nsmekanik Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 I recently picked up the 1/48 kit of the Blenheim MK1f , which looks to be a beauty. The 2 decal options are for "YX*N" of 54 OTU, and "YP*Q" of 29 Squadron I"m wondering what the history of those 2 planes is, and as the 29 squadron option is based on the restored example, how close the kit decals would be to the original wartime airframe. At the moment I'm torn between doing a night-fighter or a day Camouflaged version, but what I would like to do is something involved in the Battle of Britain and/or with a Canadian connection. A goggle search didn't turn up much so any and all pics and info would be most welcome. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Fox Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 I don't know if this helps, https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/X48198 I found it easier to assemble the nose glazing to the appropriate fuselage halves before assembling the halves together. I'm on my second one at the moment and it is a great kit. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsmekanik Posted October 7, 2019 Author Share Posted October 7, 2019 Thanks for the tip, I will definitely give that a go. I'm really happy with it, and I do plan to use the kit decals, for the moment anyway, when I get around to building it, I'm mainly interested in the history of the ones offered on the sheet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbody Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 I'm not sure if there is much or any Canadian connection to the Mk.I Blenheim. Other than a possible stray Canuck being in the RAF at that time, the RCAF hadn't yet sent any forces to Britian until No.1 Squadron and their Hurricanes arrived in June, 1940. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smithy Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 (edited) You might want to consider a 92 Sqn Blenheim IF and especially one flown by John "Butch" Bryson. Butch was a Canadian from Quebec and not only that but 92 was originally founded as a Canadian unit of the RFC in August 1917. 92's unofficial crest upon reforming was a maple leaf to denote its Canadian origins and three flying swords representing the three 601 Sqn members who were posted to reform. This maple leaf and flying swords was painted on the nose of 92's Blenheims. If you're after a Canadian connection, it's quite a nice and visual one. Edited October 7, 2019 by Smithy Rubbish spelling 7 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbody Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 Thanks, Smithy! Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muddyf Posted October 8, 2019 Share Posted October 8, 2019 92 squadron flew Blenheim until around March/April 1940 before converting to Spitfires, so if you want Battle of Britain operated Blenheim's you will have to look at other squadrons. Blenheim operating squadrons were: Fighter Command 23, 25, 29, 219, FIU, 600 & 604 Coastal Command 235, 236 & 248 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsmekanik Posted October 9, 2019 Author Share Posted October 9, 2019 Thank you for the replies gentlemen, much appreciated Some things to think about. It would still be interesting to get some background information on the kit options as well as it's usage as a night fighter in general. Actually John Bryson's does sound appealing so I'm definitely going to look into that so if anyone has any information on it that would be most appreciated. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbody Posted October 9, 2019 Share Posted October 9, 2019 Below is an excerpt from a document sent to me recently by noted aviation author Carl Vincent, regarding No. 242 ( Canadian ) Squadron. " The first aircraft used by 242 when training commenced in November were 3 Miles Magister elementary trainers, a Harvard and a Fairey Battle. Rumours that the Battle was to form the squadron’s equipment were dispelled but morale was not markedly restored when seven Bristol Blenheim IF’s arrived, as well as three more Battles. While it was now realised that the Battles were intended to help the pilots make the transition to more complicated aircraft, it seemed apparent that the Blenheims were to form the squadron’s operational equipment. The Blenheim IF was essentially a hasty expedient to provide the RAF with a twin- engined long-range fighter. It was basically a Blenheim I light bomber with the major token of its new fighter status a tray under the fuselage with four .303 machine guns. S/L Gobeil was strongly supported by his Canadian superiors, both civil and military, in his attempts to have the unit equipped with single engined fighters. The point was made that the entire publicity/propaganda aspect of the unit’s existence would be negated unless the squadron was equipped for and allotted an active role. There was a considerable amount of wheeling and dealing, not only as to the squadron’s equipment but its subsequent employment. On the point of aircraft, however, the Canadians’ arguments and lobbying carried the day. 242 Squadron was redesignated a Hurricane unit and the Blenheims stayed with the squadron little more than a month. The exact number is uncertain but serials for ten have been recorded. The squadron had hoped and expected, with some reason, that it would be equipped with Spitfires. However, for a number of reasons, Hurricanes were to be 242’s new fighters. " Detail from the email Carl sent me: A photo of a 242 Squadron Blenheim IF with P/O B. Smiley standing in front of it. I have no serial number specifically for that aircraft and I doubt that at this stage of the game any code letters had been allotted. With the Black and White undersurfaces, this would make an attractive model if we had the requisite data. Chris 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsmekanik Posted October 10, 2019 Author Share Posted October 10, 2019 Thanks for that Chris, very