver.

(As an aside, the original KZ321 was lost (on a mission IIRC) and the identity of the restored KZ321 is not known with any certainty. According to Riley's Hawker Hurricane survivors it could be KZ196 or LE292. It's was definitely built as a MkIV because the photo of it in the same book shows the windscreen and upper cockpit armouring that it particular to a MkIV (though it could also be a IID...))

 

On 10/10/2020 at 6:14 PM, Troy Smith said:

...Remember,  up until fairly recently if you asked what were the internal of a Hurricane painted,  the answer was Grey Green.....

That is definitely true, which is why I'm finding this conversation so interesting. 

 

My opinion on the current status of our discussion on the fuselage framework colour is:

- We have many original parts and also original aircraft which show a silver colour.

- Black and White images cannot be used to determine whether a part is silver or "grey green".

- Colour images also need to be treated with caution as they can be influenced by: The chemical process to make the colour image; Any post processing of the image (picture printing, scanning, digital enhancement); The light source used to take the colour image; The influence of objects nearby casting their colour on the object of interest; The physiology of the brain causing us to see the colour we expect.

- We have no original parts or original aircraft which show the fuselage framework painted in green.

 

In my opinion, until we've found conclusive evidence of "grey green" fuselage framework, it would be unwise to make this assumption.

There's still a possibility we'll find some and I'm keeping an open mind to the possibility. I know that if I was in a war and I'd run out of silver paint but I had "grey green" available, I'd not even think twice about using it.

Edited October 17, 2020 by StevSmar
Forgot about physiology and the well known colour illusions we're susceptible to.

[StevSmar]

13 minutes ago, StevSmar said:

Colour images also need to be treated with caution as they can be influenced by: .....The influence of objects nearby casting their colour on the object of interest.... The physiology of the brain causing us to see the colour we expect.

 

On 10/10/2020 at 6:14 PM, Troy Smith said:

this is the cockpit of the NASM Hurricane, LF686 

The NASM are noted for careful restorations.

I think this is an excellent example of "The influence of objects nearby casting their colour on the object of interest". Even parts in the cockpit that are known to be silver or grey-green have the same grey'ish tint to them.

 

I also think this is also an excellent example of  "The physiology of the brain causing us to see the colour we expect." Troy sees a fuselage framework that's clearly grey green, whereas I see a fuselage framework that's clearly silver.

 

(I'm hoping to find a better photo of LF686's cockpit that will show if it's fuselage retained the "White-grey" epoxy paint that's shown in the photo I posted above of LF686 during its restoration)

Edited October 17, 2020 by StevSmar
Added an additional tedious comment on physiology because I'm obsessive.

[StevSmar]

@Troy Smith

Can you clarify, when you're referring to "grey-green" are you saying: a colour that's the same as the interior woodworks green; or, a colour that's different from this?

 

(Thanks again for the interesting discussions- I've learned about the fabric on the top rear of the center section of early Hurricanes. I've learnt about the shoddy cockpit painting of P2617 that led everyone astray, etc. )

[Troy Smith]

22 minutes ago, StevSmar said:

Can you clarify, when you're referring to "grey-green" are you saying: a colour that's the same as the interior woodworks green; or, a colour that's different from this?

Same colour.   While there is a chip in the RAF museum chart of MAP colours, apparently it varied. 

 

49 minutes ago, StevSmar said:

Black and White images cannot be used to determine whether a part is silver or "grey green".

yes and no.

It will depend on lighting, and if if there is anything to compare tonally in the photo.

 

like this, the cockpit of  either KX171 or KX305, at the NII VVS in 1943.

 

we have black, we have grey green, we have aluminium parts.   

we have tubes the same tone as the side wall, as is the side panel, which is grey green on all Hurricanes. 

 

Possibly there was a change to paint just the cockpit framework grey green, but...

 

then we have this, again, an 8th Hawker batch

 

note the aluminium parts. wheel hubs, and more important, the rectangular tank below the reserve tank, which is next to framework,  which is the same as all the other frame work and internal area visible, wing frame and the open hatch by the roundel.

Interestingly the firewall and coolant header tank look aluminium

 

 

we have aluminium parts visible, the UC leg wheel hubs. aluminium, metal or paint is shiny, it reflects light in a different way than a matt painted surface. 

this is aluminium interior/seat. with a grey green rear bulkhead, note the use of aluminium paint on all the internal rear fuselage woodwork as well as the framework. This is confirmed by photos of the Finnish Hurricane.

 

we have a painting, in colour, by an artist who is near photographic in accuracy, 

 

and who shows the visible parts of the framework in the inner wing and rear fuselage as green. 

 

As an aside, this suggests the use of some kind of pale green yellow metal primer paint, and Hawker used 'Hawker yellow' on the Sea Fury.

