Russian 2 seater Hurricanes

[Wm Blecky]

 

I am hoping that someone here may be able to answer my question on W.W.II Russian Hurricanes that were converted into 2 seaters.  I am particularly after info for the rear seat's gun and mount.  I've found pictures and a few builds of this aircraft type, but nothing that really gave me some insight into that rear position.  What type of gun was used? gunner's seat? how was the gun mounted?

 

If anyone can shed some light on this for me, I'd appreciate it.

[Wm Blecky]

I should add that I am aware of the Omega resin conversion kit.  The price alone was a deterrent for me, added to what I have learned online, it is that is a modified and poorly done copy/clone of a kit makers fuselage (sorry I do not recall which company - Airfix, Hasegawa???). 

 

Between the price and information on the Omega Hurricane kits, more than enough for me to completely write these off as any possibility. 

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

I queried the same subject a couple of years ago. I do know there is a cutout in the fuselage for the rear seat observer to help direct Artillery and for general spotting. 

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235042857-white-hurricane-red-stars/&do=findComment&comment=3123370
 

 

Look for @Troy Smith’s post on the first page of my VVS Hurricane build. The photograph shows the cutaway floor. There are also some links in the build that me be helpful may be not. 
 

Dennis

[Ed Russell]

Here's a bit of info.....

 

A rough translation of the caption is

An atypical modification was done at NII-VVS to Hurricane Mk IIc BW941 making it an attack plane with a defensive machine gun mounted in the rear cabin. The aircraft is wearing standard RAF grey green camouflage and Sky band. This Hurricane was a Mk X/XI built in Canada. Some 107 of them went to the USSR but 13 were lost on the way.

 

I think the caption is partly wrong in that they were indeed for artillery spotting and it has been reported as BW945. The machine gun (most likely a Degtyaryov DP-28) was mounted on a pintle braced to the frames and the observer sat on a simple strap. There was a large cut-out in the bottom fuselage and all the framework was visible. It may have been re-armed with Russian wing guns. Somewhere  there is an account by an Artillery Podpolkóvnik about the horrors of flying in one of these.

 

[modelldoc]

My once is a scratch build:

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/21603181@N08/34946377501/in/dateposted/

 

I used a FROG / NOVO Hurricane for that.

 

modelldoc

 

[stevehnz]

@Wm Blecky, Although it doesn't give construction details, & I'd say you're on your own to a degree there, this decal set has a resin gun in it as well as decals for the two seat Hurricane shown above, reviewed here  & this page on Sovietwarplanes has more info, though still not directly about the construction of this. It would be worth it to study some detail of the internal construction of the hurricane, it is quite a roomy space frame behind the cockpit & although cross bracing wires must have been removed it should not be had to come up with something that would be somewhat representative of what was there. Study perhaps of early IL-2 rear gunner arrangements might give clues in this respect, they were rudimentry at best. @Learstang might have some ideas on this.  

Steve. 

Edited March 26, 2020 by stevehnz
correct link to decals.

[Graham Boak]

The gun looks a bit light for a Degtyarev.  Perhaps a ShKaS?

[SleeperService]

The rear gun is a DT-29 see HERE

 compared to the infantry Dp-27 this was optimised for use in AFVs, it was issued with a detachable shoulder stock, foresight and a bipod. If the tank was disabled the mgs were dismounted and the crew formed two LMG teams. As the rear cockpit would be likely 'compact' it would be a natural choice. It is a very simple gun in real life so easily built from scratch with a bit of experience.

 

The plane mounting seems to be the standard bipod barrel clamp (without legs) fitted to the rear of the barrel and a simple post. As an infantry LMG the recoil shouldn't be an issue for the airframe.

[Troy Smith]

4 hours ago, Corsairfoxfouruncle said:

I do know there is a cutout in the fuselage for the rear seat observer to help direct Artillery and for general spotting. 

more precisely, this is a removable section of the underside of the Hurricane.

 

this shows the panel removed 

 

 

this view of the Hurricane internal structure will give you an idea of what  is behind the pilots seat, note the shelf for the radio

 

as the area behind the cockpit is either plywood, or fabric covered wood longerons over wooden formers, it's not that difficult to cut away,  and the VVS were very good at this.

 

here's the other documented example, used as a trainer.

 

Hawker made some for Iran post war, initially like the Soviet one,

 

and then using a (or usually stated as ) cut down Tempest canopy.

 

 

and here's it being done now

http://hawkerrestorations.co.uk/sale/2-seater-hawker-hurricane/

more pics in link, but this gives an idea of the cutaway required and space behind the original seat.

 

HTH

[Wm Blecky]

14 hours ago, Ed Russell said:

Here's a bit of info.....

