de Havilland Hornet Moth in RAF service - update

[Ed Russell]

The 'YG' code letters reflect its time with 502 Sqn Coastal Command during early 1940, the unit was split into six Coastal Patrol Flights and the '3' on the tail indicated that it flew with 3 Flight at Hooton Park.

......

David questions which underside colour is correct on his Moth, my hunch is the yellow, any thoughts about that here?

Thanks very much for obtaining that most interesting information. Graham is correct - 502 operated Whitleys and then Halifaxes right through to the end of WW2. The Coastal Patrol Flights must have been some sort of adjunct. In the absence of a photograph it is very hard to comment on the current scheme on W9385. If I had been doing it in the absence of a picture I might have gone for DE/DG/ Aluminium dope, low demarcation, no codes, Night serial, White 3 on tail.

W9385 saw service at St Athan with the Wireless School

This may well be a reference to Radar Calibration duties. It seems it was a common euphemism to cover anything to do with radar at the time, remembering it was a highly classified secret. No 4 School of Technical Training at St Athan was apparently mot a wireless school.

Could. Perhaps. Maybe.

Exactly.

[71chally]

No 4 SoTT was the main training school at St Athan (East Camp) which mainly covered ground technical training and later Flight Engineer training.

It did umbrella other units on the station such as 12 & 14 Wireless Schools, which as you suggest were doing more than training as they were at the forefront of developing radio and radar technology and covering fitment & installation. I think the PAU may have also come under their remit.

19 & 32 MU were the other main units on site (at West Camp), and there was some bleed over of work, especially when it came to flying tasks and aircraft equipment installation. I can see how the Moth could have served with both units.

I realise that 502 Sqn was mainly a Whitley unit, but it wasn't unheard of for Flights to be born out from squadrons. I don't know enough about 502, but I would like to think Shuttleworth did some research when they came to work on W9385.

These smaller units deserve to have a lot more information published about them really, and the Hornet Moth does serve to illustrate these lesser known flying duties.

[Graham Boak]

It certainly isn't unheard of for Flights to be split off from a squadron, although usually with the same type of aircraft. However, my argument above was mainly that 502 Sqn could not be connected with all six Coastal Flights, and certainly didn't disintegrate to form them. The Flight most likely to be linked with 502 Sqn is indeed No.3, and such a link is noted, but had it been "formed from" then I think this would have been noted too. It appears that all six Flights were formed simply by distributing the Hornet Moths with appropriate numbers of pilots, crew and admin staff: in which case why should the formation of No.3 have been any different?

Moving to operations: given that 502 Sqn, No3 and No 4 Coastal Flights shared the responsibility for anti-submarine patrol for the approaches to Liverpool, it would be more surprising had there been no connection, at some level. However, aircraft not taken on squadron strength do not carry squadron codes. This would be a notable exception. Perhaps there were special circumstances in this case.

I can only argue from the evidence I have seen: I agree that Shuttleworth can be expected to have done high quality research, but until this enters the discussion (and perhaps they do have a photo giving the individual code, or at least one showing similar Hornet Moths) there is no more than an affiliation to 502 Sqn, not an integration requiring common codes. It would be great by me if this lovely aircraft was indeed carrying historically accurate codes, but I retain an open, if doubting, mind on the subject.

Edited May 19, 2016 by Graham Boak

[Ed Russell]

agree that Shuttleworth can be expected to have done high quality research,

The obvious thing to do is to ask them so I have and I'll report back.

[Seahawk]

The Coastal Patrol Flights must have been some sort of adjunct. In the absence of a photograph it is very hard to comment on the current scheme on W9385. If I had been doing it in the absence of a picture I might have gone for DE/DG/ Aluminium dope, low demarcation, no codes, Night serial, White 3 on tail.

That's exactly what I would have done as well.

