Brits abroad - British subjects in foreign markings Chat

[RMP2]

Ah. Just realised this GB is up n running and I volunteered an Indian Jaguar for it.

I have a Hunter to knock up in the 60s NATO GB too, but shall try!

[Giorgio N]

On 8/9/2018 at 7:20 PM, PhantomBigStu said:

 I may having entered one eduard spitfire, buy a mkVIII weekend, is the RAAF Grey nurse aircraft in standard RAF camo or does it have RAAF paints? 

 

Standard RAF Dark Green and Ocean Grey over Medium Sea Grey.

If you know which aircraft you're interested in building I can look for info on this

[Wez]

7 hours ago, RMP2 said:

Ah. Just realised this GB is up n running and I volunteered an Indian Jaguar for it.

I have a Hunter to knock up in the 60s NATO GB too, but shall try!

I'm sure you'll manage...

[Hardtarget]

Thinking of doing an RCAF/RAAF Lancaster,potentially VR-A of the mynarsky museum when they popped over a couple of years ago.  Any objections?

[Giorgio N]

13 hours ago, Hardtarget said:

Thinking of doing an RCAF/RAAF Lancaster,potentially VR-A of the mynarsky museum when they popped over a couple of years ago.  Any objections?

 

As long as the aircraft is clearly recognisable as a Canadian or Australian bird, then I see no problem. I'm not familiar with the subject you have in mind, can you show us more ?

[Hardtarget]

3 hours ago, Giorgio N said:

 

As long as the aircraft is clearly recognisable as a Canadian or Australian bird, then I see no problem. I'm not familiar with the subject you have in mind, can you show us more ?

It will be this one.

 

http://www.warplane.com/aircraft/collection/details.aspx?aircraftId=4

 

Either that or a Ajeet (indian single seat Gnat)

[Hardtarget]

In addition, how do we stand on RAF markings but the personnel who operated them are a dedicated national squadron i.e 302 (czech) sqd during the BOB?

[Giorgio N]

On 8/27/2018 at 1:01 PM, Hardtarget said:

It will be this one.

 

http://www.warplane.com/aircraft/collection/details.aspx?aircraftId=4

 

Either that or a Ajeet (indian single seat Gnat)

 

Hmmm... tricky one !

The idea (and this will answer your other question too) was to consider Commonwealth and foreign manned squadrons serving with the RAF in Europe and carrying RAF markings as RAF units, and therefore excluded from the GB. However any unit that carried nationality markings that immediately identified them as foreign would have been eligible. An example is the Halifax built in a thread below, belongs to a French manned units in the RAF but carries French insignia, so it's eligible.

My view is that an aircraft of a similar squadron carrying British national markings would really be an RAF aircraft.

Now Commonwealth nations units are in a similar but different situation: they were originally from a different country but operated under RAF control with RAF markings. Again I would consider these not eligible as really they would be impossible to tell from a standard RAF machine apart from the codes and maybe a unit insignia (that only a few Squadrons carried).

For this reason I would consider not eligible your Lancaster... and it pains me as I saw this very same aircraft a few years ago during a visit to Canada and would love to see her reproduced in model form.  Of course the same aircraft during her service with the RCAF with Canadian markings would be perfectly eligible.

Interestingly I have proposed a GB for next years that would include subjects piloted by any foreign pilot in service in the RAF in addition to any foreign made material serving with the British armed forces, but this would be for next year if approved.

 

Now as a host this is my view, if all other modellers feel strongly against this we can discuss and open the GB to RAF marked aircrafts from Commonwealth and foreign manned units. Personally I feel that this would not follow the original spirit of the GB, that was to show British hardware in foreign use and markings, but then again it's a hobby

[Hardtarget]

Hi Giorgio,

 

Foreign piloted squadrons did come under the banner of the RAF but were independantly controlled by their own nationality pilots/commanders working in partnership with and to RAF regulations.  Therefore a Czech pilot would fly his RAF plane in RAF roundel markings but would also carry their own nationality markings on the each side of the fuselage i.e the Czech, Polish & French insignias.  If this moves away too much from your intentions thats fine and that clears my two queries up i think!. I note Tony's Halifax as that does not have RAF roundels.

 

As for the Ajeet, its a british based design tweaked to indian requriements with indian national markings so i think this would clearly fall into the GB rules.

 

Its not a problem ill find somethign british but in foreign markings.

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

Hello Giorgio ... Mind if I jump in to this build with a Revell Hurricane IIB.

I want build it as a lend-lease Soviet Hurricane in winter distemper ? Something like this photo.

This profile is similar to what im thinking. 

I actually wouldn't mind doing the artillery spotting dual open cockpit version. But i seriously doubt i could pull the mods off in the amount of time given. If so I wouldn't start for a week or two. 

 

Dennis

Edited August 28, 2018 by Corsairfoxfouruncle

[Giorgio N]

16 hours ago, Hardtarget said:

Hi Giorgio,

 

Foreign piloted squadrons did come under the banner of the RAF but were independantly controlled by their own nationality pilots/commanders working in partnership with and to RAF regulations.  Therefore a Czech pilot would fly his RAF plane in RAF roundel markings but would also carry their own nationality markings on the each side of the fuselage i.e the Czech, Polish & French insignias.  If this moves away too much from your intentions thats fine and that clears my two queries up i think!. I note Tony's Halifax as that does not have RAF roundels.

