Hurricane L2047.... more "accurate" research from Xtradecal... *sigh*

[Troy Smith]

While looking for something else, spotted this

https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/X72343?result-token=SMAAh

 

 

 

 

 

which was discussed all the way back here...

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234963507-all-the-hurricane-questions-you-want-to-ask-here/#elControls_1673827_menu

 

profile...  as per above

 

and the reference image..  Note the planned decals copy the profile NOT the photo... what a surprise..

 

 

 

Note style of 6 inch high serial, which is quite wide, the lack of yellow outer ring to roundel, the Spitfire type De Havilland propeller.

Note the profile shows a Spitfire type Rotol BTW - see here http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234980181-hawker-hurricane-propellers-and-spinners-a-modellers-guide/ for what is what.

The patch is interesting, I would think most likely a repair that has not been totally painted over. I very much doubt it being red, note the film/filter used has the red centre as being very dark.

before someone points out that film can make yellow appear black, note the prop blade tip below is not. s

See image below

Yellow outer rings were only reintroduced in May 1940. These look to be prewar A1 types [35 inch fuselage, 49 inch upperwing] that have had the yellow outer rings overpainted, note the smaller than usual upperwing roundel as a result.

Note here the blade tip is  pale,  

 

Also, shown better the the next photos, is the spinner, which is probably not black. Compare spinner with blades, and note how dark the roundel centre is.

 

And that look very winter/early spring.  

 

Also, 87 after that used rudder stripes, and larger codes letters

 

Other photos from this photographer Bray C.R.

http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/listing/object-205220730

 

show 87 Sq planes with light spinners,

87 Squadron 05 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr

 

and flight coloured spinners were used by 85 Sq, and Sq ldr Ian Gleed's famous LK-A was sporting a red spinner in the BoB and beyond.

 

looking at the roundels and the spinner, I would think red is the best option.

 

It could be black, but there are reason for it not to be as well.

 

So, pretty profile picture, but wrong in many details, so basically useless. The paint chipping particularly on the starboard wing is interesting, and occurs on some early Hurricanes, but not others.

Another search turn up this image

Interestingly this appears to be a L**** serialed Hurricane with metal wings [note position of landing light], and this clearly shows the overpainting of the upper wing roundels

and yes, I have copied and pasted some of this.... from the 2014 post... 

 

 

 

Oh, this just gets better, note how they depict the upper wing roundels... 

 

Oh...  while image searching, look who else copies profiles..

 

 

Would anyone like me to research a proper decal sheet for Battle of France Hurricanes? 

 

 

PS - this time I have written to Hannants, linking this thread.   

[John]

8 minutes ago, Troy Smith said:

 

 

show 87 Sq planes with light spinners,

87 Squadron 05 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr

 

 

What do you make of the less than pristine paint on the wing underside Troy? 

 

J

 

[Troy Smith]

8 minutes ago, John said:

less than pristine paint on the wing underside

? 

Which one? 

this

 

The machine on the left maybe an early Gloster, the centre plane is likely a Hawker N****, as it has the SH Spitfire prop, which is relativley rare, only used before the DH Hurricane spinner became available.

 

 

or the uppers?

 

I'll note again that the early-mid  Hurricane MkI's are a very complex subject, with whole series of variations in fit and markings, the more images turn up, the more quirks you find.

 

 

There are more example of early Hurricanes with poorly adhering paint,  usually from the first Gloster batch

 

eg these 85 Sq shots July 1940

VY-K P3408,

85 Squadron 68 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr

85 Squadron 67 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr

 

P2722, VY-H

85 Squadron 59 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr

 

there are more of both in the Flickr album linked

 

P2829, LK-G, 87 Sq Aug 1940

 

 

 

I don't know the reason, poor priming of the metal would seem the cause for it to flake off in big chunks.   Interestingly the main problem areas seem to be the wing,  gun bays make sense,  maybe vibration shock from gun firing?

 

I'll @Graham Boak who maybe able to add more on this.    

