Spitfire PR 1G

[X Trapnel]

I'm looking to build the new Tamiya 1/48 Spitfire in a PRU Blue scheme, but not wanting to put my modelling skills to the test in removing the armament panels, would like to build it as an armed PR 1G.  I have found this older profile on the IPMS

Stockholm website and wonder what the consensus is on its accuracy. 

 

  

 

I've also found this picture on a Britmodeller thread which seems to broadly match the profile above, although the color looks a bit dark for PRU Blue.  (Could be just the lighting/print of course.)  I also wonder about the red spinner depicted in the profile - the color does not seem apparent in the photo.  Finally, are there any thoughts on the exhausts?  The back two in the photo and profile are clearly a lighter color, silver perhaps?

 

Thanks for any help with this.  

 

[Giorgio N]

interpreting B/W pictures is always tricky, personally however I'm a bit skeptical of the overall PRU Blue colour proposed in the profile and I believe that these aircraft were camouflaged. DP were the codes of 1416 Flt, an Army Co-operation  and tactical recce unit and their aircraft are known to have carried camouflage (most likely the temperate land scheme at this stage). The Ventura book on the Merlin engined PR Spitfires mentions only overall white/pink and camouflage for the PR.Ig, with PRU blue being never used

 

[Troy Smith]

3 hours ago, X Trapnel said:

The back two in the photo and profile are clearly a lighter color, silver perhaps?

lead oxide deposits on the rear two pipes, from running a lean mixture, which is pale grey with brown tinge

 

 Spitfire Vb...............SAAF by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr

 

the effect is clearer here

Spitfire Mk. IIA, 1941. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr

 

 

[Troy Smith]

4 hours ago, X Trapnel said:

but not wanting to put my modelling skills to the test in removing the armament panels, would like to build it as an armed PR 1G. 

AFAIK all PR Spitfire I's retained the armament panels,   it was only with the PR IV that the dedicated PR bowser wing was introduced. 

There are conversion parts for the OLD Tamiya Mk.I and the new tool Airfix Mk.I,   the old tool Tamiya kit has some inaccuracies that means some parts would not fit

Quote

 

I have found this older profile on the IPMS

Stockholm website and wonder what the consensus is on its accuracy. 

 

Poor.   but note the date.  

these will probably serve to confuse, but maybe if interest for some background on the possible variety of schemes

This is from the ventura book mention by @Giorgio N

Spitfire PR IG 1416 Army co operation by losethekibble, on Flickr

 

The book is basically unobtainable BTW, shame as it is very informative.  PR schemes varied a lot, and were allowed too.    So, who knows,  but PRU Blue was a high altitude scheme, and PR I G's were used low level.

 

HTH?

 

[72modeler]

The Aviation Workshop On Target profile series did a very nice  reference work on all PR Spitfires: volume 8 was titled Photo Reconnaissane Spitfires in Worldwide Service, and I think copies can still be had from some stockists and auction sites. In addition Model Alliance did a decal sheet to go with this volume- in 1/72 for sure, as I have it, but maybe in 1/48 as well. There are detailed descriptions of the external and internal differences between each variant as well as colors and,markings. I would recommend iot if you are going to build more than one or two PR Spits.

 

That being said, I looked at my copy and found a description and color profile of a PR 1G, serial R70928, with No. 1416 Flight, coded DP with 30" medium sea grey codes, which might be the one in the photo you posted. Aircraft was finished in dark green/dark earth over sky and had a red spinner. This aircraft was later converted to PR VII standard. As stated in the monograph, a Mk 1G  retained the eight-gun armament, externally armored windscreen, had side blisters on the hood, two vertical F24 cameras on the underside of the fuselage and an oblique F24 camera in the hatch behind the cockpit on the LH side. it was also fitted with a 29-gallon fuel tank behind  the cockpit.  The PR 1G became the PR Mk VII when the designation system was changed in 1941. I think, but am not sure, that the PR VII's had the larger oil tank that required a deeper lower nose cowling, as I found reference to this in one written source, and that the PR 1G's original Merlin II was replaced by the Merlin 45.