We're talking the darkest days of 1940 here. So hurriedly impressed aircraft which may well have been in aluminium dope to start with receive camouflage on upper surfaces only. (In fact, the more I think about it, given the short life of 3 & 4 Coastal Patrol Flights (CPF)(formed 1/12/39, disbanded 29 and 30/5/40), I could believe the aircraft may not have been camouflaged at all: at one stage 6 CPF's Hornet Moth was not even wearing a service serial - see below.) Coastal Patrol Flights (CPF) were hastily improvised units, so it would be odd indeed if 3 and 4 CPF were not. for administrative and infrastructure purposes, taken under the wing of an established RAF unit performing the same task in the same area. Lake (see below) describes 4 CPF as "affiliated" to 502 Sq which captures the sort of relationship I envisage. But actual subordination to/integration into 502 Sq to the extent of wearing YG codes is a bridge too far for me, absent photographic or contemporary written evidence. As Graham says, an open but doubting mind.

Rawlings' Coastal Support and Special Squadrons makes no mention of any coastal flights being formed out of 502 Sq and I would have expected it to have done were that so.

Lake's Flying Units of the RAF lists a number of CPF Hornet Moths:

1 CPF (Dyce): X9310

2 CPF (Abbotsinch): X9322

3 CPF (Hooton Park): W5784

4 CPF (Aldergrove): W9388

5 CPF (Carew Cheriton): W5748

6 CPF (St Eval): G-ADKM

And, just to muddy the waters ever so slightly, he lists MW as the code for 5 CPF, who were "affiliated" to 217 Sq (example: Tiger Moth II N9128 MW)! 1 CPF had code "T": examples Tiger Moth II N6841 TA and N6849 TK (but no code for Hornet Moth X9310).

Edited May 19, 2016 by Seahawk

[Graham Boak]

That's possibly a key comment, that 5 CPF were "affiliated" to 217 Sqn. and used their codes, offering a clear parallel to 502 Sqn/3 CPF. Yet 1 CPF used just a single character T, which is puzzling in itself.

Combat Codes has Tiger Moth N6837 as 217 Sq MW-* suggesting some possible confusion (shared here!) as to just what "Affiliated" may have meant. Neither Tiger nor Hornet Moths feature in 217 Sqn's page in Coastal etc. Squadrons (Rawlings).

PS I'm sure I had Lake but can't find it. Amazon has it for 1p - well, it did. Checking after buying, it still does. Go for it.

PPS might be worth looking in Stuart Mackay's Tiger Moth opus for other examples.

Edited May 20, 2016 by Graham Boak

[Ed Russell]

The obvious thing to do is to ask them so I have and I'll report back.

The Shuttleworth Trust were most unhelpful - I got an amateurish canned text reply advising me to look at their web site and search their collection of stuff - if I saw anything with an interesting title it would then cost me £7-50 for someone to tell me what it was.

[71chally]

It certainly isn't unheard of for Flights to be split off from a squadron, although usually with the same type of aircraft. However, my argument above was mainly that 502 Sqn could not be connected with all six Coastal Flights, and certainly didn't disintegrate to form them. The Flight most likely to be linked with 502 Sqn is indeed No.3, and such a link is noted, but had it been "formed from" then I think this would have been noted too.

I would concur with that, my line in post #27 about the six flights being split from the one squadron is a bad assumption and wording on my part.

Will try and dig deeper.

[Ed Russell]

I have received useful communication from John Benjamin and Jim Greaves of the Shuttleworth Trust to the effect that the scheme is educated guesswork. If I were advising them I would stick with my suggestion in post #26.

Having spoken to (the painters of the Hornet Moth) there is no period photographic evidence. The main data source was the Harleyford book 'Aircraft Camouflage and Markings 1907 - 1954' which gives the standard schemes and sizing of the markings. The code letters are for 502 Sqdn. Attached is a photo taken by one of the engineers. I believe Air Britain's Impressment Log was also used but having looked through that there are no photos of G-ADND in there.

[Ed Russell]

I'm not surprised Mr Dekno hasn't included this one in his colour scheme options but I'm delighted to see one released and have ordered one.

 

 

[LN-KEH]

Dekno will probably make a RAF version if a colour scheme can be documented

 

[Dave Fleming]

Only pics of RAF ones I can think of are these two.

