1/72nd Airfix Fairey Fulmar MkI

[Heather Kay]

Fairey Fulmar MkI, N1868, 7L, No 808 Squadron Fleet Air Arm, Scotland, August 1940

 

Built as one of my contributions to the Battle of Britain 80th Anniversary Group Build. While I let everyone else build the usual suspects for such a GB, I decided to try and cover some of the more unusual participants in the Battle.

 

The British Air Ministry issued a specification in 1934 calling for a light bomber capable of being used as a dive bomber. In the end, the Hawker Henley was the selected design - although it was only used as a target tug, but that's a whole different story.

 

Fairey's P.4/34 prototype was later found, with some modifications, able meet a later Admiralty specification for a fleet observer and defence fighter. As the rather hide-bound organisation it was at the time, the specifications called for a two-man crew, with a pilot plus observer. It was understood that pilots were not capable of flying the plane, making observations, and finding their home aircraft carrier on their own. I am only partially joking. Bearing in mind the aircraft might often be some distance from its aircraft carrier when acting in a fleet observation role, and navigation and communication technology was still fairly rudimentary, having a second crew member guide home would have been very useful.

 

 

 

 

The Fulmar first flew in April 1940. It was an all-metal design, derived very much from the Fairey Battle light bomber, and was rather heavy for an eight-gun fighter. This wasn't all that surprising, considering the nature of a carrier-based aircraft with folding wings and catapult equipment, carrying two people. The Fulmar proved to be easy to fly, with few vices, rugged and reliable. A single Rolls-Royce Merlin VIII of 1,080hp gave the plane a maximum speed of just under 250mph and a service ceiling of 21,000ft, plus a useful endurance of around four hours. Armament was eight 0.303in Browning machine guns, grouped four to each wing. Lack of a defensive armament for the observer was criticised at the time, and it became a regular thing for observers to carry a Very pistol or sub-machine gun on sorties. I have read an effective defence was to throw a bundle of toilet paper wrapped in elastic bands into the slipstream, apparently guaranteed to throw a pursuing fighter into confusion!

 

The aircraft was never expected to deal with land-based fighters, which is exactly what happened in the Mediterranean. Even so, the Fulmar ended the war as the Fleet Air Arm's highest scoring fighter.

 

No 808 Squadron was formed at RAF Worthy Down, Hampshire, in July 1940. A brief period of patrols over the Irish Sea while based on the Isle of Man was followed by the squadron being assigned to the RAF Coastal Command station at Wick in the north of Scotland. No 808 Squadron came under the effective control of No 13 Group, Fighter Command, making it only the second FAA squadron to qualify for Battle of Britain honours. In September, the squadron was assigned to HMS Ark Royal, part of Force H in the Mediterranean. You can read more about the squadron on the Wikipedia page. 
 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/808_Naval_Air_Squadron

 

The kit was built from an Airfix boxing of a mould that has been around various manufacturers, kicking off with Vista around 1995. I think it's currently available from AZ Models. It doesn't exactly fall together, but there isn't much that can go wrong with so few parts. I busied up the cockpit areas a bit with some scratched details and parts from the bits box, bought in a paint mask from Montex, and made up the camouflage and markings to match what is known of N1868 in the summer of 1940. I suspect the actual finish is more correct once the squadron had been posted to Ark Royal, but without any further firm information it will do. The model was painted with ColourCoats and Humbrol enamels, mainly airbrushed (now I feel happy with that particular tool), transfers from a Special Hobby Fulmar kit that had been donated to me and my transfers file. Another aircraft to add to my 1940 Fleet Air Arm display, which leaves a Supermarine Walrus, Blackburn Skua and Fairey Swordfish to go.

[stevehnz]

A nice build Heather. Its always nice to see what I have in stock given form so nicely.

Steve.

[Heather Kay]

1 minute ago, stevehnz said:

A nice build Heather. Its always nice to see what I have in stock given form so nicely.

Steve.

Thanks Steve. I didn’t link to the build thread because it’s muddled up with another build. The only things to watch for are the wing dihedral (the lower wing part had flattened considerably over the years and needed a little help) and the undercarriage doors are way too long for the legs if you have the gear down. Otherwise, a pleasant build that I’m really pleased with.