 

 

If you need them, I can give you thee size and type of roundels and fin flash carried by this airplane. Believe @Graham Boak can give you more accurate/better information than me, as he has much better references. This should get you started, though. This PR Spit is also in The Spitfire Story, page 102, by Alfred Price

Mike

 

[Graham Boak]

I would prefer to believe that this was an example of this rare low-level PR scheme, but the date and the unit do suggest that Temperate Land scheme is the likelier.  I'd be surprised to see the more exotic colours outside of the PRU  itself.  Sadly the photograph is not clear enough to make any sensible distinction between the two.  The deep cowling is normally required for the longer PR missions that the bowser wing made possible, and there seems no reason for it to be needed on the "dicer"  PR Mk.IGs.  I would suggest that for most missions by this type the vertical cameras would not have been carried, although provision for these was normal on many "photo" Spits.

 

X4555 has been claimed as another example but without any supporting evidence that I've seen, and in the photo I have seen the scheme does not appear dark enough.  But EDSGrey did fade... and I've never seen any description of EDSGreen to pass legitimate judgement on its properties.

[Troy Smith]

48 minutes ago, 72modeler said:

The Aviation Workshop On Target profile series did a very nice  reference work on all PR Spitfires: volume 8 was titled Photo Reconnaissane Spitfires in Worldwide Service, and I think copies can still be had from some stockists and auction sites.

Books that fall foul of my signature line.   pretty profiles, few photos,  I find a lot in them questionable, and or wrong (not mat as pop against you Mike) 

 

48 minutes ago, 72modeler said:

 

In addition Model Alliance did a decal sheet to go with this volume- in 1/72 for sure, as I have it, but maybe in 1/48 as well.

They did in 1/48th.

48 minutes ago, 72modeler said:

 

There are detailed descriptions of the external and internal differences between each variant as well as colors and,markings. I would recommend iot if you are going to build more than one or two PR Spits.

A better book for info on Merlin PR Spitfires is the other Ventura book, this one

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Malcolm-Merlin-Spitfires-Classic-Warbirds/

which now seems to also be unobtainable

48 minutes ago, 72modeler said:

 

That being said, I looked at my copy and found a description and color profile of a PR 1G, serial R70928, with No. 1416 Flight, coded DP with 30" medium sea grey codes, which might be the one in the photo you posted. Aircraft was finished in dark green/dark earth over sky and had a red spinner. This aircraft was later converted to PR VII standard.

Profile almost certainly drawn from one of these pics, and I just don't believe the Sky undersides, or the red spinner, (why would you paint the spinner red on a PR plane?) 

 

 

 

All that can really  safely be said is that it's  low contrast concealment scheme...

 

@ben_m  was a PR Spitfire fan, and maybe able to help?

 

[NPL]

2 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

AFAIK all PR Spitfire I's retained the armament panels,   it was only with the PR IV that the dedicated PR bowser wing was introduced. 

There are conversion parts for the OLD Tamiya Mk.I and the new tool Airfix Mk.I,   the old tool Tamiya kit has some inaccuracies that means some parts would not fit

Poor.   but note the date.  

 

Pavla made (1:48) a series of sets for the Tamiya old Mk.I, but renewed the sets for the Airfix Mk.I. Airwaves made quite a series covering these early PR 1's (a-g).

 

Is the PR IV not a PR Mk.ID?

 

The easiest overview will probably be Franks, Richard A., The Supermarine Spitfire, Part 1, which was published  a few months ago.

 

 

Edited February 8, 2019 by NPL

[Graham Boak]

The PR Mk.IV was indeed the PR Mk.ID, when the PR Spitfires were given their own separate series of Mark Numbers.

 

If you wanted to be really picky you could say that the PR Mk.1D began life with the Merlin III, whereas the PR Mk.IVs would all have the Merlin 45 by the time the change occurred.  However this is invisible to modellers, however important it may have been to the users.