 

A rough translation of the caption is

An atypical modification was done at NII-VVS to Hurricane Mk IIc BW941 making it an attack plane with a defensive machine gun mounted in the rear cabin. The aircraft is wearing standard RAF grey green camouflage and Sky band. This Hurricane was a Mk X/XI built in Canada. Some 107 of them went to the USSR but 13 were lost on the way.

 

I think the caption is partly wrong in that they were indeed for artillery spotting and it has been reported as BW945. The machine gun (most likely a Degtyaryov DP-28) was mounted on a pintle braced to the frames and the observer sat on a simple strap. There was a large cut-out in the bottom fuselage and all the framework was visible. It may have been re-armed with Russian wing guns. Somewhere  there is an account by an Artillery Podpolkóvnik about the horrors of flying in one of these.

 

Thanks Ed.  I've seen the first picture online, but in your post, it is nice and large and it's the first time I've been able to get a good look, externally, of that rear cockpit area.  It is a big help.  Thank you.

[72modeler]

@Wm Blecky,

 

If  you can't find any drawings/photos that show what the observer/gunner position looked like for the Hurricane you want to do, then maybe looking for the gun position on an airplane that used the same machine gun might be helpful? Maybe a Po-2 or an Il-2? I've got zilch when it comes to WW2 VVS references, so this is the best I can do- sorry! It would make a very unusual Hurricane model, though- prettier than the Persian two-seater, in my humble opinion. Good luck on your quest!

Mike

[Wm Blecky]

2 hours ago, 72modeler said:

@Wm Blecky,

 

If  you can't find any drawings/photos that show what the observer/gunner position looked like for the Hurricane you want to do, then maybe looking for the gun position on an airplane that used the same machine gun might be helpful? Maybe a Po-2 or an Il-2? I've got zilch when it comes to WW2 VVS references, so this is the best I can do- sorry! It would make a very unusual Hurricane model, though- prettier than the Persian two-seater, in my humble opinion. Good luck on your quest!

Mike

Thanks Mike.  I tell you, I sure know how to pick my projects! 😸

 

Information is quite difficult to come by.  I've found a couple of builds online, with each builder's interpretation.  A real pipe dream would be to find the company that did these conversions on the real Hurricanes and be able to get information from them.  As I said, a real pipe dream!

 

It looks like it will be making use of the help posted here and best guesses for this project. 👍

[Ed Russell]

For my build, sometime in the 90's I had a few pictures and a written description. Lt Col Evgeny Abramovsky wrote a small memoir in the 1950s and some of it was translated by a Russian-speaking friend.  I can find no written internet or printed references to him. i will try and find the original and maybe have it properly translated. What I have is my handwritten notes of her verbal translation. Here is a  summary of the relevant parts of An Artilleryman of the Bryansk Front rendered into colloquial English and out of order.

1. The airman said they had a modified Curtiss to do artillery spotting from. I later learned it was an English Hurricane not a Curtiss..

2. The rear position was obstructed by a Model 28 toy rifle, the mount of which was improperly fixed so it flailed around. On subsequent flights it was removed. I used the mounting rail to fix my clipboard to instead of my  leg. Thus I could hold the framework with one hand and make notes with the other.

3. The wind howled through the openings, threatening to wash me from the canvas sling that I sat on. There was nowhere to put my feet which flapped in the gale.

 

There were favourable references to the Po-2 as being a more suitable plane. "The only advantage of the Hurricane was that it was faster".

 

Edit - I defer to @SleeperService's knowledge of Russian armament. Abramovsky was an artillery guy so all MG's would have been "toys" . I used a Lewis gun in my model.

Most of the references quote the Leningrad Front as the army that used these Hurricanes.

I think there was a vague reference to what we would call "sticky tape" in the comments about Hurricane construction - more likely doped fabric to seal the edges.

Modern two seat Hurricanes take their inspiration from this and other conversions.

What did the Red Armies use later in the war for artillery observation? Lend-lease Pipers and Austers? Some other locally made plane? A blank in my knowledge. @Learstang @Massimo Tessitori

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

@Learstang might be able to help regarding the observers position. If its anything similar to an Il-2 ...  Иль два or Il' dva he's your guy. 

[stevehnz]

@Wm Blecky, I have corrected the first link in my post above to the decals I referred to, here it is again. Sorry, you must have wondered what the heck I was on about.

Steve.

[Gazontipede]

12 hours ago, SleeperService said:

The rear gun is a DT-29 see HERE

 compared to the infantry Dp-27 this was optimised for use in AFVs, it was issued with a detachable shoulder stock, foresight and a bipod. If the tank was disabled the mgs were dismounted and the crew formed two LMG teams. As the rear cockpit would be likely 'compact' it would be a natural choice. It is a very simple gun in real life so easily built from scratch with a bit of experience.

