Jump to content

307 Squadron Defiant September 1940


Olmec Head

Recommended Posts

I am building the Hendon Museum Defiant as it may have appeared in September 1940 when first issued to 307 Squadron.  It was in TLS and looking through Britmodeller has raised some 'things'.   @303sqn  had some very interesting detail in an highly informed post that I cannot find again.  One aspect is an contemporary picture posted by 303sqn in that post (I am happy to remove the photo if needed):

 

defiant 2

 

What is interesting is that the A/C individual code letter is to the front of the roundel.  I had assumed that that it would be the EW code to the front as on the port side.  I am trying to decide what the sqn code letter size would be to fit EW between the roundel and the tail. I presume it would have been painted over serial number.  I am guessing it would be 36in, but possible smaller?  The current Hendon codes are a slightly thin and elongated style based on another 307 Sqn photo, but the above photo suggests that the codes in September were more standard.  Another 307 Sqn photo from the Web shows a Nightfighter with a standard code:

307

 

So any advice please on code size please?  And my apologises to @303sqn for not being able to access his post which had excellent information on 307 Sqn aircraft in Autumn 1940.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

The look to be the same height as the diameter of the blue in the roundel.  Would that be 25"?  

Thanks Graham, I am going to start very technically measuring my xtradecal sqn code sheets against the roundel to find the best fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Olmec Head said:

What is interesting is that the A/C individual code letter is to the front of the roundel.  I had assumed that that it would be the EW code to the front as on the port side. 

There was no specified code running order.  RAF sq codes are the wild card in RAF camo and markings.

so they can read on port and starboard...

XX-X/XX-X

XX-X/X-XX

X-XX/X-XX

X-XX/XX-X

usually, but not always bisected by the roundel..... 

 

the lack of running order really can cause problems, as without a photo of your subject, or of another plane around the same time, you won't know  the running order....   oh, and it could, and did, vary during the war.....   

Did we mention sizes... or 'fonts'  yet.... 

5 hours ago, Olmec Head said:

I am trying to decide what the sqn code letter size would be to fit EW between the roundel and the tail. I presume it would have been painted over serial number.  I am guessing it would be 36in, but possible smaller? 

On fighters they tend to be be in 'sensible' imperial sizes, eg, 2ft, 2ft 6, 3 ft....  .  (or 24, 30 and 36 inch high)   but there are exceptions.  Stroke widths also varied...

the specified fighter size was 48 inch or 4 foot.... which didn't fit on anything.......  maybe the largest seen on single seat fighter were the 40 inch seen on 32 Sq in the BOB

 

5 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

Would that be 25"?  

24 inch.   25 is an odd imperial size. 

5 hours ago, Olmec Head said:

The current Hendon codes are a slightly thin and elongated style based on another 307 Sqn photo, but the above photo suggests that the codes in September were more standard.  Another 307 Sqn photo from the Web shows a Nightfighter with a standard code:

There is NO standard code font.     

 

As the war went on they tended to be more uniform,  but a study of photos will show many variations.

The codes were unit painted.   the "font" would depend on the painter,  which is why they do tend to be fairly uniform in a Sq at a specific time, as they were done by the same painter. 

case in point....  very skinny stroke width, maybe 3 inch ...(see below for how I guesstimate this...based on roundel ring size) 

119116153_2018600578275638_6734282913520

 

note.... at Hendon

RAF_Museum_Hendon__the_only_Defiant_in_e

 

and now...

Boulton-Paul-Defiant-5.jpg

 

Looks like they tried to replicate the flight shot....

 

6 hours ago, Olmec Head said:

It was in TLS and looking through Britmodeller has raised some 'things'.   @303sqn  had some very interesting detail in an highly informed post that I cannot find again. 

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235001461-defiant-exhausts/#elControls_2339441_menu

 

Use google.  "Britmodeller defiant 303squadron"  is what used.  