[72modeler]

2 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

Books that fall foul of my signature line.   pretty profiles, few photos,  I find a lot in them questionable, and or wrong (not mat as pop against you Mike) 

No offense taken,  Troy! I didn't have the references to confirm or deny the scheme, and the colors in the on Target profile didn't really match the photos that were posted in my mind's eye, so I figured it was best to drop-kick this one over to you and Graham. (I keep forgetting you're not just about Hurricanes- sorry!)  Besides, I know when I'm punching above my weight! It would make for a very attractive PR Spit, whichever way it turns out. 😪

Mike

[NPL]

9 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

The PR Mk.IV was indeed the PR Mk.ID, when the PR Spitfires were given their own separate series of Mark Numbers.

 

If you wanted to be really picky you could say that the PR Mk.1D began life with the Merlin III, whereas the PR Mk.IVs would all have the Merlin 45 by the time the change occurred.  However this is invisible to modellers, however important it may have been to the users.

 

Yes, and I understand that the change took place in 1941. Also that the correct name was PR 1 type D. Or something like that. 

[Andy Fletcher]

PR Spitfires fitted with Merlin IIIs were known as Spitfire I PR Type x ie Spitfire I PR Type D or Spitfire I PR Type F etc, those fitted with the Merlin 45 were known as Spitfire V PR Type x until the name re-designation took place.

 

Best Regards

 

Andy Fletcher 

[NPL]

1 hour ago, Andy Fletcher said:

PR Spitfires fitted with Merlin IIIs were known as Spitfire I PR Type x ie Spitfire I PR Type D or Spitfire I PR Type F etc, those fitted with the Merlin 45 were known as Spitfire V PR Type x until the name re-designation took place.

 

Best Regards

 

Andy Fletcher 

Source? 

 

PLease

[NPL]

PS: as to the profile versus photos ... any reason why the 'DP' should not be in sky?

 

 

[Graham Boak]

Correction to post 9.  Spitfires with the Merlin 45 will have the larger oil cooler with the circular inlet.  Not the most obvious of features in photographs, but not present in the Tamiya kit.

[Andy Fletcher]

3 hours ago, NPL said:

Source? 

 

PLease

Hi NPL,

 

A list of losses up to 18/4/42 suffered by the PDU/PRU/1 PRU signed by S/L Ellcock, the Senior Technical Officer 1 PRU, Also the 1 PRU ORB refers to aircraft arrivals and departures to the 1 PRU inventory as Spitfire I or Spitfire V.

 

Best Regards

 

Andy Fletcher

[Giorgio N]

Back to the possible colour scheme for the "dark" PR.Ig, the possibility of the famous low level PR scheme is there but this scheme was officially sanctioned after 1416 Flt. became 140 Sqn and adopted the codes ZW. Actually well after, as official documents are dated 1944.It is of course possible that the scheme was used before the official document appeared and that this simply sanctioned the existing.

What is intriguiing is that the few pictures in any case seem to show quite dark undersurfaces, something that may suggest that these were not in the standard Sky.. of course it may be that this is simply due to lighting and the poor quality of the photos, but I wonder if there could be other reasons...

One possibility could be that PRU Mauve was used earlier than the rest of the scheme and this is proven by a few documents: Morgan & Shacklady mention the colour being tested in late 1941 while a November 1942 Supermarine document found by the late Edgar Brooks mentioned its use on the lower surfaces of PR Spitfires in conjunction with Dark Green and Medium Sea Grey (a combination that explains certain pictures of PR Spitfires with high contrast upper surfaces).

I know, I may be jumping to conclusions here, but maybe what we see in pictures of 1416 Flt aircraft is a scheme where the upper surfaces are in Temperate Land and the lower surfaces in PRU Mauve.

Some interesting information can be found in this link:

 

http://www.jshawmsc.f2s.com/140squadron.pdf

 

The document is about 140 Squadron, that was what 1416 Flt, became in September 1941

Among the various information is the mention of a sortie by a Spitfire in "sea camouflage" on 1/03/1942 (page 28), that sounds pretty interesting... was sea camouflage referring to the temperate sea scheme ? Or to an aircraft camouflaged using "sea" paints ? If the latter, then we may have again some hint about the use of the famed extra dark sea green( extra dark sea grey scheme.