 

HTH

 

 

 

 

[Procopius]

10 minutes ago, Troy Smith said:

 Interestingly the main problem areas seem to be the wing,  gun bays make sense,  maybe vibration shock from gun firing?

 

Or that those areas are frequently opened to be serviced and have the pitter-patter of little armourer feet over them a lot.

[Paul J]

Note that the upper wing roundels on the pic with the Hurri on its nose, closely resembled by the decal sheet.

 Another interesting point, the lower rear edge of the nosed over machine has  squarer bottom rear to the rudder when compared to those on the photo with the tricolour rudder being more rounded  ( which look like blue is at the leading edge with the red aft...opposite to the standard arrangement. Or is that due to the film used?).

[Troy Smith]

9 minutes ago, Procopius said:

Or that those areas are frequently opened to be serviced and have the pitter-patter of little armourer feet over them a lot.

The cowling don't show much wear.

 

One point,  those working on aircraft usually wore wellingtons, or gym shoes/plimsouls,  as seen here, another pic of the VY-H sequence, as hob nail  bots will not do thin aluminium sheet any good...

85 Squadron 60 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr

 

note  the touch up  to paint ding on the leading edge of VY-H

85 Squadron 62 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr

 

It's not consistent either, note that on L2047 LK-H starboard wing that the actual removable panels are in very good shape, while round them the paint has gone

 

The cowlings are in good shape except for the filler cap just above the ring sight post.

 

Isn't research fun!

 

 

 

[Troy Smith]

2 minutes ago, Paul J said:

Note that the upper wing roundels on the pic with the Hurri on its nose, closely resembled by the decal sheet

No.

what you can see is a A1 49 inch which has been badly repainted into a B type.

this is what they started with

111  Squadron 04 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr

the upperwing has had the yellow outer ring overpainted like the fuselage, and the upperwing has had the red and blue exapanded, with the white are in fresher blue paint or perhaps white 'grinning' through the blue, but  not a ring of camouflage paint 'inner ring'  as on the decals.

In contrast to the colour image below, it look like only Dark Green has been  used to paint out the yellow.

 

this is a repainted A1 to undersize B

Hurricane by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr

 

and you can clearly see the removal of the fuselage outer yellow ring.   image is of L1940,  3 squadron, spring 1939, probably at Kenley.

 

L2047 was made in July 1939, interesting that the factory was still applying the A1 type then,  as these were overpainted in squadron service during the Munich crisis. 

 

[Jon Freeman]

Well I'm so so so so so sorry that this issue has caused so much alarm and distress to so many people, may god strike me down for my sins.

 

This issue is now resolved, everyone can move on with the lockdown-esque trauma as the decal sheet will look like what Troy has outlined.

 

Such a shame for some of you that this sheet has not been sent to print yet so the ball you saw slowly trickling over the line and into the net was kicked away at the last millisecond.

 

Ah well there's probably an Airfix kit coming soon that needs pulling to bits in the tried and tested British modeller way.

 

No wonder I don't frequent these websites. Unreal!

 

Oh and BTW I didn't copy any profile as my original art was drawn over 15yrs ago.

[Jochen Barett]

3 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

The patch is interesting, I would think most likely a repair that has not been totally painted over. I very much doubt it being red, note the film/filter used has the red centre as being very dark.

before someone points out that film can make yellow appear black

 

Nonehteless I'd like to claim:

 

Orthochromatic film in use (or French roundels):

 

 

Panchromatic film in use:

 

 

[Sabrejet]

30 minutes ago, Jon Freeman said:

Well I'm so so so so so sorry that this issue has caused so much alarm and distress to so many people, may god strike me down for my sins.

 

This issue is now resolved, everyone can move on with the lockdown-esque trauma as the decal sheet will look like what Troy has outlined.

 

Such a shame for some of you that this sheet has not been sent to print yet so the ball you saw slowly trickling over the line and into the net was kicked away at the last millisecond.

 

Ah well there's probably an Airfix kit coming soon that needs pulling to bits in the tried and tested British modeller way.

