All the Hurricane questions you want to ask here

[Troy Smith]

7 hours ago, JWM said:

BTW - how deeply weathered the wing roundel is on above photo! What colour came from beneeth? No one is brave enough to do soemthing like that on the model...

J-W

 

 

5 hours ago, 224 Peter said:

I wonder if the roundel was painted directly on the the wing, without a proper primer, so the blue has peeled off?

The Roundel on "A-LK" looks fine. 

. 

 

 

35 minutes ago, rob Lyttle said:

I'll pass on the tail underside debate.... But the roundel on the wing of the camera plane is something else, isn't it?

In fact I'd say the "absence of a roundel".

That's way more than weathered or a bit worn.... That looks to be deliberately removed and obliterated, like someone was trying to enhance the camouflage effect from above and remove the "targets" on the wings.

I understood the camo and roundel paint work was done on the wings before they were even attached to the fuselage on the assembly line.

 

 

 

 

I posted on this here

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235043645-hurricane-head-armour-plate-detail-and-some-other-points/

 

Quote

 

Note the wing roundel on the photographer's plane, pale and flaking off, compared to LK-A,  perhaps an example of Gloster's reputed use of bright pre war red and blue?  

Heavy paint chipping is also noted on some of the first batch of Gloster built Hurricane's as well, a topic on its own perhaps?

 

 

 

The colour difference implying that LK-A has had the roundels repainted with correct paint?

 

More example of heavy paint chipping,  from what I presume are first Gloster built batch

Quote

 

Block 1/G, First Gloster Produced Block

Serial Range P2535 - P2584 (50), P2614 - P2653 (40), P2672 - P2701 (30), P2713 - P2732 (20), P2751 - P2770 (20), P2792 - P2836 (45), P2854 - P2888 (35), P2900 - P2924 (25), P2946 - P2995 (50), P3020 - P3069(50), P3080 - P3124 (45), P3140 - P3179 (40), P3200 - P3234 (35), P3250 - P3264 (15) - Total 500

 

 

501 Sq Hurricane in France, May 1940

 

VY-K of 85 Sq,  I'm guessing at Castle Camps July 1940,  as there are a load of photos of 85 sq there,  note the differnt colour spinners on the two DH prop Hurricanes in the background, 85 was using (probably ) flight coloured spinners at this point

another shot of K,  

this is supposed to be Sammy Allard's plane

https://c7.alamy.com/comp/M9D4MA/raf-fighter-command-1940-hawker-hurricane-mk-i-flown-by-sgt-g-sammy-allard-of-no-85-squadron-july-1940-M9D4MA.jpg

link as Alamy slapped all over it but IIRC it's IWM...

 

VY-R 

 

 

Quote

Sgt Laurence A "Rubber" Thorogood of No 87 Squadron RAF sits at the controls of Hurricane Mk I LK-G at RAF Bibury in 1940

note heavy chipping and replacement panel

 

this is a late build from the first  Hawker built batch, L2047

 

But, all the others above are from the first Gloster built batch AFAIK

http://www.k5083.mistral.co.uk/APS.HTM

 

[Graham Boak]

1 hour ago, rob Lyttle said:

I'll pass on the tail underside debate.... But the roundel on the wing of the camera plane is something else, isn't it?

In fact I'd say the "absence of a roundel".

That's way more than weathered or a bit worn.... That looks to be deliberately removed and obliterated, like someone was trying to enhance the camouflage effect from above and remove the "targets" on the wings.

I understood the camo and roundel paint work was done on the wings before they were even attached to the fuselage on the assembly line.

 

 

If so, then the defacer has made the aircraft much more visible than the dull red and blue.  Of course, on a Gloster-built aircraft they might not have been dull.  Even so, to me this looks much more like peeling from an unprimed surface, much as 1945 Japanese aircraft look for just that reason.

[SeaVenom]

On 9/23/2018 at 2:40 PM, JackG said:

 

Going by this Finnish owned Hurricane, looks like the area directly behind the front windshield is the exterior aircraft colour:

 

 

regards,

Jack

 

 

 

Thanks Jack.    Nice clear photo.