 

[Guest]

I'd be tempted with a kit - until I saw the price Hannants are charging for the Dekno one.  40 notes?  (Anti Hannants vitriolic diatribe deleted on legal advice)

[Ed Russell]

Mine arrived..... sufficiently impressed to order another one. It was cheaper at Hannants than direct from Dekno. I'll get on with it and do a WIP soon.

[Ivor Ramsden]

The current Dekno kit is the pointy-winged version of the Hornet Moth, the DH-87A. I can't remember seeing any pictures of this version in RAF markings although I'm sure they must have been used.

Pointy or not, it's a belter of a kit.

[Ed Russell]

Yes I appreciate that and I was thinking of using modified Tiger Moth wings.

John Aero offered a set of plans in this thread but it seems from the Aeroclub trader thread he has retired.

[Seahawk]

Thread resurrection time.

 

Have just found (p.107 of The Other Few, Larry Donnelly DFM, Red Kite 2004) a starboard side photo of a Tiger (rpt Tiger, not Hornet) Moth of 5 CPF, Carew Cheriton.  Upper surface camouflage is carried down to the bottom edge of the fuselage and it wears the MW code of 217 Sq, also based at Carew Cheriton.  The rear cockpit flap is unhelpfully hanging down but it looks as if it is obscuring the individual letter "Z".  The serial appears to be black outlined in white or silver.  The letter is obscured by a passing WAAF and flare makes the serial numbers difficult to read: the first 3 numbers may be 6839 or 8839 but I'd only swear to the "3" and am very dubious about the "9". I think I can see the end of a hyphen between the letter and the numbers.  Flare and the strut of another Tiger Moth make it difficult to see whether there is a fin flash or not.

 

And in the foreground at the RH edge of the shot is an wingless cabin aircraft with wheels and nose similar to those of a Tiger Moth: a Hornet Moth?  It is in an overall light colour: silver dope?  Sturtivant and Co's RAF Flying Training and Support Units lists Hornet Moth G-AFDT as serving with 5 CPF.

 

The Donnelly book says 5 CPF was "attached to 217 Sq".

 

So photographic, as opposed to documentary, evidence of a CPF aircraft wearing the code of the squadron to/with which it was attached/affiliated!

 

Edit: looking through my A-B serial books, I note that N6839 saw initial service with 217 Sq.  Others in that batch are recorded as being doled out to 217, 502 (Aldergrove/Hooton Park.  Eg N6779) and 612 Sq (Dyce) (N6785 is even listed as 612/1 CPF), suggesting to me they were allocated for CPF "scarecrow" purposes.

Edited April 17, 2018 by Seahawk

[Graham Boak]

MW.Z: Having an attached unit using codes from the back end of the alphabet makes sense, as they would be less likely to clash with the mother unit's own codings.  Does this cast doubt on YG:L?  Not necessarily, as L being at the end of the usual A Flight allocations it could also be seen as not clashing.  Mustn't read too much into small amounts of information!

[rossm]

On 17/04/2018 at 4:12 PM, Seahawk said:

Thread resurrection time.

 

Have just found (p.107 of The Other Few, Larry Donnelly DFM, Red Kite 2004) a starboard side photo of a Tiger (rpt Tiger, not Hornet) Moth of 5 CPF, Carew Cheriton.  Upper surface camouflage is carried down to the bottom edge of the fuselage and it wears the MW code of 217 Sq, also based at Carew Cheriton.  The rear cockpit flap is unhelpfully hanging down but it looks as if it is obscuring the individual letter "Z".  The serial appears to be black outlined in white or silver.  The letter is obscured by a passing WAAF and flare makes the serial numbers difficult to read: the first 3 numbers may be 6839 or 8839 but I'd only swear to the "3" and am very dubious about the "9". I think I can see the end of a hyphen between the letter and the numbers.  Flare and the strut of another Tiger Moth make it difficult to see whether there is a fin flash or not.