 

The plane mounting seems to be the standard bipod barrel clamp (without legs) fitted to the rear of the barrel and a simple post. As an infantry LMG the recoil shouldn't be an issue for the airframe.

At the risk of being labelled a useless pedant, I'd suggest that the gun is more likely to be a DA than any of the other Degtyaryov rifle calibre guns (DP/DT).

http://ram-home.com/ram-old/mgun-da.html

Not that there's a lot of difference between a DA and a DT. Essentially the DA loses the DT folding stock and replaces it with an odd looking handle on the back.

http://www.imfdb.org/images/e/ea/Degtyaryov_DA.jpg

http://www.imfdb.org/images/thumb/8/87/Morskoy_post-DA-1.jpg/500px-Morskoy_post-DA-1.jpg

 

Edited March 26, 2020 by Gazontipede
failing to get the links displayed as images

[John Thompson]

Good luck with all of that - if you ever figure out what specific gun you need, check out the Mini World range of products. Excellent quality and detail, so no need to futz about with adapting a resin or white metal Lewis or whatever:

https://www.google.com/search?q=Mini+world+brass+gun&tbm=isch&source=univ&client=firefox-b-d&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjY7KnMornoAhXrAp0JHd3rBTQQsAR6BAgKEAE&biw=1920&bih=938

 

Or, you could try AML Decals 72009 option 3:

https://www.modelimex.com/172-decals-hhurricane-iii-amld72009

 

John

[Learstang]

2 hours ago, Ed Russell said:

What did the Red Armies use later in the war for artillery observation? Lend-lease Pipers and Austers? Some other locally made plane? A blank in my knowledge. @Learstang @Massimo Tessitori

Ed, one aircraft that was used for what the Soviets called 'artillery correction' was the 'Il-2KR', a minimally-modified version of the two-seater Il-2. The 'KR' stood for korrektivorshchik, or '(artillery) corrector' in Russian. It had the normal gunner's position, but sometimes it carried a large camera on the machine gun mount. It also had the antenna mounted on top of the front windscreen and not the middle of the canopy (over the fuel tank), as was normal with the two-seaters. There was a camera mount in the underside of the fuselage, aft of the wing's trailing edge. Both straight-winged and arrow (swept-winged) versions were built, and both production and field-modified versions were made. It had the normal fixed gun armament, so it had the advantage of not only being able to spot and photograph targets, but also to attack them itself. The Il-2KR also carried a more powerful radio. I'm afraid I really can't add much about the 'artillery corrector' Hurricanes, though, other than it sounds like the gunner/observer sat on a strap similar to the one the Il-2 gunner sat on.

 

Best Regards,

 

Jason

[Ed Russell]

1 hour ago, John Thompson said:

Or, you could try AML Decals 72009 option 3:

https://www.modelimex.com/172-decals-hhurricane-iii-amld72009

The decals  are quite fine but disregard their colour scheme for the 2 seater..

[Troy Smith]

2 hours ago, Wm Blecky said:

A real pipe dream would be to find the company that did these conversions on the real Hurricanes and be able to get information from them. 

if you have printer, print out the drawing showing the internals, and then sketch in the visible external modifications,  and look at where you could fit a gunners sling seat. The framer work in main structure, it satays, you fit a seat sling onto the structural tubing. 

 If you are doing the model you are going to have to make this framework anyway,  with the hole at the top and lower panel removed. and a sitting crew figure may just show you the basic layout needed. Also, chekc the link to hawker restorations, as they have just done this 1:1,  so you can see where the fitted the seat.  

The modifications were most likely done by a local air depot, I suspect the back armour may have been removed.  

 

The VVS did make a few two seaters out of Lend Lease types, I have seen photos of Spitfire IX, P-40 and P-39,. as well as the other Hurricane I posted.

 

AFAIK THE VVS Hurricane pipe dream is a photo of the gun bay showing the new weapons installed.   I have photos of a salvaged one without the guns, but with the new mountings.   one detail, they enlarged the holes in the main spare for the guns with a hammer..... they did have a rough and ready approach.

 

Colours

17 hours ago, Ed Russell said:

The aircraft is wearing standard RAF grey green camouflage and Sky band.

although all the profiles show Dark Green/Dark earth.  

I also think Day fighter scheme, but look carefully around the new area, this must have been repainted a bit.