The same document mentions blue Spitfires only a couple of lines below, but I'd expect these to have been other PR variants as a ceiling of 25,000 ft is mentioned and the Type G was generally used only for low altitude missions.

Another few lines below is the mention of a pink and then a white Spitfire, these were likely PR.I Type G that we know were painted this way. Now we could debate if these were two separate schemes or just the same scheme described in different ways, as we know that PRU Pink was really a white with a pinkish tinge

[gingerbob]

28 minutes ago, Giorgio N said:

was sea camouflage referring to the temperate sea scheme ? Or to an aircraft camouflaged using "sea" paints ?

 

I think it pretty unlikely that the chap keeping the diary (ORB) would even know the official name of the camouflage colours, especially if he doesn't differentiate between white and "pink".  My gut feeling about such references is that the aircraft looks like a Fleet Air Arm, or perhaps Coastal Command, aircraft, which would certainly be obvious to even a layman compared to the typical fighter camos.  But it's just a feeling, I certainly don't claim to "know", and I applaud the evidence and reasoning you have presented.

 

These "dicers", and the later PR.XIIIs (of odd camo fame) would have done most of their work along the coastline- that being of great interest, and the range and risk not allowing much deeper exploration- so it makes sense that they'd be in a "sea" camouflage.

[303sqn]

On 17th December 1942, The Air Ministry wrote to OC PRU at Benson explaining that a request had been received from Washington DC for details of any special type of aircraft camouflage used for particular missions such as photographic reconnaissance . The AM requested that full details of the various camouflage schemes and markings used by the PRU be supplied along with any details of any special tactics or methods used to conceal an aircraft in flight be forwarded without delay.

 

The PRU’s reply was sent to HQ Coastal Command for onward transmission on 22nd December. It stated that two standard schemes had been adopted for camouflage of PR aircraft.

 

Scheme A was applied to high-flying aircraft and consisted of an overall finish of PRU Blue (33B/494) with the exception of national markings.

 

Scheme B was applied to low-flying aircraft and consisted of Extra Dark Sea Grey (33B/245) and Extra Dark Sea Green (33B/338) on the upper surfaces. Under surfaces were PRU Mauve which was mixed from 5 parts PRU Pink (not in Vocabulary of Stores), 2 parts PRU Blue and one part ident red (33B/72). 33B/72 is the pre-war bright red.

[Giorgio N]

3 minutes ago, gingerbob said:

 

I think it pretty unlikely that the chap keeping the diary (ORB) would even know the official name of the camouflage colours, especially if he doesn't differentiate between white and "pink".  My gut feeling about such references is that the aircraft looks like a Fleet Air Arm, or perhaps Coastal Command, aircraft, which would certainly be obvious to even a layman compared to the typical fighter camos.  But it's just a feeling, I certainly don't claim to "know", and I applaud the evidence and reasoning you have presented.

 

These "dicers", and the later PR.XIIIs (of odd camo fame) would have done most of their work along the coastline- that being of great interest, and the range and risk not allowing much deeper exploration- so it makes sense that they'd be in a "sea" camouflage.

 

Very good point ! That leads me to add more to my previous train of thought: if whoever added the comment in the ORB found worth mentioning this "sea camouflage", then maybe this aircraft differed from the others, something that may point to the more common camo being a standard fighter type camouflage.

 

A well know picture is included in the pdf document of R7116 coded ZW-C and this shows a Sky band and spinner, all consistent with a standard fighter scheme. The picture is captioned as being taken in Autumn 1941, that would be shortly after 140 Squadron was established. By then the camo scheme would have been DFS, the picture shows very low contrast but first of all is not of great quality, and then we know that early in the use of DFS there were several cases of Spitfires with less contrast than we would normally expect from such scheme. The lower surfaces however are still pretty dark...

[WLJayne]

Hello everyone, if I may revive this very old thread, I am currently checking my research for two PR Type G schemes. from reading through this thread, it seems that the evidence supports X9969 DP being EDSGrey and EDSGreen with PRU Mauve undersides. I agree with @Troy Smith that a red spinner seems incongruous and I would think that a black/night spinner is more likely? Also does anyone know who flew it?