 

As for the Ajeet, its a british based design tweaked to indian requriements with indian national markings so i think this would clearly fall into the GB rules.

 

Its not a problem ill find somethign british but in foreign markings.

 

Yes, really the original idea of the GB was to show exported subjects, then I included foreign manned RAF units as long as they had clearly different markings showing them to belong to another air force. I considered other foreign manned units, afterall you're right that they were controlled by their own governments in exile, at least to a certain degree. Still accepting these would have led to a number of subjects almost totally identical to a standard RAF machine, apart from the small nationality markings under the cockpit.

With RCAF and RAAF units I found the matter even more difficult to sort... RCAF units were Canadian and not British, still when serving in Britain they not only were under RAF control but often they featured crews from a variety of nationalities, in the same way as there were Canadians and pilots of other nationalities in RAF Squadrons. Really the lines would have been very blurred.

I should add that in the rules I allowed RCAF and RAAF WW2 subjects that operated outside of RAF control, reason why for example RAAF Spitfires serving in the pacific are eligible..

I know, these rules may be a bit unfair but I had to draw a line at some point. Have to say that I also believe that the various foreign manned RAF units would IMHO deserve a whole GB because of their contribution to the RAF war effort ! I believe the heroism of these pilots should never be forgotten, they went through great trouble to keep fighting, put themselves in great danger (a Pole shot down over occupied Europe would have been treated quite differently from a British one) and in some cases they found themselves ostracised when back in their countries (as happened to many from Poland and Czechoslovakia).

Ok, enough talk, thanks for being understanding !

 

Back to the matter of eligiblity,  the Ajeet would be perfectly fine, it was British designed and the modifications introduced by the Indians did not change this into anything really different from the original Gnat. It's a big yes for me !

[Giorgio N]

8 hours ago, Corsairfoxfouruncle said:

Hello Giorgio ... Mind if I jump in to this build with a Revell Hurricane IIB.

I want build it as a lend-lease Soviet Hurricane in winter distemper ? Something like this photo.

This profile is similar to what im thinking. 

I actually wouldn't mind doing the artillery spotting dual open cockpit version. But i seriously doubt i could pull the mods off in the amount of time given. If so I wouldn't start for a week or two. 

 

Dennis

 

Dennis, your Hurricane would be very welcome ! I don't think we have a Soviet operated WW2 subject yet, this would be great

I agree, the two-seater would really be something but I can see how this may be a bit complicated...

 

[Graham77]

Late to the starting line here, would a Harrier in US service be eligible either AV8A, B or even a twin seat?

[PhantomBigStu]

Not to speak for the hosts, but av8a (and c) will be fine, But for the Harrier II av8bs it’s tricky, a US Harrier is probably not ok but given the rules a Italian or Spanish one may well be 

[stevej60]

11 minutes ago, Graham77 said:

Late to the starting line here, would a Harrier in US service be eligible either AV8A, B or even a twin seat?

Graham,the original Harrier's operated by the USMC were I believe standard Hawker Siddely machines with the Av8A designation as in the Airfix newish

tool.the AV8B was an American development.

[Graham77]

Cheers chaps A it’ll be then, if that works with Giorgio. Just need to get to it. Thanks for the quick response.

[Giorgio N]

Graham, the answers you've received pretty much cover what I'd have answered to you: A and C are easy, as they were variants of the GR.1 and therefore fully British in my eyes. More so all AV-8As were built by Hawker Siddeley in Britain ! The C is just an updated A so is still a British designed and built machine. The same applies to the TAV-8A, all built in Britain.

The AV-8Bs are a different story... this really was a new type based on the same configuration but was more of an american design with a good British content. As such I'd probably not consider this as eligible in USMC markings.

As you've already decided for an A, all the above is academic of course.. 😁 Looking forward to your Harrier !

Edited September 8, 2018 by Giorgio N

[Giorgio N]

Quick recap of how the GB is moving. I'd say it's going pretty well ! We're having subjects from 19 different countries from all parts of the world, some modellers have already completed their projects and some with more than one model, others are close to the finish line. In any case we are seeing a lot of interesting subjects, some that I knew about and others that were totally new to me and I bet a few others

I'm glad that modellers are enjoying this GB, now I only have to speed up my two models... 😁

[IanHx]

When does this GB end ?  Some places say 7th, others say 17th.  

[John Masters]

My calendar says October 7, 2018.

[Giorgio N]

I can confirm that the GB is supposed to end on October 7th, however we've been offered one extra week, that I duly accepted. Praise be to our Group Build Moderator ! 😀

[John Masters]

2 hours ago, Giorgio N said:

Praise be to our Group Build Moderator!

All Hail The Moderator!  Blessed be his guiding moderation...

[Giorgio N]

Folks, great news: @Enzo Matrix , our Group Build moderator, has decided that since the wrong date of October 17th was written in the Gb title, to help any modeller that may have planned their build according to that date the GB end date is moved to the closest Sunday, that is October 21st !

We now have not one but two extra weeks ! Let's make good use of these and add a few more models to the gallery !!!

[exdraken]

That is great news!

I 'll dive in again full steam ... 

The Syrian Meteor deserves a GB gallery entry I think!

[Enzo the Magnificent]

I like the way that Giorgio uses the passive voice and is non-commital when he says "since the wrong date of October 17th was written in the Gb title" when what he really ,means is "that Matrix was a complete and utter muppet.  Again."