 

52 minutes ago, Olmec Head said:

I am going to start very technically measuring my xtradecal sqn code sheets against the roundel to find the best fit.

The Xtradecal sheets are invariably close not not quite right, for the reasons above.   They are however 24" and 30"

 

Size. Easy.  Get model, draw letter on with pencil. Measure.  Not in metric,  imperial give exact fractions.    2ft6 in 1/48th is exactly 5/8th of an inch. 

 

The roundel    

52440802877_c8330c01c7_b.jpg

 

 

right.

Factory diagram

Boulton%20Paul%20Defiant%208%20(18)-960.

 

look to be a 42 inch roundel.  the centre and the rings are the same width,  Note the best scan, you are looking at the centre roundel, centre and each ring are 6 inch.   that means to the outer of the blue is 30 inch, the K is slightly below,  but look to be the same, eh 30 inch , two foot six..... a 'round' imperial size.  Stroke width seems to be 4 inch. (or 1/12th inch in 1/48) 

Again, as long as the model is accurate, a combination of presuming 'round' imperial sizes (think base 12, remember currency back then was also base 12, 240 pence to a pound) and sketching will likely give you a good idea.   

 

Note, later on Spitfire codes tended to be 20 inch high, simply as they fitted better. 

 

Camo diagram from here

https://boxartden.com/reference/gallery/index.php/Camouflage-Markings/Boulton-Paul-Defiant

note the variations in fuselage codes....

 

Crikey...  that sounds a lecture, more years of following threads on here and applying the gained knowledge.  The variations on RAF codes does seem to not be widely known or understood.    One you are aware,  it becomes very obvious.   There are all the Ducimus Monographs in the link above, have a browse and you will see what I mean.

 

 

The chap who is really the the Defiant buff is @AndyL  

 

HTH?

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Troy Smith said:

24 inch.   25 is an odd imperial size. 

 

Think how it was assembled:

 

5 inch centre to the roundel

5 inch for each band around it

Total 25 inch.

 

35 inch with the Yellow band.

 

24 inch looks like a misprint.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Graham Boak said:

24 inch looks like a misprint.

the Defiant fuselage roundel was 42 inch,  it's not clear on the above scan,  but I pulled out my Ducimus to check.   That's for the 2 and 3rd in the row. 

You mentioned 25 inch for the code letter based on the ideal the roundel centre was 25 inch,  it's not.    And even the roundel centre was 25 inch,  the code letter of comparable size would then be most likely to be 24 inch, or 2 foot for the reasons in post above, and post below.   

 

My point about 'odd' imperial sizes was not about roundels, which were laid down depending on other specifics.

Graham, I know you are old enough to have been raised in a country using base 12 currency and imperial measurements,  so you will understand my point about 'imperial measurement' logic,   I was at school when things were theoretically metric in a country where the adults were imperial.   

I only really know the imperial measurements because of modelling, both for scale and being interested in RAF types, which were imperial measurements,   it's the only reason I understand that part of the imperial system, because it had some relevance for me to learn it.  

 

So, that was my point about being able to think 'imperially'  so if unless you are dealing with a specific laid down size,  like your 25/35 inch roundel example,  the squadron painter is likely going to work in imperial,  as can be seen in practice.    I have no idea how old @Olmec Head head is,  but anyone under 50 likely will have mostly used metric for most measurements apart from the odd imperial that have stayed as they are cultural,  eg personal height and roads measurements in miles, pints in pubs. 

 

In modelling, it has it's place,  like when a question is asked about how wide an 18 inch sky band is in 1/48th,  is 9.525 mm, or exactly 3/8th of an inch.

OK, it's 9.5 mm, but I can work out 18 inch in 1/48 with getting out a calculator.... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's N1684 as delivered to 307 Squadron on 18th September 1940, the day after N1671. They came in from different MU's with the former in from 10 MU, and the latter from 6 MU.