 

As for markings, I'm seeing 30" MSG squadron codes with a 35" type B roundel on the fuselage, small fin flash, and standard 56" type B roundels on the upper wings. I have no sources for underwing roundels - possibly absent? Does that seem reasonable?

 

The other scheme I have chosen is X4784 ZW, I have very little information on this and if I hadn't already commissioned artwork on it I probably would have chosen another. But I'm a bit stuck with it now! Sources suggest PRU pink, 30" MSG codes, 35" type A fuselage roundel and 30" type A upper wing roundels. Basically the same as the better known R7059 LY. Any comments on this would be appreciated as I can accept slight inaccuracies on the artwork if we can correct them on the profile. I need to delete the radio mast too.

 

Will.



EDIT: I also managed to find a decent photo of X4784 ZW

Edited February 13 by WLJayne

[WLJayne]

Here's the draft for X4784 and I'm fairly happy with it but open to feedback.

 

 

And the updated profile for P9328. I've tried to create a mauve by mixing 5 parts PRU pink, 2 parts PRU blue and 1 part signal red.

 

Edited February 13 by WLJayne

[ben_m]

On 2/13/2024 at 12:27 PM, WLJayne said:

And the updated profile for P9328. I've tried to create a mauve by mixing 5 parts PRU pink, 2 parts PRU blue and 1 part signal red.

 

 

The PRU Mauve looks sensible given the mix instructions, but doesn't match the shade of grey in the black and white photo. So either the aircraft wasn't in this scheme, or the mix instructions aren't accurate for the colour used on this aircraft.

 

The oblique camera opening/radio hatch was not a standardised part in Type G's, 140 Squadron (that was formed from 1416 Flight in Sept 1941) were  certainly had some bulged doors, as seen in this photo:

 

 

The July 1941 date is dubious for the photo of P9328, as there is snow on the ground, and trees have no leaves. My guess is this aricraft was technically in 140 Sqn at the time of the photo, but they hadn't change the squadron code letters to 140's ZW on this aricraft.

 

[WLJayne]

On 2/22/2024 at 1:02 PM, ben_m said:

 

The PRU Mauve looks sensible given the mix instructions, but doesn't match the shade of grey in the black and white photo. So either the aircraft wasn't in this scheme, or the mix instructions aren't accurate for the colour used on this aircraft.

 

The oblique camera opening/radio hatch was not a standardised part in Type G's, 140 Squadron (that was formed from 1416 Flight in Sept 1941) were  certainly had some bulged doors, as seen in this photo:

 

The July 1941 date is dubious for the photo of P9328, as there is snow on the ground, and trees have no leaves. My guess is this aricraft was technically in 140 Sqn at the time of the photo, but they hadn't change the squadron code letters to 140's ZW on this aricraft.

 

 

Thank you Ben! RE the mauve, it's so hard to tell from these B&W photos, all kinds of optical tricks can happen depending on what film was used and then the reproductions. I don't think we'll ever know for sure, the mauve is plausible in written sources and it's visually interesting so I think I'll throw my hat in that ring, but I think as others have mentioned, a MSG type colour might be just as plausible.

 

Yes the photo of P9328 is definitely some time in the winter of 41/42. It's unlikely that the markings and camo changed much in the months prior during crew training, so I think that a summer '41 date is ok to suit the Type G designation, which gives some variety. As always, nobody knows with certainty but as long as it lands within the boundaries of "probable" that's usually enough as a starting point. Likewise, I can't add an extra part for the bulged hatch, so a small decal for the camera lens works within the constraints I'm beholden to with the kit. It's quite possible they were fitted for some sorties and not others, what with range and speed being concerns.

 

Will.

[alt-92]

On 2/22/2024 at 2:02 PM, ben_m said:

The July 1941 date is dubious for the photo of P9328, as there is snow on the ground, and trees have no leaves.

To be fair to the author(s), they don't attribute the photo to that date, merely stating that the aircraft was in use with the unit during that period.