RIAF Hurricane with elephant nose art - did it exist?

[dogsbody]

A bit larger view.

 

 

 

Chris

[Seahawk]

Some circumstantial evidence for the defence: according to the Air Britain serials listing KZ352 was a Hurricane II c and did serve with 1 Squadron, IAF.

Edited March 29, 2018 by Seahawk

[Dave Fleming]

13 hours ago, Seahawk said:

Some circumstantial evidence for the defence: according to the Air Britain serials listing KZ352 was a Hurricane II c and did serve with 1 Squadron, IAF.

 

And we know that 1 IAF Hurricanes did carry nose art, so it's possible that it is real, posisbly base don verbal description?

[ClaudioN]

Squadron code for No.1 Sqn. RIAF was NB, so NB-A would be OK for the CO aircraft, but when did the change to single letter 'A' occur? And were squadron codes still carried in 1944?

No. 1 Sqn. at Imphal

 

Claudio

 

[Ed Russell]

Yes, 1965, as per post 12 above.

I wonder if anyone inherited James Goulding's archive?

[Troy Smith]

The Profile series are interesting,   given their date,  and having been given a stash of Airfix magazines from the  60's,   both show the  rise of  interest in aircraft markings (I wonder how much is due to the popularity of plastic modelling?)

 

The few older publications I have seen on WW2 Aircraft are in B/W,   the Profiles featured colour,  and were reasonably cheap, 

I got a bound volume of some as child and was very impressed,   but  it seems only in the past few years has the artwork been seriously questioned,    and that  due to the rise of forums like this.

I ended putting in my signature line because of debates like this....

 

regarding that page of profiles in the original booklet..

https://boxartden.com/reference/gallery/index.php/Modeling-References/Aircraft-Profiles/Britain/WW2/Hawker-Hurrican-IIC-24

note the scans above appear to have had a couple of pages added at the end,  from the Aircam monograph IIRC.

 

of the seven above,   I have only seen photos of LK-?,  ZY-S, and FI-D,    though it didn't stop Fly models from usig AK-G in their 1.32nd kit

the fact that the PR II and VVS  profiles have serials is of note.

 

Also shows up some of the poor outlines on Hurricane drawings,  the mis shaped fin and too deep canopy being the main glitches.

 

the booklet is also the first source of the much discussed Kuttlewasher Night Reaper  intruder scheme,  summarised here

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234976286-hurricane-mk-iic-flown-by-km-kuttlewascher/&do=findComment&comment=1889582

but the whole thread is worth a read.

 

HTH

T

 

 

 

[ClaudioN]

4 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

of the seven above,   I have only seen photos of LK-?,  ZY-S, and FI-D,    though it didn't stop Fly models from usig AK-G in their 1.32nd kit

AK-G appears to be another mythical creature. I recall being attracted to the ESCI 72nd Hurricane decal sheet because of it (they did decals before making kits).

Years later, I saw a picture of a Mk. IIc under camouflage netting, where the shades cast by the sun created a pattern that seemed exactly that of AK-G. Pity I can't find that photo now.

 

Claudio

 

[Ed Russell]

LK-?    A friend researched this one - I think the ? is really "we don't know the code" rather than painted code LK-?

 

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205126942

 

Here "Nightingale" is "Night Duty" and (perhaps) code is LK-R

 

https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/hawker-hurricane-n-f-mk-iic.41145/

[JWM]

2 hours ago, ClaudioN said:

AK-G appears to be another mythical creature. I recall being attracted to the ESCI 72nd Hurricane decal sheet because of it (they did decals before making kits).

Years later, I saw a picture of a Mk. IIc under camouflage netting, where the shades cast by the sun created a pattern that seemed exactly that of AK-G. Pity I can't find that photo now.

It was discussed here and it is not exactly so. I mean there are photos of desert Hurricans with such Italian style camos. I have at least one such photo in a French journal or booklet. I can dig for it if you would like.

Fast googlig gives also some results

The latest is said to be from 73 Sq

Regards

J-W

 

[Troy Smith]

On 30/03/2018 at 06:04, Ed Russell said:

LK-?    A friend researched this one - I think the ? is really "we don't know the code" rather than painted code LK-?

 

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205126942

 

Here "Nightingale" is "Night Duty" and (perhaps) code is LK-R

 

https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/hawker-hurricane-n-f-mk-iic.41145/

 

Hi Ed

No,   sometimes Sqs used '?' instead of 'Q'  and there is most certainly a photo....