KH6BQvy.jpg

Edited by AndyL
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slightly O/T, but I'd appreciate opinions on the cammo colors, too.

No.307 Sqn Defiants are often depicted in profiles and scale models with only the lower color over-painted in black:

 

spacer.png

source: Polish Squadrons Remembered

 

But looking at the photos from this webpage, seems that all of the Defiants were painted overall black. Then it got weathered, so original DE/DG cammo started showing through (?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, warhawk said:

Slightly O/T, but I'd appreciate opinions on the cammo colors, too.

No.307 Sqn Defiants are often depicted in profiles and scale models with only the lower color over-painted in black:

 

spacer.png

source: Polish Squadrons Remembered

 

But looking at the photos from this webpage, seems that all of the Defiants were painted overall black. Then it got weathered, so original DE/DG cammo started showing through (?)

 

I'd say that profile is wrong. N3437 was delivered to 10 MU on the 29th December 1940, then to 307 on 1st February 1941. As all aircraft deployed in the night fighter role had to be in overall black according to an Air Ministry order on 22nd November, I'd suggest that N3437 came off the Boulton Paul production line in an all black scheme. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Troy: 25 inches or 24 inches, both are Imperial measures.  The principle of 1;3;5;7 ratio was that defined for what is now generally termed the A/A1 roundels.  Hence 5:10:25:35.  Or as depended upon the size of the central dot.  There were a number of examples, (mainly on Spitfires IIRC) where the central dot was too small, but these are readily obvious in photographs and do not seem to have affected the outer rings.  Post war (D) roundels have the ratio 1:2:4 in their layout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AndyL said:

Here's N1684 as delivered to 307 Squadron on 18th September 1940, the day after N1671. They came in from different MU's with the former in from 10 MU, and the latter from 6 MU.

KH6BQvy.jpg

 

Thanks Andy, That photo is ideal, its interesting how the 'E' is slightly over the turret ring, I was going to put below the 'bulge'.   Its great to see a picture of a contemporary aircraft of the squadron it gives me some better ideas on the finish and markings etc.  Now only if it was the starboard side to confirm the code placements, but from the sizes on this photo, I think I can go with the sqn code letters to the rear and the individual code letter to the front as per the original photo posted by 303Sqn.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

There was no specified code running order.  RAF sq codes are the wild card in RAF camo and markings.

so they can read on port and starboard...

XX-X/XX-X

XX-X/X-XX

X-XX/X-XX

X-XX/XX-X

usually, but not always bisected by the roundel..... 

 

the lack of running order really can cause problems, as without a photo of your subject, or of another plane around the same time, you won't know  the running order....   oh, and it could, and did, vary during the war.....   

Did we mention sizes... or 'fonts'  yet.... 

On fighters they tend to be be in 'sensible' imperial sizes, eg, 2ft, 2ft 6, 3 ft....  .  (or 24, 30 and 36 inch high)   but there are exceptions.  Stroke widths also varied...

the specified fighter size was 48 inch or 4 foot.... which didn't fit on anything.......  maybe the largest seen on single seat fighter were the 40 inch seen on 32 Sq in the BOB

 

24 inch.   25 is an odd imperial size. 

There is NO standard code font.     

 

As the war went on they tended to be more uniform,  but a study of photos will show many variations.

The codes were unit painted.   the "font" would depend on the painter,  which is why they do tend to be fairly uniform in a Sq at a specific time, as they were done by the same painter. 

case in point....  very skinny stroke width, maybe 3 inch ...(see below for how I guesstimate this...based on roundel ring size) 

119116153_2018600578275638_6734282913520

 

note.... at Hendon

RAF_Museum_Hendon__the_only_Defiant_in_e

 

and now...

Boulton-Paul-Defiant-5.jpg

 

Looks like they tried to replicate the flight shot....

 

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235001461-defiant-exhausts/#elControls_2339441_menu

 

Use google.  "Britmodeller defiant 303squadron"  is what used.  