[SAT69]

Excellent!

[Brandy]

No question as to the heritage, very "Battle" like, apart from the tail!

 

Very nicely done too!
 

Ian

[Doc72]

A very nice Fulmar and a good summary of its history!

I always considered it odd that the US and the Japanese Navies never seemed to have felt the need for a twin-seater fighter (at least not in the late 30s). And this although their fighters had a longer range than the Fulmar and Firefly. 

By insisting on this concept, the Admiralty really missed an opportunity here: With its sound design, the engine and armament of a Spitfire and being purpose-built for carrier operations (unlike the later Seafire), the Fulmar could have been superior to the Wildcat and a match for the Zero if it had been designed as a single-seater.

(But then this would have left the pilot with no-one to launch the toilet paper, I suppose)

[Eric Mc]

_{That is nice. I built a Vista original about ten years ago and I found it a pleasurable build. I have an Airfix build to do too.}

[Spitfire31]

Very neat Fulmar! And I always enjoy these historical lectures that give a model 'depth'.

 

Excellent and pedagogic modelling.

 

Kind regards,

 

Joachim

[Blimpyboy]

Hmmm... now you’ve got me pondering whether or not to get one!

 

Lovely paintwork there - a nice combination of subdued and bright. It seems it was an easy-ish build.

[Blimpyboy]

4 hours ago, Doc72 said:

I always considered it odd that the US and the Japanese Navies never seemed to have felt the need for a twin-seater fighter

I did tinker with the thought of a twin-engine A6M once, but never got ‘round to it.

From - http://arawasi-wildeagles.blogspot.com/2011/12/nipponki-46-twin-engine-zero.html?m=1

 

 

 

Much nicer looking than the F5F...

 

[stevehnz]

10 hours ago, Heather Kay said:

I didn’t link to the build thread because it’s muddled up with another build.

& I've been happily muddling along with that thread too & very much enjoying it.

Steve. 

[Heather Kay]

17 hours ago, SAT69 said:

Excellent!

Thank you! I’m pleased at how it turned out. I think my finishing is definitely improving.

 

14 hours ago, Brandy said:

No question as to the heritage, very "Battle" like, apart from the tail!

 

Very nicely done too!

Cheers Ian! I keep putting off reworking the Airfix Battle for my Bomber Command collection. Having done a rough and ready job for a Belgian one, I realise how much work you’ve put into yours. 
 

(You may not have got your copy yet, but there’s a nice RE.8 in the current IPMS UK magazine  )

 

13 hours ago, Doc72 said:

A very nice Fulmar and a good summary of its history!

 

11 hours ago, Spitfire31 said:

Very neat Fulmar! And I always enjoy these historical lectures that give a model 'depth'.

 

Excellent and pedagogic modelling.

Thank you both! I always like to try and learn something about the planes I’m modelling - not just the exploits of those that flew them, but how the design came about and so on. It’s part and parcel of the hobby. Placing a model in context when presenting it is important to me. Just showing photos without any background information wouldn’t be right. 

 

Extra point for getting the word "pedagogic" in, too, Joachim! 

 

8 hours ago, Blimpyboy said:

Hmmm... now you’ve got me pondering whether or not to get one!

 

Lovely paintwork there - a nice combination of subdued and bright. It seems it was an easy-ish build.

I think it’s currently being boxed by AZ Models, so why not get one. You know you want to! It’s fairly easy to put together, without millions of tiny bits of resin or PE. I spent a while filling out the cockpits with styrene strips and odd bits and pieces, which turns out to have been worth the effort because a lot can still be made out under the greenhouse.

 

 

 

 

[Brandy]

It will be a month or so before I get my copy Heather, but I did get an email informing me of its inclusion. I'm looking forward to seeing how it looks in print!

 

Ian

[DaveyGair]

Lovely job. I have a Smer Mk 1, the same mould? Also the SH Mk II which doesn't look the same as the Smer one.  Will use your thread for reference of course when I get to do mine.

 

 

Davey.

[fatalbert]

Now i like that alot,one of my favourite Fleet Air Arm types,i have one in the stash awaiting its turn with the wing fold set.If it looks half as good as yours i will be happy.👍

[woody37]

Lovely build Heather, pretty scary that this was considered a fighter!