Another detail I just noticed while looking at this aspect

 

compare

assuming that the darker tone on BW945  is Dark Green and the lighter tone is Ocean Grey, then the upper colours are reversed in compared to the usual application where the Dark Green band runs through the cockpit, as seen above (I wasn't finding a another starboard shot clearly showing the pattern) 

I would surmise that they would make good the pattern with local paint,  nearest to Ocean Grey would be AMT-11 Grey. 

That is supposition. 

Spinner looks to still be Sky (compare to Sky band) and stars are white or silver outlines, never yellow.

 

One other point, many many profiles show patches where the roundels are painted out with VVS colours, but Lend Lease planes from the UK had the roundels painted out with British paint  (so no VVS colours) and red stars applied BEFORE delivery. as seen here in Abadan in Iran, note the star stencil.

 

 

 

the pic above is not part of the sequence, but below is,  after red star sprayed, then black outline applied.

 

 

after stars and outline added

 

if you look you can see the fresh paint. 

Also, the British applied stars to fuselage and lower and upper wing, VVS standard was fuselage, lower wing and tail fin. 

You see photos of Hurricanes with red stars on upperwing,  British applied.  

BW945 has a red star on fin, so VVS applied.  The RAF did not apply markings to control surfaces, this was standard practice.

 

 

[SleeperService]

2 hours ago, Gazontipede said:

At the risk of being labelled a useless pedant, I'd suggest that the gun is more likely to be a DA than any of the other Degtyaryov rifle calibre guns (DP/DT).

http://ram-home.com/ram-old/mgun-da.html

Not that there's a lot of difference between a DA and a DT. Essentially the DA loses the DT folding stock and replaces it with an odd looking handle on the back.

http://www.imfdb.org/images/e/ea/Degtyaryov_DA.jpg

http://www.imfdb.org/images/thumb/8/87/Morskoy_post-DA-1.jpg/500px-Morskoy_post-DA-1.jpg

 

Good observation @Gazontipede Possibly but without seeing the rear end it's difficult to be sure.

Here's the DA

and the DT

 

 

By 1941 the DA version was superseded as an aircraft gun being issued to second-line infantry units as AA defence. DT was a current weapon. TBH in 1/72 with the reference available it could be either. Although the rear sight suggests DT to me. Either way it seems as though it will be an interesting build.

 

 

 

[Graham Boak]

The repainting of markings on used Spitfires in Abadan may not help with Hurricanes, most of which were built new for Russia.

 

Examples of exchanged colours in the pattern were always rare, other than in early desert schemes, but they did exist.  I think a repaint into VVS colours is equally rare, but this is a possibly used aircraft already.  Repainting only one colour would be exceptionally odd.  The reason for it appearing in profiles as DG/DE is probably because of the long held belief that this was the VVS standard.

[Luka]

10 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

That looks indeed like a patch of fresh paint around the cockpit(s); the scheme makes an odd bend just between the star and the observer's position, and also in a slightly off colour.

But what I'm wondering about now are the undersides; the wheel cover looks pretty dark even in the full sun, and it has an even darker patch near the lower front. In fact, the tones look very similar to the uppersurface camo, Could this maybe be some field-applied wraparound camouflage? I've never seen this on a Hurricane before.

[Graham Boak]

The dark patch on the undercarriage door is commonly seen on all Hurricanes (apart from very well maintained warbirds of course), and is oil streaks from when the door is closed.  There does appear to be something odd about the camouflage under the cockpits, almost like a third colour, but the matter is confused by  the exhaust stains.  It is difficult to understand why a VVS repaint would respect the Sky band, as indeed has any underside repaint. I suspect that the underside is just the original Medium Sea Grey, which can appear darker under some lighting/photographic conditions..

Edited March 27, 2020 by Graham Boak

[Luka]

38 minutes ago, Graham Boak said:

The dark patch on the undercarriage door is commonly seen on all Hurricanes (apart from very well maintained warbirds of course), and is oil streaks from when the door is closed.  There does appear to be something odd about the camouflage under the cockpits, almost like a third colour, but the matter is confused by  the exhaust stains.  It is difficult to understand why a VVS repaint would respect the Sky band, as indeed has any underside repaint. I suspect that the underside is just the original Medium Sea Grey, which can appear darker under some lighting/photographic conditions..

Looks like I have been using percisely the 'wrong' reference pics for my models (doors obscured by flying dust, a museum machine, etc), but a query in google images indeed quickly yields many pictures of stained UC doors. Another job for the pigment powders!
As for the rest of the UC door; I understand the logic, also in regard to the sky band, but it does still look quite dark for MSG compared to the uppersurface colour (which is then assumed to be Ocean Grey). Especially since they're both in full sunlight (judging from the sharp shadow on the ground).