[Phantome]

I just tested with a night intruder Hurricane I'm building and a light source.

 

Putting it an angle in which the light source creates the exact same shadow from the stabilizer, a slight upward tilt of the port wing does lead to the light hitting the radiator, which would make it look brighter... but not as dramatic as on the pic. So maybe it is the case that Z's slightly different angle is the cause of the different radiator color. Who knows? Granted, this is 1:72 scale and using a lightbulb half a meter away, which clearly is not the same as a real aircraft being hit by sunlight millions of miles away

[JackG]

Gentleman. I just found an interesting anecdote from the RCAF no.1 squadron during the Battle of Britain.   On July 11th 1940, a week after being relocated to Croyden for further training, a pilot was flying a Hurricane with the then still half white/black undersides.  An RAF fighter, upon spotting this, first flew aggressively around them, and then finally signaled the Canadian that he must land immediately (apparently it would have been  proper to shoot them down).  As a result of this incident, the RCAF unit was grounded until all it's aircraft were properly painted, as well as given  their assigned unit fuselage codes of 'YO'.

 

http://www.rcaf-arc.forces.gc.ca/en/cf-aerospace-warfare-centre/elibrary/journal/2015-vol4-iss2-08-a-very-swift-death-to-the-enemy.page

 

regards,

Jack

[Enrico Chiambalero]

Hello everyone,

 

I'm working on a 1/32 Hurricane MkIIc and I'd like to go for a white winter soviet VVS camo. I found some profiles that depict an all white MkIIc, with Vokes tropical filter, original RAF serial HL549, VVS number 45 black, unit unknown. It seems that this plane took service on winter 1942 from Vaenga AFB. My purpose is that white coating should partially cover the original camo. 

 

Now the question is which camo? Is it realistic assuming that this plane was originally painted in dark green/earth/sky type S scheme? or with late continental scheme? or what else russian camo?

 

HL549 serial seems to be Block 7 Hawker Aircraft Ltd. built, RR Merlin XX. from 17 Mar 1942 to 23 Nov 1942. Aircraft belonging to this production batch were delivered to RAF and only small numbers reallocated to SAAF and Turkey, according to http://www.rafcommands.com/database/serials/

 

Anyone has sources or informations? I'm aware that regarding lend&lease machines original pics are very poor, so this is almost a "what if" project, it would only be interesting to know what livery had (or should have had) this aircraft before leaving UK.

 

Thanks

[Graham Boak]

I would expect it to be in the Day Fighter Scheme of Dark Green and Ocean Grey over Medium Sea Grey.

 

 

[Troy Smith]

22 minutes ago, Enrico Chiambalero said:

I found some profiles that depict an all white MkIIc, with Vokes tropical filter, original RAF serial HL549, VVS number 45 black,

Hi Enrico

 

as my  SIG line says.... "never trust a profile with a photo"

the profile in question is an old chestnut, first appearing in the the Aircraft in Profile series in  the mid 60's,  and many of the profiles seem to lack a confirmation photo.

 

 

note that 3 of these,  AK-G, A-A of the IAF and 45/HL549, I have never seen a photo for, but you will see plenty of copies profiles for them...

 

Also,  while the VVS apparently got a load of IIc's, photos are almost non existent, AND of the few that exist, no markings are visible.

eg

the above image is of note as the plane looks to be in desert camo, and is a IIc, the bulge over the cannon feed being vsible

see here for little is known... scarily nearly 8 years ago

http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/board/index.php?topic=23.0

the pics are mostly gone, but were from the polish book Hurricane in Foreign service, pdf's are floating about online of it.  

 

So,  if you want an actual documented scheme for a VVS IIc, I don't know of one....

 

There is supposed to be a book on the Hurricane in VVS service coming out, but the authors of Soviet Hurricane Aces,  but I've not heard any more on that project.

