Tiger Moth K-4288 /D colour questions

[warhawk]

Hello,

 

I am keen on building this particular machine - a Tiger Moth coded K-4288 /D of 18th Elementary and Reserve FTS, Fairoaks, Surrey, England 1937.

I intend to use Xtradecal set No. X72190, and the instructions suggest a very interesting scheme - silver fuselage + wings in "shadow" camouflage + yellow wingtips and undersides!

 

Img source: Hyperscale

 

This looks very interesting, indeed, but looking at the two photos if this machine known to me, I have some doubts about the wing camouflage and yellow wingtips.

Would anyone please also take a look at the photos, and contribute with his opinion? 20 eyes are always better than just two 😁

 

Img source: Aerohispanoblog

 

Img source: Krul antiquarian books

 

Thank You in advance!

Edited September 23, 2018 by warhawk

[Graham Boak]

I don't see any camouflage wing set being  available in 1937, let alone the yellow wingtips.  The aircraft in the photos appears to be in either overall Aluminium or  more possibly Yellow.   Note that it lacks the code letter, which is common prewar but usual  in wartime.  It would be unlikely for a Yellow aircraft to gain a camouflaged wingset without being camouflaged in some sense itself.  The yellow wingtips are not in themselves remarkable, though they may infer a timescale.

 

I'd have to go digging to discover whether overall Aluminium was used on early Tiger Moths, or just when Yellow was introduced.

[warhawk]

Thank You for the additional information suggestion, Graham.

Any input is of great help!

[rod mcq]

There is a further photograph of K4288 on page 28 of the 2014 edition of Stuart McKay's book on the Tiger Moth and was probably taken at the same time as the photo above.  The caption in the book states the aircraft is on the strength of 18 ERFTS at Fairoaks and is dated 1938 - a year after the scheme proposed in the Xtradecal sheet.  The aircraft looks to be in overall Aluminium and has a code number "3" in the top decking just behind the rear cockpit. You can just see it in the photo above.

[rod mcq]

I knew I had seen it somewhere. There is a 4 view colour drawing of K4288 in the Xtradecal scheme on page 29 of the AirFile book RAF trainers Volume 1 1918- 1945 although in the drawings the aircraft  lacks the code letter "D". The AirFile book quotes its reference souce as Scale Aircraft Modelling  Volume 15 No. 11 Spetember 1993 page 478.  I have just checked that magazine and all page 478 has is the smaller of the 2 photos shown above and there is no description on the colour scheme.

[Graham Boak]

Yes, overall Aluminium was the initial colour scheme for the Tiger Moth.  K2488 was delivered to 2 ASU on 9.5.35.  (Aircraft Storage Unit at Cardington)  It was issued to 18 ERFTS on 16.9.37, which is interesting as the unit wasn't formed until 1.10.37 at Fairoaks.  It was recorded there as 3 (as Rod says above).  This unit became 18 EFTS on 3.9.39,  the next record for K4288 is 10 MU 30.7.45, then soc 25.5.50.  18 ERFTS/EFTS used numbers for individual aircraft identification.

 

Yellow was adopted for training aircraft in July 1936.  At this stage the engine cowlings were polished metal (which I think if what you see above.).  Camouflage partway down the fuselage was adopted after the Munich crisis.  Yellow outer wings were permitted from December 1943 - although I'm pretty sure that I have seen examples from earlier than this.

 

Rod has been busy while I was sorting out the above.  Xtradecal has a habit of using the Airfiles as a source, and regrettably they are not always reliable.  Not (to be fair) that any source is likely to be perfect.

Edited September 23, 2018 by Graham Boak
Cowlings.

[warhawk]

Too bad for that nice looking color scheme turning out to be very unlikely... 

Thank you all very much for helping me clear my conundrum up!

[Paul J]

Not only does it look aluminium dope overall the roundels are post war D types. Nothing to say that K serialled Tigers did not exist post war as well.  I have reservations about Xtradecals accuracy at times. Several actually.

 

In any case the camo wings with yellow panels would not normally have A type roundels more likely B types!

[Graham Boak]

Well spotted, but I think you are reading too much into a roundel with too large a red centre.  No postwar Tiger would carry serials on the fin, and the hyphen between the K and the rest of the serial is a known DH foible which would not have lasted seven years of service.

 

Aluminium overall was the scheme for RAF trainers when it was built, only to be put into store.  By the time it came out the standard scheme was Yellow with polished metal cowlings, and it will have been repainted that way before issue.  The lack of any individual marking may imply this photo was taken in between build and delivery, but in that case why two crew? 

[Paul J]

Ah yes ! Thanks Graham. Missed the missing fin flash and seril positioning.

 

Lovely photos though... not seen them before.  I just love Tiger Moths.

[Graham Boak]

Just had a look in Stuart Mackay's opus on the Tiger Moth, and there are a lot of these large red centres.  Another DH foible.  Something to minvestigate when looking at transfer sheets, perhaps?

[Roger Holden]

On 24/09/2018 at 11:20, Graham Boak said:

Just had a look in Stuart Mackay's opus on the Tiger Moth, and there are a lot of these large red centres.  Another DH foible.  Something to minvestigate when looking at transfer sheets, perhaps?

The early Tiger Moths (DH82 and a few 82A) were delivered with 1:2:3 proportion roundels, instead of the more usual 1:3:5. A few other types, notably the AW Siskin, also had these.  

[Seahawk]

On ‎9‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 6:23 PM, Graham Boak said:

 Xtradecal has a habit of using the Airfiles as a source, and regrettably they are not always reliable.  Not (to be fair) that any source is likely to be perfect. 

But some have a better track record than others.

 

At least the Airfiles quote the source of the info so people of a suspicious mind can check whether the evidence is (anything like) strong enough to support the artist's interpretation.  The trouble starts when people like Xtradecal start taking these secondary or tertiary sources as gospel.  In this case I'd say the artist got the stroke width and style (stencilled 4 and 8s on rudder?) of the serials wrong even before we move onto the more contentious stuff.