 

And in the foreground at the RH edge of the shot is an wingless cabin aircraft with wheels and nose similar to those of a Tiger Moth: a Hornet Moth?  It is in an overall light colour: silver dope?  Sturtivant and Co's RAF Flying Training and Support Units lists Hornet Moth G-AFDT as serving with 5 CPF.

 

The Donnelly book says 5 CPF was "attached to 217 Sq".

 

So photographic, as opposed to documentary, evidence of a CPF aircraft wearing the code of the squadron to/with which it was attached/affiliated!

 

Edit: looking through my A-B serial books, I note that N6839 saw initial service with 217 Sq.  Others in that batch are recorded as being doled out to 217, 502 (Aldergrove/Hooton Park.  Eg N6779) and 612 Sq (Dyce) (N6785 is even listed as 612/1 CPF), suggesting to me they were allocated for CPF "scarecrow" purposes.

The same photo appears on p39 of Coastal Command by Chris Ashworth

[Mike Starmer]

One point about early colours.  These Hornet Moths may have been aluminium undernearth since the current 1938-39  AMOs only specified trainers and communications aircraft to be yellow.  When shadow shading was first used this became the 'Service Scheme' for all aircraft.  Commands changed schemes for their aircraft ,fighters in black/white and bombers in black. Other aircraft remained Alumininium, as Taylorcraft D at Old Sarum, Flamingos and Albatross.  Yellow was not introduced for all other types until 1940 when enemy aircraft were operating over Britain.  Later Wellington and Warwick transports carried the same scheme, replaced by TSS with Azure Blue undersurfaces.

[Seahawk]

If anyone is interested in unusual schemes for the new Airfix Tiger Moth kits, the photo of N6839 MW-Z of  5 CPF, referred to in posts 42 and 44 above, has turned up again on page 47 of the September 2020 Aeroplane.   Can't recall whether the quality of reproduction is better or worse than in the other instances.  The caption writer is more dogmatic than I felt able to be about the serial but in my opinion he is wrong about the code being MW-4 vice MW-Z.  It would be a mighty big "4" whereas a partially obscured "Z" would be the same size as the squadron code letters.

 

Now: what colour should the codes be and who makes them small enough for a 1/72 Tiger Moth?

[Ed Russell]

I would go with MW-Z too. In fact, as part of the Hornet Moth discussion,  I was informed of, but have not seen, a picture of the other side, clearly MW-Z in the format Z - MW.

It's a very interesting article with inspirational pictures - well worth a read. Here's the picture, which has been published several times, posted for review and scholarly purposes.

 

[Magpie22]

I note that 217 Sqn was primarily equipped with Ansons and based at St Eval in Cornwall in 1940. My UK geography is a bit hazy, but I think Carew Cheriton is in southwest Wales, so a relatively short hop, across the water, between the two airfileds.

 

I note Graham's comment above that it would be best to separate the codes applied to a second type by starting at the other end of the alphabet. If you had more than a few of this second type, it may be better to use a different system altogether, i.e numerals rather than letters. I tend to fall into the latter camp.

 

Thus, I think it is quite possible that N6839 was indeed coded MW-4. A '4', of the same size as the 'MW', is consistent with the photo above if it had been painted lower to avoid painting on the cockpit access door. My rough overlay shows how this could have been done. 

 

 

It is also of interest to note that Flintham and Thomas in their 'Combat Codes' book list Tiger Moth II, N6839, as MW-4 in their code listing for 317 Sqn.

 

'Z' or '4'??????????

 

Peter M

 

 

[Dave Fleming]

Vote for '4' here - you can see the vertical stroke and the edge of the horizontal one just forward of the interplane strut

 

I'd say medium sea grey for the colour, white for the serial

[bjohns5]

If I can bring back up this old thread, I have a question about that Tiger Moth N6839. It has a very low demarcation line between the upper and lower colors. Would that indicate the underside is probably silver? And during the period the Scarecrow patrols were flown, late 39 to early 40, would it likely have had the shadow scheme colors on the lower wing? I'd like to build a 1/48 Airfix Tiger as one of the submarine patrol aircraft.

Edited September 19, 2020 by bjohns5