 

HTH

T

 

[JWM]

What would be a reason to re-write British serial on bottom of fin in USSR? If serial still exists it should be on regular position and it may suggest that mashine was no re-painted before beeing covered white. But the position of serial on fin suggest that all stuff is just guessed...(fabricated/ or simply - fake)

Regards

J-W

 

P.S.

Edited September 25, 2018 by JWM

[Enrico Chiambalero]

Hi Troy, thank you very much.

 

This old discussion you linked http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/board/index.php?topic=23.0 almost made me sure that "Hurricanes in VVS service topic" is a mine field and that my project is even more a "what if" project.

 

The discussion about the photo of the pilot and the MkIIc is interesting, that aircraft seems indeed painted in desert scheme. This would justify the trop filter presence on alleged white HL549. The book Hawker Hurricane: The Multirole Fighter also report that HL549 & HL665 were sent to Russia and after converted to two seaters. It's possible to suppose that conversion was made because the presence of the trop filter that affected the engine performance, already reduced by poor soviet petrol.

[Enrico Chiambalero]

25 minutes ago, JWM said:

What would be a reason to re-write British serial on bottom of fin in USSR? If serial still exists it should be on regular position and it may suggest that mashine was no re-painted before beeing covered white. But the position of serial on fin suggest that all stuff is just guessed...(fabricated/ or simply - fake)

Regards

J-W

 

P.S.

Yes I'm almost entirely certain that white MkIIc on VVS markings is a fake.

[Graham Boak]

The recent work "Lend-Lease and Soviet Aviation in the Second World War" by Vladimir Kotelnikov has photos of a Mk.IIC under trials, and states that because of the weight of the 4 cannon it was considered unsuitable for front line use.  However the high firepower and good radios meant that they were considered suitable for air defence work, and that's where the majority went.  By !st May 1945 out of 731 Hurricanes on air defence work, 570 were Mk.IIc.  The last combat sortie was flown on 23rd May 1944.  I'd have thought it unlikely that these aircraft would have been repainted white in winter.

 

Postwar a (much smaller) number of surviving Hurricanes were collected for use in meteorological service.  I've seen one picture which appeared to show sensors fitted on the cannon of a Mk.IIc - although more likely these were simply on posts mounted in the same position.

 

The book also includes a photo of a serviceman repairing a propeller at the side of a white Hurricane, and the 4 is in the same style as that on the profile.  Perhaps there's another photo in the same sequence showing a fuller code.  The photo is said to be of the 128th Fighter Air Regiment, Moscow area 1941.  Interestingly, the rear of the Hurricane (all that is shown) is much cleaner than the front of those in other photos, so perhaps some care should be taken when weathering these types?  Or perhaps it was just freshly painted.

[Troy Smith]

20 hours ago, Enrico Chiambalero said:

Hi Troy, thank you very much.

 

This old discussion you linked http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/board/index.php?topic=23.0 almost made me sure that "Hurricanes in VVS service topic" is a mine field and that my project is even more a "what if" project.

 

The discussion about the photo of the pilot and the MkIIc is interesting, that aircraft seems indeed painted in desert scheme. This would justify the trop filter presence on alleged white HL549. The book Hawker Hurricane: The Multirole Fighter also report that HL549 & HL665 were sent to Russia and after converted to two seaters. It's possible to suppose that conversion was made because the presence of the trop filter that affected the engine performance, already reduced by poor soviet petrol.

 

The 151 wing Hurricanes had trop filters, and dusty conditions meant laster that the VVS made their own tropical filters

This first came to light in the Osprey Soviet Hurricane Aces book AFAIK

for more on this

http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/board/index.php?topic=2122.0

 

Later in the war the VVS started to get better fuel, with the supply of American fuel addditives IIRC.

 

as we are on the subject, here's the thread on VVS Hurricane armament modifications

http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/board/index.php?topic=881.0

 

20 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

The recent work "Lend-Lease and Soviet Aviation in the Second World War" by Vladimir Kotelnikov has photos of a Mk.IIC under trials, and states that because of the weight of the 4 cannon it was considered unsuitable for front line use.  However the high firepower and good radios meant that they were considered suitable for air defence work, and that's where the majority went.  By !st May 1945 out of 731 Hurricanes on air defence work, 570 were Mk.IIc.  The last combat sortie was flown on 23rd May 1944.  I'd have thought it unlikely that these aircraft would have been repainted white in winter.