 

Hurricane MkIIc RAF 87Sqn LK Question Nightingale P.Off Frank Mitchell HL864

Note the poor brushed paint job... especially on the green,

 

On 30/03/2018 at 08:26, JWM said:

It was discussed here and it is not exactly so. I mean there are photos of desert Hurricans with such Italian style camos. I have at least one such photo in a French journal or booklet.

this camo has been extensively discussed here,  including the conclusion it's not Italian style,  but the base paint being aluminium dope with maybe blue and purple mottle.

there are links to previous threads on this in the above link too.

 

Note,  all the planes you post images of are Mk.I's,   not Mk.IIc's

 

My comment was specifically about profiles that have become 'fact' without a photo being seen by anyone.

 

HTH

T

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ClaudioN]

5 hours ago, JWM said:

It was discussed here and it is not exactly so. I mean there are photos of desert Hurricans with such Italian style camos. I have at least one such photo in a French journal or booklet. I can dig for it if you would like.

Thank you J-W,

however, I'm afraid that's an entirely different matter.

AK-G is, reportedly, an Mk. IIc in mid-1942 and, if we are to believe the pattern shown in the Profile, mottles extended to the whole fuselage. Sorry I can't find the photo, but shade from an overhanging camouflage net is a very convincing explanation in this particular case.

 

AFAIK, so-called "Italian style" mottles were only found on Mk. Is, no later than 1941. BTW, the term "Italian style" turns out to be slightly misleading for Mk. I mottling, at least with regards to colours used, see the post mentioned by Troy.

Your final picture appears to be taken in Greece.

 

Claudio

 

Edited March 30, 2018 by ClaudioN

[Graham Boak]

The last photo is among a series of similar ones: I've seen them captioned as being at Argos or on Crete.

 

My personal opinion is that the mottles are just in the camouflage colours.  Not only does this appear just plain sensible, there was no purple in the RAF palette.  (You don't need to remind me that 607's squadron colours were mauve and gold, neither of which exist in the RAF palette either, but they weren't worn during WW2.)

[Jagan]

On 3/29/2018 at 1:34 PM, ClaudioN said:

Squadron code for No.1 Sqn. RIAF was NB, so NB-A would be OK for the CO aircraft, but when did the change to single letter 'A' occur? And were squadron codes still carried in 1944? 

 

The squadron codes only existed late 1942, early 1943. In Imphal it did not have Squadron Codes.

 

Additionally a KZ serialled aircraft would put the 'date' after July 1944 which is when they got the IICs 

[Troy Smith]

I'm going to bump this thread as @Linescriber  maybe able to add some information,  as he built a model of one of Sq Ldr Arjan Singh  Hurricane

 http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal10/9001-9100/gal9035-Hurricane-Singh/00.shtm

 

cheers

T

[Linescriber]

this is the closest pic i got ( albeit of a 6 Sqn IAF example!!)😀

 

 

 

 

 

[KevinK]

I think we can all agree that there's definitely an elephant in that photo.

 

Q.E.D

[ClaudioN]

10 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

I'm going to bump this thread as @Linescriber  maybe able to add some information,  as he built a model of one of Sq Ldr Arjan Singh  Hurricane

 http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal10/9001-9100/gal9035-Hurricane-Singh/00.shtm

 

1 hour ago, Linescriber said:

this is the closest pic i got ( albeit of a 6 Sqn IAF example!!)😀

Very, very nice model.

Forgive me, may I ask about the serial number in your model? AP953 was reportedly in a cancelled batch, but that information might be incorrect, that's why I'm making the question.

Is the number correct and confirmed from some source, possibly mis-typed on the web page (sorry, I can't read it from pictures), or else?

 

Best regards

Claudio

[Linescriber]

5 minutes ago, ClaudioN said:

 

Very, very nice model.

Forgive me, may I ask about the serial number in your model? AP953 was reportedly in a cancelled batch, but that information might be incorrect, that's why I'm making the question.

Is the number correct and confirmed from some source, possibly mis-typed on the web page (sorry, I can't read it from pictures), or else?

 

Best regards

Claudio

Sorry, the understanding at that time was that Arjan's aircraft was 953 when with 1 Sqn.  However, his logbook shows it was AP 932

.

[Troy Smith]

On 04/05/2019 at 07:50, Linescriber said:

this is the closest pic i got ( albeit of a 6 Sqn IAF example!!)😀

 

 

 

 

 

One for @tonyot  as this is an option in the Fly 1/32nd kit,  

 

turns out to be an IWM image

THE INDIAN AIR FORCE IN THE BURMA CAMPAIGN, 1942-1945. © IWM (IND 3111) IWM Non Commercial License

 

evidently Fly's usual level of research..... find a profile and copy it....

 

Now, there maybe a shot of HV538 later on with the SEAC bands and head motif,   but I do not believe in the Day Fight Scheme colours,  note how pale the underside is, and low contrast uppers, suggesting Drake green/Dark Earth over Sky Blue.