 

Tempests, built at the same time, in the same factory, are grey green internally.   We know there was a switch, from mainly aluminium internals on Spitfires, to all grey green as well.  These are documented, and not controversial.  

 

the inside of the wing visible  in the landing light, on KX829,  shows Grey Green, as does the head armour, please not the canopy frames are dark green, and wjile KX829 was either painted aluminium or stripped of paint at Loughbourough, B/W pics here https://abpic.co.uk/pictures/operator/Loughborough College

show the canopy framing was not.   

 

 

I know I have posted all this before,  but they seem to be ignored or dismissed. 

 

1 hour ago, StevSmar said:

A friend called the BBMF for me and spoke with several of their staff. The fuselage of PZ865 still has traces of silver paint on it rear fuselage.

 

The BBMF indicated that the fuselage has been extensively maintained and restored, however because of the complexity of the joints it's not been fully disassembled. Around some of the fuselage joints, particularly in the rear of the aircraft, traces of the original silver remain.

this is interesting, though bear in mind PZ865 never left Hawkers, and was used extensively by them.  

While the BBMF does sterling work in keeping them flying,  like talking to wartime flyers,  colours are not their strong point.  (the Spitfire II has all grey green wheel wells, )

PZ865 maybe a bad example, in that as there was a big fuss over the last Hurricane,  Hawker's may have already arranged to buy it back, and treated it differently? 

 

If anyone could examine KZ191, that would help.    

 

Just to muddy the waters, while looking for a pic, I looked, again carefully at this

 

L1955, note the wing interior, aluminium, but look at the main spar and area around wing fuel tanks,  which are not the same....

as well as top of seat, aluminium, and bulkhead grey green, before armour plate.

Oddly,. the man on wing with the screwdriver appears to have a seat behind him? 

 

The photo I was looking for is a of IIC being checked over at the factory, outside, with the engine panels off.

[StevSmar]

On 10/17/2020 at 11:25 AM, Troy Smith said:

 

1) ...I know I have posted all this before,  but they seem to be ignored or dismissed. 

 

2) ...Just to muddy the waters, while looking for a pic, I looked, again carefully at this...

...L1955, note the wing interior, aluminium, but look at the main spar and area around wing fuel tanks,  which are not the same....

as well as top of seat, aluminium, and bulkhead grey green, before armour plate.

Oddly,. the man on wing with the screwdriver appears to have a seat behind him? 

1) Nothing is ignored or dismissed. You've presented your arguments as have I. Until we have more information we can't really add much to this interesting discussion.

 

2) I agree, the wing spars and center section don't look the same in the black and white photo. It could be because the fellow laying down on the center section is shadowing the light from above? So maybe the center section is largely being lit from a camera's flash and the wing is largely being lit from the overhead lights.

I've wondered to why there's a seat behind too. Since the photo is from a training facility it's possible that someone was being shown something that was easier on a removed seat rather than the installed seat?

 

You may be interested in knowing that as my job as an electrical engineer I've designed the lighting systems for many buildings and have been exposed to how difficult it is to render colours properly. When I've worked on supermarkets, I've had some clients who would specify a different Colour Rendering Index and Colour Temperature for lighting installed in different parts of the supermarket, especially in the section which has vegetables and the section that has meat. This is why when you bring the food home, the vegetables don't look as vibrantly green or the meat as freshly red.

I also worked on a school where a particularly energy efficient type of lighting called High Pressure Sodium was used (this was back in the 90's before LED's, which render colour better and have similar efficiency). I took a colour wheel with me when I was inspecting the completed school and in the gymnasium red showed up as black! (because there is comparatively little red colour emitted by High Pressure Sodium) (I disagreed with our choice of using High Pressure Sodium, but was overruled by others wanting to maximize energy efficiency)

It's a fascinating topic which is probably why I'm also interested in our discussion on the fuselage colour, when I don't typically comment on discussions of the colour of aircraft or their markings. There are too many variables to accurately compare one colour to the other- from the colour of the illuminating source, the technology used to record the colour, the colour of the photo or screen displaying the image, to the colour perceiving ability of each individuals eyes.

(Colour Rendering Index is a measure of how well a light source will render colours "on average". Colour Temperature is a measure of the "peak" of the light sources colour, how well it matches the colour of a "perfect" source of light (a black body radiator which emits light across the full spectrum, like sunlight does. Both of these measures are roundly criticized for their inaccuracies yet they remain widely used because proposed alternates are either just as bad or difficult to use.)

 

I'm hoping to hear back from the owner of KZ191 confirming the colour of the fuselage tubing...

All very fascinating, and I appreciate that until you provided examples, I thought that the fuselage of early Hurricanes were painted in "Green with a hint of Grey" like the RAF Museums Hurricane.