My Kotelnikov book is not too hand, but the point about the Air Defence units (PVO) may explain the lack of photos, as they were not in the front lines, it was harder to get permission to visit these units by journalists, and thus photos are very rare,  a better description of this is in  Red Stars 4, regarding the rarity of VVS Spitfires photos, but if the Hurricane IIc ended up in PVO units as well, that's the explanation.

 

Also, the use of winter white painting was discontinued after the winter of 42/43 IIRC. 

 

20 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

 

The book also includes a photo of a serviceman repairing a propeller at the side of a white Hurricane, and the 4 is in the same style as that on the profile.  Perhaps there's another photo in the same sequence showing a fuller code.  The photo is said to be of the 128th Fighter Air Regiment, Moscow area 1941.  Interestingly, the rear of the Hurricane (all that is shown) is much cleaner than the front of those in other photos, so perhaps some care should be taken when weathering these types?  Or perhaps it was just freshly painted.

 

This is the image at the bottom, supposed to be red 48,  these are from the Polish Hurricanes in Foreign Service book

 

the above is a IIb, the outer ejector slots are visible in the red star.

 

I suspect the painting out is British done, but with Medium Sea grey over Sky, as it seems to have been policy for the Lend Lease providers to have supplied aircraft with red stars already applied, though these have had the fin starts added.

British practice seems to have been to add red stars to usual VVS position, underwing and fuselage, but also upperwing and not on the fin. 

 

Hopefull the authors of the Soviet Hurricane Aces book will do the planned book on the Hurricane in VVS service,  as the osprey book had over 20 photos I'd not seen before, and I am very interested in VVS Hurricane use.

 

HTH

T

[KRK4m]

On 9/24/2018 at 1:25 AM, Troy Smith said:

 

No, it's not, it's wood.

 

 

the underside scheme before sky had the rear underside in aluminium paint.  

 

As @Graham Boak points out,  why would they have retained an countermanded colour scheme? 

 

OK, Troy, this photo does convince me - the tailwheel rear fairing on the Gleed's aircraft isn't NMF.

Then it's painted silver !  And what is the reason? So maybe (as Graham has pointed out in his post #1173) it was covered with some sheet metal fairing?

After all I don't stick longer to my interpretation of the radiator box colour - after making several experiments with models they could appear dark or light with only few degrees change of lighting angle. And as the photo was taken from the aircraft flying very close to the discussed four the roll angle must be examined given the perspective distortion. 

Cheers

Michael

Edited October 1, 2018 by KRK4m

[michael_hase]

Gentlemen,

 

it´s been a long time since my last postings here, however my interest in the Hurricane hasn´t gone yet - quite the opposite. I follow this discussion and I have to admit that Troy´s Knowlwdge of this fighter is more than extraordinary and comprehensive.

 

As a keen and enthusiastic - and unfortunately sometimes pendantic scale-modeller in 1/72nd-scale I have done several Hurricanes in 1/72nd, mainly Mk. I-types. I will try to fir in some pictures when I have learnt to add these in a topic..

 

Meanwhile please have a look at the German site "modellboard" :  http://modellboard.net/index.php?topic=59863.msg922257#msg922257

There I started the conversion of the Revell - allegedly -  Mk. IIB into something more realistic, a Mk. I. I discovered that the fuselage is of the almost correct length for a Mk. I, however the wings are some 2mm to narrow... and some other faults. I haven´t moved on with this built yet to work-commitment but perhaps I can show the result at SWM in Telford this year. Again, Mr. Bentley´s drawings are - according to my researches - the best ones for the Hurricane and supoosably for other aircraft, too.