 

The Xtradecal sheets are invariably close not not quite right, for the reasons above.   They are however 24" and 30"

 

Size. Easy.  Get model, draw letter on with pencil. Measure.  Not in metric,  imperial give exact fractions.    2ft6 in 1/48th is exactly 5/8th of an inch. 

 

The roundel    

52440802877_c8330c01c7_b.jpg

 

 

right.

Factory diagram

Boulton%20Paul%20Defiant%208%20(18)-960.

 

look to be a 42 inch roundel.  the centre and the rings are the same width,  Note the best scan, you are looking at the centre roundel, centre and each ring are 6 inch.   that means to the outer of the blue is 30 inch, the K is slightly below,  but look to be the same, eh 30 inch , two foot six..... a 'round' imperial size.  Stroke width seems to be 4 inch. (or 1/12th inch in 1/48) 

Again, as long as the model is accurate, a combination of presuming 'round' imperial sizes (think base 12, remember currency back then was also base 12, 240 pence to a pound) and sketching will likely give you a good idea.   

 

Note, later on Spitfire codes tended to be 20 inch high, simply as they fitted better. 

 

Camo diagram from here

https://boxartden.com/reference/gallery/index.php/Camouflage-Markings/Boulton-Paul-Defiant

note the variations in fuselage codes....

 

Crikey...  that sounds a lecture, more years of following threads on here and applying the gained knowledge.  The variations on RAF codes does seem to not be widely known or understood.    One you are aware,  it becomes very obvious.   There are all the Ducimus Monographs in the link above, have a browse and you will see what I mean.

 

 

The chap who is really the the Defiant buff is @AndyL  

 

HTH?

I looked at the Ducimus book on Box Art Den, what I have just realised is that the factory diagram is that the roundel is further foward compared to a BoB era Defiant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20/10/2022 at 23:08, Troy Smith said:

the Defiant fuselage roundel was 42 inch,  it's not clear on the above scan,  but I pulled out my Ducimus to check.   That's for the 2 and 3rd in the row. 

You mentioned 25 inch for the code letter based on the ideal the roundel centre was 25 inch,  it's not.    And even the roundel centre was 25 inch,  the code letter of comparable size would then be most likely to be 24 inch, or 2 foot for the reasons in post above, and post below.   

 

My point about 'odd' imperial sizes was not about roundels, which were laid down depending on other specifics.

Graham, I know you are old enough to have been raised in a country using base 12 currency and imperial measurements,  so you will understand my point about 'imperial measurement' logic,   I was at school when things were theoretically metric in a country where the adults were imperial.   

I only really know the imperial measurements because of modelling, both for scale and being interested in RAF types, which were imperial measurements,   it's the only reason I understand that part of the imperial system, because it had some relevance for me to learn it.  

 

So, that was my point about being able to think 'imperially'  so if unless you are dealing with a specific laid down size,  like your 25/35 inch roundel example,  the squadron painter is likely going to work in imperial,  as can be seen in practice.    I have no idea how old @Olmec Head head is,  but anyone under 50 likely will have mostly used metric for most measurements apart from the odd imperial that have stayed as they are cultural,  eg personal height and roads measurements in miles, pints in pubs. 

 

In modelling, it has it's place,  like when a question is asked about how wide an 18 inch sky band is in 1/48th,  is 9.525 mm, or exactly 3/8th of an inch.

OK, it's 9.5 mm, but I can work out 18 inch in 1/48 with getting out a calculator.... 

Sadly I think in a variation of imperial and metric as I was at primary school for the crossover.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, JWM said:

I think this could be perhaps the thread you've been looking for:

There are decals in 1:48 https://polish-made.com/pl/p/D48046-Boulton-Paul-Defiant/2895

and in 1:72 https://www.scalemates.com/kits/modelmaker-d72046-boulton-paul-defiant--963445

 

Regards

J-W

Thanks J-W, I found the referred post most useful.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...