Planes123 Posted July 31, 2021 Share Posted July 31, 2021 Lovely bowser. What paints did you use and how? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mancunian airman Posted August 1, 2021 Author Share Posted August 1, 2021 Planes 123 I brush paint and I used Humbrol paints . . . Ian 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mancunian airman Posted August 1, 2021 Author Share Posted August 1, 2021 The scratch built, correct type, flight-engineers drop down seat . . . It wont be secured until the fuselage halves are together Thanks for looking in Ian 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mancunian airman Posted August 2, 2021 Author Share Posted August 2, 2021 On 7/31/2021 at 1:00 PM, isaneng said: Err, navigator's bench seat, shared with the bomb aimer? Ok, now I'm lots confused (a common state, no real surprise). I thought the nav had an individual chair, on a swivel mount. The only 'double' seating area we have (PA474) is the 2 seats at the W/Op position, or the rest bunk down the back. Damn, I'm going to have to start looking things up again! Just the briefest clip from a chap who flew with 'my' squadron (100 ) from RAF Grimsby, just listen to the very first thing he says . . . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAeIv35Qlxs Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Smith Posted August 2, 2021 Share Posted August 2, 2021 On 31/07/2021 at 15:58, Mancunian airman said: Nav sat on a bench, no seat with a back piece or frame . F-Freddie nose at the IWM. Apparently preserved in wartime state. Is the bench seat possibly a Canadian built fitting? interesting 360 degree panorama of KB889 at Duxford https://www.pan3sixty.co.uk/portfolio/avro-lancaster-panorama-kb889-at-duxford/ with bench seat. perhaps a later war mod, with the use of more electronic aids and the need for the bomb aimer to help? Note the green leathercloth as well, also seen on F-Freddie. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Smith Posted August 2, 2021 Share Posted August 2, 2021 On 01/08/2021 at 00:08, Planes123 said: What paints did you use see here https://www.mafva.org/british-vehicle-camouflage-1939-45 scroll down to R.A.F. GROUND VEHICLE COLOURS There are mixes further down the page. you may also find this an interesting read https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235046145-aec-matador-bowser-camouflage/ HTH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isaneng Posted August 3, 2021 Share Posted August 3, 2021 Ian, you have convinced me chap, once again I learn new stuff! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
224 Peter Posted August 6, 2021 Share Posted August 6, 2021 The bench seat, or three stools: the BDAC Lancaster export informs me that this was used on aircraft carrying "Airborne Cigar" and the other airborne jamming and countermeasure equipment when there were 1 or sometimes 2 additional WOPs on the flight. 101 squadron was the pioneer unit. Airborne cigar aircraft could not carry H2S as there was insufficient power for both. The unit reduced bomb load by 2000 lbs and required additional aerials mounted on the upper wing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mancunian airman Posted August 6, 2021 Author Share Posted August 6, 2021 Peter I was lead to believe that that ABC operator sat at the back end of the bomb-bay roof within the fuselage as that was the only space available with his three transmitters etc. You are correct in that they carried less bombs but as they were there to jam German transmission within the bomber stream, they, 101 Squadron, flew on virtually ever operation even if No1 Group were not flying and consequently suffered a high proportion of losses . . . PS there were two aerials on the top spine of the aircraft between the mid-upper turret to the back of the canopy, the third aerial was under the nose of the aircraft Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
224 Peter Posted August 7, 2021 Share Posted August 7, 2021 Ian, the transmitters were certainly there but I was told that the instruments had to be up front as input from the Nav and WOP was part of the spoofing/jamming game. One article I read said that it took 30,000 hours to modify the Lance, which seems almost unbelievable. Given 101s loss rate it does seem that the cost of the ABC programme may have been rather high for what was achieved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mancunian airman Posted August 7, 2021 Author Share Posted August 7, 2021 Peter From what I have read about the ABC operators, they were not assigned to any particular crew. They kept to themselves, had separate briefings and transported out to a crew they were to fly with from their own hut. I have (had) a book describing their role but loaned it out to a lady whose father flew with the squadron; think its was written by Sean Feast (?) They were not allowed to discuss their role with other aircrew types so I find it strange when you say they needed inputs from two other crew members. Remember the role of the ABC man was to listen on German frequencies and then to jam their broadcast. Three aerials gave them plenty of options to listen out and jam certainly nothing to do with the navigator and I suspect the W/op would have been busy doing his thing particularly if he had the use of 'Fishpond' I do think the hours you mention to mod the Lancaster is somewhat over the top . . . best rgds Ian 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