If the profile is supposed to based on the above photo it's actually managed to get every detail wrong....

 

Can anyone perhaps @Seahawk  and see if HV538 is actually a IIc?  I can't see any cannon bulges on the wing.

 

I'm also wondering if it's a Tac R plane, note the chaps working underneath with the removed belly panel

EDIT found it..

Quote

 

Flying Officer B R Rao with ground crew who are working on the Camera equipment.

 

 

 

the removed belly panel can just be seen here, under the plane, behind the chaps work on the camera

 

 

 

 

[Seahawk]

1 hour ago, Troy Smith said:

Can anyone perhaps @Seahawk  and see if HV538 is actually a IIc?  I can't see any cannon bulges on the wing.

HV538 ought to be a IIc, according to the A-B serial listing.  The batch of 1000 HV275-HW881 was a mixture of IIb, IIc and IId: the relevant entry does not have the asterisk marking denoting a IIb or the cross  denoting a IId so by default it's a IIc.

 

HV538 is not listed separately in the Hurricane production listing in Mason's The Hawker Hurricane but all the HV53x and HV54x aircraft that do feature are IIc Trops. 

 

PS I can't see any cannon bulges either.

Edited May 4, 2019 by Seahawk

[Troy Smith]

13 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

 

I'm also wondering if it's a Tac R plane, note the chaps working underneath with the removed belly panel

I'm sure i saw a photo recently of some Indian mechanics working underneath a Hurricane...  one perhaps @Linescriber  may remember,  I think they were working a camera.

EDIT found it and posted above

 

Not sure if the Hurricane in the background is RIAF,  but I wish there was a side shot of it....   the only other spinner spiral I can recall on a Hurricane was on a Portuguese one..

 

Official photograph. © IWM (CI 857) IWM Non Commercial License

 

Apparently Arjan Singh being handed the control of the squadron

[Linescriber]

I am told that pic is after the battle of Imphal and the Samurai sword is being handed over to Arjan for his Sqn's role in the Ops.

[Troy Smith]

12 hours ago, Seahawk said:

HV538 ought to be a IIc, according to the A-B serial listing.  The batch of 1000 HV275-HW881 was a mixture of IIb, IIc and IId: the relevant entry does not have the asterisk marking denoting a IIb or the cross  denoting a IId so by default it's a IIc.

 

HV538 is not listed separately in the Hurricane production listing in Mason's The Hawker Hurricane but all the HV53x and HV54x aircraft that do feature are IIc Trops. 

 

PS I can't see any cannon bulges either.

I found the image of the Indian ground crew working on the cameras, here

http://www.rafcommands.com/galleries/SEAC/No-1-Squadron-at-Imphal

 

the Hurricanes visible all appear to be IIb's

Quote

A Hurricane IIB of the Squadron fitted with long range fuel tanks that were fitted in May 1944.

The aircraft is most likely HW172 noted in various logbooks of pilots of No.1 Squadron

 

I wonder if the identity of this could be deduced

B Flight – L to R : F P Amber , K N Kak, M M A Cheema, H Raza (Flt Cdr), Rajendra Singh, AM Kapur, U/I, M N Bulsara

note the same nose art here

Fg Offr F P Amber with Hurricane

 

pushing the circumstance argument, but note both are under camo netting, and note the construction of the blast pen wall, logs?  same in both.

 

also, note the fixing under the wing for the long range tank, and the 'hole' in the fuselage at bottom right

 

as seen here on the 34 sq example

 

 

[Graham Boak]

The hole is the opening for the sidelooking camera on an FR Hurricane, in case anyone didn't know already.  The patch under the wing is where the fairing has been removed from the carrier which could be for a bomb or a tank.   It is surprising that the two pipes for the tank haven't been tucked away out of sight.

[Seahawk]

1 hour ago, Troy Smith said:

the Hurricanes visible all appear to be IIb's

 

 

By the time the HWxxx Hurricanes were being produced, IIb s were in a distinct minority, say 1 in 8, scattered irregularly through the production run (beats me why they were being produced at all).  It's striking however that all the early HWxxx-series aircraft listed as issued to 1 IAF, whether new or used, are IIb, despite their being in a minority.  The first IIc recorded as going to 1 IAF (that I've spotted) is  HW407 (ex 67 Sq, so when is moot). Thereafter 1 IAF aircraft are almost all IIc, mostly further ex-RAF hand-me-downs.  The first IIc apparently issued new to 1 IAF is HW620: even then the occasional new IIb creeps in (eg HW806).  Not sure how that translates to timelines but to me it suggests an initial preponderance of IIb s.