 

In 1/72nd-scale there actually is no decent Mk. I with metal wings. Arma from Poland have announced a Mk. I in 1/72nd as multi-media-kit (www. Arma.pl) and this one seems to be quite good. Unbtil then you have to put in a lot of work once you are addicted to the "additional Millimeter" as I am.

 

Luckily my son is studying in Tampere which has given me the chance to visit him last week. Of course I travelled up to Tikkakoski where the only remaining Finnish AF Hurricane (N2394/HC-452) is on show. I was lucky enough to get permission to climb up and around this aircraft which is a mixture of restoration work and original parts -e nding up ith a lot of pictures then. The Finnish did some alterations to their ten or something Hurricanes and added some "safety features". Still this aircraft is by far the most original Hurricane Mk. I outside of Britain and on the exterior almost complete in original colours from 1944 when it made its last flight.

This one has been restored from 2010 to 2013 and mainly the interior parts have been rebuilt and added as it was pretty much empty when the museum got it. However, vereything which was there only was cleaned and sealed. You still can see the traces of black and white underwing colours under the "RLM65"-like Finnish paint and it carries a replacement rudder in original DG/DE. Interior is silver paint except the upper parts of the panels and the back armour which is something like an "interior green". The seat is bare metal, the Sutton-Harness is in a light linen-colour. Also the Wheel wells, the landing gear struts and the inside of the original cover (port-side) were originally painted in aluminium-colour

 

My personal opinion ist that almost all producers of Hurricanes in 1/72nd - except Airfix - have the front part wrong - either with wrong dimensions and/or wrong panel-lines. As far as I learnt from taking dimensions from original and mainly not rstored Hurricanes the lengths of the oil-cooling ring and the adjacent engine-covers always have been the same from Mk. I up To Mk. IV. The only difference  is the length of the panels which begin from the engine cover to the fabric covered part of the fuselage. Actually here is the difference which resulted in a different wingroot-/fuselage fairing for the Mk. II-versions. Again, no kit for the Mk. II-series in 1/72nd is "spot on", not even the new AZ-model´´s Mk. Iic which are are "pita" to build.

 

Until the release of the Arma-kit I stay either with Airfix´Mk. I and the Alley-Cat wings (once they arrive here in Nuremberg) or the Hasegawa-kit and for the Mk. II-Versions a massively re-worked AZ-models kit...

 

 

Regards

 

Michael 

 

 

 

[rob Lyttle]

Sorry  @michael_hase. I made a comment about stuff that's none of my business, so carry on, ignore this!👍

Edited September 30, 2018 by rob Lyttle
erase

[Graham Boak]

15 hours ago, michael_hase said:

 

My personal opinion ist that almost all producers of Hurricanes in 1/72nd - except Airfix - have the front part wrong - either with wrong dimensions and/or wrong panel-lines. As far as I learnt from taking dimensions from original and mainly not rstored Hurricanes the lengths of the oil-cooling ring and the adjacent engine-covers always have been the same from Mk. I up To Mk. IV. The only difference  is the length of the panels which begin from the engine cover to the fabric covered part of the fuselage. Actually here is the difference which resulted in a different wingroot-/fuselage fairing for the Mk. II-versions. Again, no kit for the Mk. II-series in 1/72nd is "spot on", not even the new AZ-model´´s Mk. Iic which are are "pita" to build.

 

I'd be interested in knowing your reason for rejecting the Hasegawa nose, which I always felt matched the Bentley drawings.  I am talking here about the nose that comes in the standard boxing (Late production Mk.Ib), and all Mk.II boxings, and not the short horror that comes in the dedicated Mk.I specials.

[Troy Smith]

22 hours ago, michael_hase said:

My personal opinion ist that almost all producers of Hurricanes in 1/72nd - except Airfix - have the front part wrong - either with wrong dimensions and/or wrong panel-lines. As far as I learnt from taking dimensions from original and mainly not rstored Hurricanes the lengths of the oil-cooling ring and the adjacent engine-covers always have been the same from Mk. I up To Mk. IV. The only difference  is the length of the panels which begin from the engine cover to the fabric covered part of the fuselage. Actually here is the difference which resulted in a different wingroot-/fuselage fairing for the Mk. II-versions.

the front part of the cowling is the same,  yes.