much appreciated :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaudioN Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 On 10/9/2019 at 4:26 AM, dogsbody said: Detail from the email Carl sent me: A photo of a 242 Squadron Blenheim IF with P/O B. Smiley standing in front of it. I have no serial number specifically for that aircraft and I doubt that at this stage of the game any code letters had been allotted. With the Black and White undersurfaces, this would make an attractive model if we had the requisite data. Chris A very intriguing underside colour scheme, from what can be seen. The aircraft nose appears to be in standard bomber finish with black as the only underside colour. The starboard wing appears definitely white and the colour continues down the fuselage with a straight vertical demarcation. This makes me think that, perhaps, black/white identification colours were only applied to the wing(s) and the lower fuselage part between the wings. On the other hand, the gun tray is overall black and both undercarriage doors are the same (darkish?) colour. Finally, port wing undersides do not appear nearly as dark as the fuselage nose undesides so, are they black or possibly some lighter colour? Anybody going to make guesses at it? I wonder what the Observer Corps might have thought of it. Claudio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 It has simply obeyed the instruction to paint the starboard wing white and leave the fuselage outside the wing in its original colours. I think the apparent brightness of the inner port wing is just glare, as with the undercarriage doors. Although yes, one of them should have been white. The bomb pack will have come like that from the Southern Railway workshop where they were made. I suspect that the Observer Corps had seen many worse combinations. Although judging from the apparent identification problems stressed in the references of the time they may have called it a Ju.88... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Graham Boak said: I suspect that the Observer Corps had seen many worse combinations. Although judging from the apparent identification problems stressed in the references of the time they may have called it a Ju.88... You're confusing the Observer Corps with the Royal Navy. The last of the aircraft-observing-type Observer Corps members are still with us (just) and their aircraft recognition skills are still red-hot. Which is why a number of them (Seaborne Observers) were posted to RN warships for D-Day: ISTR the last of them died recently. https://www.combinedops.com/ROC.htm Edited October 10, 2019 by Seahawk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 The RN didn't have any recognition problems - if it was an aircraft they shot at it. However confusion between the Ju.88 and the Blenheim appears to have been fairly universal, despite the undoubted abilities of the OC. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 3 minutes ago, Graham Boak said: The RN didn't have any recognition problems - if it was an aircraft they shot at it. However confusion between the Ju.88 and the Blenheim appears to have been fairly universal, despite the undoubted abilities of the OC. As borne out by the following excerpt from the description of a contingent from 103 Sq to a corvette at Grimsby, taken from Patrick Otter's Maximum Effort III, a book of reminiscences from former members of 1 Group, Bomber Command : "I asked him what the crew did about aircraft recognition. 'No problem,' he replied affably. 'If it's got one engine, it's a Me 109, if it's got two engines, it's a Me 110 and if it's got four engines it's a Focke Wulf Condor!'" But we digress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaudioN Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 (edited) 29 minutes ago, Seahawk said: You're confusing the Observer Corps with the Royal Navy. The last of the aircraft-observing-type Observer Corps members are still with us (just) and their aircraft recognition skills are still red-hot. Which is why a number of them (Seaborne Observers) were posted to RN warships for D-Day: ISTR the last of them died recently. https://www.combinedops.com/ROC.htm I wasn't talking of RN Observers. I was thinking of air raid warning from ground based observation posts, wasn't the Observer Corps who manned them? But I may be mistaken. My comment was not on recognitions skills. The question would rather be whether an odd-coloured friendly shape would be accepeted as friendly, or raise some doubt? As Graham said, the OC may have seen several off-standard combinations. Edited October 10, 2019 by ClaudioN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 1 minute ago, ClaudioN said: I wasn't talking of RN Observers. I was thinking of air raid warning from ground based observation posts, wasn't the Observer Corps who manned them? But I may be mistaken. No, you aren't. I was gently chiding Graham (not you) for appearing to confuse the recognition skills of the ROC (role as you describe and skills so excellent that the RN borrowed them and their eyes for D-Day - see link in my post) with those of the RN (notoriously bad). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbody Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 On 10/10/2019 at 06:14, nsmekanik said: Thanks for that Chris, very much appreciated I thank Carl Vincent for sharing this and other material with me. I don't know what I've done to deserve such, but I'm prepared to sacrifice the cat in the BBQ to make sure it continues! Chris 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbob Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 Curses, the temptation to order an Airfix Blenheim grows... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsmekanik Posted October 10, 2019 Author Share Posted October 10, 2019 (edited) You have to, and not only that, you have to build it Edited October 10, 2019 by nsmekanik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now