[StevSmar]

I thought others might be interested in this example of how poorly paint stuck to aluminium of Hurricanes.

 

The following sequence is likely from a publicity photo shoot are were taken in sequence on the same day.

 

1) Very little paint chipping in the area of the gun bay. It also looks like the paint has been patched up by a paint brush:

2) A few chips...

3) More chips...

A nice example of how quickly paint chipping could occur

[JackG]

Interesting patterns in what looks to be previous touch ups, some are straight edged as opposed to other spots having random shaped dabs of paint.  Wonder if they would touch up those two newly exposed areas right away, or wait till the end of the day?

 

regards,

Jack

[Troy Smith]

9 hours ago, StevSmar said:

I thought others might be interested in this example of how poorly paint stuck to aluminium of Hurricanes.

A FEW Hurricanes.  And on occasional panels. 

 

Poor painting is noted on mostly the first Gloster batch,  but does occur on some other aircraft, but usually only on certain panels.    

The nose ring seems to be common from images

 

This is VY-H, P2722.    If the paint adhesion was so bad, the kick step and panel would be extensively stripped, and neither is the wing centre section.

 

85 Squadron 55 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr

 

this is another angle of VY-H, note the paint touch up are on the outer panel, not the centre section or cowling

 

85 Squadron 62 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr

 

The individual patches of the gun ports are also of note.

 

this is another from the sequence

85 Squadron 63 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr

 

Of note are the plimsouls of the ground crew, these and wellingtons were worn to protect the airframe, and that the chap appears to have a belt of bullets around him? 

 

9 hours ago, StevSmar said:

The following sequence is likely from a publicity photo shoot are were taken in sequence on the same day.

 

Indeed, they were taken mid July 1940, for a Life photo shoot, At RAF Debden and the satellite airfield at Castle camps.

 

Most/all the rest of the photos are here 

85 Sq

https://www.flickr.com/photos/144949377@N05/albums/72157704898371932/with/47757543071/

 

as to paint flaking, while VY-K P3408, shows shows bad paint flaking, VY-Q/P3166 does not, neither does VY-R/P2923 do not.

 

VY-K, P3408 is really tatty.  Note the starboard wing , as well as the  YB-O of 17 Sq, who were also based at Debden.

85 Squadron 67 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr

 

this show the front,  note also the pil on the spinner and on nose ring. 

85 Squadron 68 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr

 

I have seen this captioned that the pilot  is Sammy Allard

85 Squadron 66 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr

 

looking here

http://www.bbm.org.uk/airmen/Allard.htm

 

I think this is correct, and this is also Allard

85 Squadron 83 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr

 

 

As to why the paint flaked? Ppoor paint prep on certain parts I suspect.       

 

as mentioned above, 17 Sq shared Debden with 85 Sq at the time, and most of the photos in this album

https://www.flickr.com/photos/144949377@N05/albums/72157678154026658

are from the same shoot.

And they do not show a lot of paint flaking.  

 

It should be noted that aircraft in both 85 and 17 Sq share very similar and non standard upper/lower paint demarcations,  most likely a quirk of the Debden paint shop when applying the new 'Sky' undersides.

See VY-R, VY-K, VY-H, and what is probably VY-N,(image with 6 pilots in front)  and YB-A, YB-C and YB-W from 17 Sq. 

 

I did put a sequence of 85 Sq pics here, in the Flickr album they are out of sequence,   this is P3166 landing and refuelling

which maybe of interest.

 

 

[StevSmar]

On 10/25/2020 at 8:26 PM, Troy Smith said:

A FEW Hurricanes.  And on occasional panels...

 

...this is another angle of VY-H, note the paint touch up are on the outer panel, not the centre section or cowling...

 

...Most/all the rest of the photos are here 

85 Sq https://www.flickr.com/photos/144949377@N05/albums/72157704898371932/with/47757543071/

...

 

...As to why the paint flaked? Poor paint prep on certain parts I suspect...   

 

...as mentioned above, 17 Sq shared Debden with 85 Sq at the time, and most of the photos in this album

https://www.flickr.com/photos/144949377@N05/albums/72157678154026658

are from the same shoot...

 

...which maybe of interest...

 

 

Good point about how the bad flaking is on some wings only. I was thinking of a (colour) photo showing a tatty FAA Hurricane that showed equally bad flaking, if I come across it I'll post it.

That's a neat photo showing the severe flaking on the stbd wing compared to the port wing.

I wonder if certain batches had priming missed? Or it was a poor batch of primer?

That's a neat collection of 85 squadron photos that you linked to, I've seen the photo of the Erk's on the tailplane during runup, but not the series.

Yes it is of interest to me.

(Haven't heard back from the owner of KZ191 unfortunately)