I maybe misunderstanding your description here that I underlined, but the below deals in where the length difference is

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/64364-hurricane-noses-and-the-hasegawa-172-kits/&

 

 

On 21/2/2011 at 19:17, Troy Smith said:

The difference is in the rear engine bearers, they are longer, because the merlin XX is longer. The added length is is in the middle of the panel in front of the cockpit, behind the exhaust panel.

The longer engine bearers need a longer leading edge fillet, it's quite subtle unless you look carefully and it's well lit, due to curves, and the camo lines, remember it's only 4 inches, a quick measure of some drawings show the rear panel on the MkI to be 39", so one a MKII it should be 43", about 10% longer.

Graham nails this point

Quote

A more obvious comparison is the fairing between the wing leading edge and the nose - this is almost circular on the Mk.I and twice the length and more elliptical on the Mk.II. This is very easy to note when you have the two to compare, of course.

These pics while not ideal, I hope show this difference.

Mk I



Mk II

Mk I

Mk II

neat shot of a IIA, this shows the extended root fillet well.

compare to this one again.

HTH

T

 

and, fropm Peter Cooke's Hurricane Veracity article

 

 

the story behind the Bentley drawings

HurricaneBentleynotescrop_zpsc6a2675f by losethekibble, on Flickr

 

Quote

 I follow this discussion and I have to admit that Troy´s Knowlwdge of this fighter is more than extraordinary and comprehensive.

 

thank you!

 

HTH

T

[JackG]

Speculation on that Canadian Hurricane incident that I had posted earlier, where it was caught flying with night/white undersides on July 11, 1940.   Could this have been the R.C.A.F. serial Hurricane 323 sent over from Canada on June 27th.   Normal sea transit time was about eight days, so that gives an extra six days to reach the squadron and be up and flying by July 11th.   It kind of makes sense that it would still have the improper undersides, as opposed to RAF Fighter Command handing them improperly painted Hurricanes after Dowding's visit on June 25th?

 

regards,

Jack

[dogsbody]

6 hours ago, JackG said:

Speculation on that Canadian Hurricane incident that I had posted earlier, where it was caught flying with night/white undersides on July 11, 1940.   Could this have been the R.C.A.F. serial Hurricane 323 sent over from Canada on June 27th.   Normal sea transit time was about eight days, so that gives an extra six days to reach the squadron and be up and flying by July 11th.   It kind of makes sense that it would still have the improper undersides, as opposed to RAF Fighter Command handing them improperly painted Hurricanes after Dowding's visit on June 25th?

 

regards,

Jack

As far as I know, the RCAF's Hurricanes still had the aluminum underside paint when they were shipped back to the UK with No.1 Squadron. Though, admittedly, there is little information on those Hurricanes during their year in Canada.

 

 

Chris

[JackG]

Chris, thank you for the interest. 

 

Apparently 323 was shipped on it's own after repairs from a Category  B  Accident, it's overhaul completed  at Canadian Car and Foundry.    Of course, what exactly was done in terms of a repaint is unknown.  

http://www.rafcommands.com/archive/08476.php

 

We also know Canada received a  Spitfire (L1090) during the spring of 1940 for testing purposes, and it did have b/w wings and aluminum undersides - which may have influenced them on how their Hurricane was painted?

 

If it remained aluminum undersides, does that mean it was the RAF that passed down air frame(s) with  b/w undersides?  There is an interesting footnote (no.32) found in the following link suggesting initially, maybe only four Hurricanes were handed to the Canadians after Dowding's visit - or is this old news?

http://www.rcaf-arc.forces.gc.ca/en/cf-aerospace-warfare-centre/elibrary/journal/2015-vol4-iss2-08-a-very-swift-death-to-the-enemy.page

 

regards,

Jack

[michael_hase]

@Graham and Troy,

nothing to add from my side to this - Troy exactly got the point on the original and I hope everything has been explained with this. However this still leaves the topic with the kits. Yes, the nose of the 1/72nd Hasegawa Mk. I (the one without the oil cooling ring) ist almost correct but together with the fuselage part again it is not and can be corrected if somebody wishes. That is what I wanted to point out.

 

@Rob,

quite a nice and honest comment! Thanks for this. As I told I am a fan of "millimeters" and I enjoy coeercting kits as far as my humble skills enable me to do so. For me it is not spoiling the hobby it is the extra mile I go with these. I admit that nobody cares and almost 99.9% of the colleagues doing modelling wouldn´t recognize the difference but for me it is enough to know that I have done it. In the older days - I am almost 58 by now - we simply corrected the faults and missing parts according to scale drawings and dimensions given but nowadays kits are expected to be complete and correct "from the box". Of course they should be with regard to the sources available and the prices asked for, but.... have a look at Eduard´s first edition of the BF 109G which is mor 1/46 than 1/48 and some makers/kits more. I enjoy correcting these but I neither ask all others to do the same nor would I ever comment on these issues when seeing and commenting on a model. This - for me - is another issue. As long as it looks like a Bf109, Hurricane etc. it is "one". I focus more on the building and painting then - ist the build done well with regard to the skills of the respective modeller and is the result "accurate and historically correct" as far as the sources available demand - then it is a good or very good model for me.

BTW: I also enjoy building airliners in 1/144 - but far to few. I still have the B747-200 in CX-livery, the Spirit of HK´97" on my work-bench and was lucky enough to get original CX-paint, but.....

 

Again, many thanks for your interest in my posting.

 

Perhaps we meet at SMW in Telford. A colleague of mine and I will go there and show a few models. AS 1.PMCN" will have a stand of our own in the foreigner´s corner....

 

Regards

 

Michael

 

[Graham Boak]

All Hasegawa fuselages are Mk.II, even the  one which comes with the standard Mk.1 kit.  I read your comment as specifically referring to the shape  of the standard Hasegawa engine cowling.  After many years of suffering narrow noses on Hurricane kits, it was a delight., and still is.  It's a shame about some other parts of the kit.

[michael_hase]

20 minutes ago, Graham Boak said:

All Hasegawa fuselages are Mk.II, even the  one which comes with the standard Mk.1 kit.  I read your comment as specifically referring to the shape  of the standard Hasegawa engine cowling.  After many years of suffering narrow noses on Hurricane kits, it was a delight., and still is.  It's a shame about some other parts of the kit.

A true word....

 

I had some real difficulties with correcting these, not only the structure of the fabric of the rear fuselage. I hope to get the promised Alley-Cat-wings shortly and then my first option for the Mk. I will be mating AX-fuselage and AC-wings. The atilplanes I will have to check.

Hope that Arma will get it more closely to the original.

 

For the Mk. IIc my fisrt (and very personal) option is the AX Mk. IIc which again has some issues to be corrected, but still is no. 1 for me. I am still struggling with the AZ-(KP-models Mk. IIc which is too short in length and also has a very thick wing.

 

Revell again is a personal challenge as not only the fuselage is a topic that can be corrected with a little effort but also the wing-/fuselage position and the thus resulting work.

 

Cheers

 

Michael

[Graham Boak]

The first thing to do with the Airfix Mk.IIc is shave off all the fabric effect from the rear fuselage, something that will improve the majority of Hurricane kits.  The annoying problem is that it still has a "pencil shape" cowling with no room for the Merlin, and because of the thickness and stiffness of the plastic it is much less easy to wedge and reshape the upper nose than with the previous Airfix Mk.1.  Then there are the guns...   No, the whole kit is distinctly sub-standard for when it was introduced.  It will have to remain your very personal opinion, I'm afraid.  I suspect we all have favourites that others turn their eyes away from.

 

I don't have the Alleycat wing: repeating gossip from this site, the trailing edge has been criticised as too thick, so watch for that.  Even if so, it may simply be variable during production, because of the nature of short-run resins.