 

No wonder I don't frequent these websites. Unreal!

 

Oh and BTW I didn't copy any profile as my original art was drawn over 15yrs ago.

 

It did strike me that a quiet email to the right place would be a better way to do it. 

[Troy Smith]

25 minutes ago, Jon Freeman said:

that this sheet has not been sent to print yet

 

Excellent, if this has allowed a correction of the sheet it has been worthwhile.    

 

I'm pleased it has drawn a speedy response and acknowledgement of issues raised.   

 

Please note that the L**** and N**** serials were 6 inch high but are the same overall width, and have quite broad strokes. 

clearly seen on this side shot, very distinctive, and often missed.  

the serial digits are too close together, and too slim 

 

29 minutes ago, Jon Freeman said:

I didn't copy any profile as my original art was drawn over 15yrs ago.

Then perhaps the French publication  copied you.   

Whatever,  the profile, and the  decals share the same issues,  I have carefully explained the faults with the decal artwork vs the photos as I see it.  Oh, and before I forget, if the patch was 'red' why is not dark like the roundel centre.  

I have carefully detailed the areas that I see as being in conflict with the photos,  posted for reference, and so far no-one on here has said my points are in error.   

 

So,  you need to redraw the code letters, the roundels, the serial, and add some underwing roundels, as these were standard for operations over France, which is dealt with below.   

You might want to add the modellers notes that the L**** series had 5 spoke wheels (visible in the 3/4 shot) and lack the 2nd rectangular hatch on the starboard side,  as well as the noted pole aerial,  otherwise all the bits are in the Arma Hobby Mk.I

 

No, I don't know what the underwing roundels looked like,  given the overpainted factory roundels, likely still as applied at the factory,  though they evidently varied.   I think the centre are the factory type from when underwing serials were still being applied, as they are closer to the tip. 

 

 

 

47 minutes ago, Jon Freeman said:

may god strike me down for my sins

No wonder I don't frequent these websites. Unreal!

If you did you may make less mistakes.    Or ask for help in proof reading artwork,  it's easy to lose perspective and not 'see' an issue when you have been gawping at it for hours.    And sure getting those details right takes time , and I presume you get a flat fee for a sheet, and I presume it's job, not a hobby. 

 

But,  even though you asked for help and advice back in 2014 for the 75th Anniversary BoB sheets STILL has mistakes, and not even  the courtesy of a complimentary sheet for any assistance rendered, (or would that be a matter take take up with Hannants )

 

The thread in question has gone, (removed by you?)  but I recall having to draw lines on a photo to prove a point to you Jon as just the photo wasn't good enough, the longer stroke of the The F in the UF of 601 Sq code was specific example.   

 

Yes,  there is plenty of  noise on websites, but there is a lot of information to be gleaned if you cut through that.   You could just contact people directly and ask.   

 

27 minutes ago, Sabrejet said:

It did strike me that a quiet email to the right place would be a better way to do it. 

Maybe, maybe not.    I just saw this and went "oh here we go again"    

This got fast response though.  If it fixes it, even better.   

     

This is ongoing, we have had far too many threads on here about Xtradecal sheets being almost but not quite right.  And plenty of older ones still being punted out with mistakes.    

I don't know how many designers they use, but it's come up a regular basis.   

 

It was pure chance  I spotted this and it's my pet subject.

And it's depressing to end up posting the same corrections up again and again, or see models  where the builder has followed the instructions in good faith.  

 

55 minutes ago, Jochen Barett said:

Nonehteless I'd like to claim:

 

Orthochromatic film in use (or French roundels):

it's a filter,  not the film.   the film type makes black appear dark, hence the ide that there was a yellow ring.   Except the prop tips are visible.

@JackG  is good on this.

 

 

[Ed Russell]

5 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

Would anyone like me to research a proper decal sheet for Battle of France Hurricanes? 

Only after you have written the book!😀

[Peter Roberts]

1 hour ago, Ed Russell said:

Only after you have written the book!😀

 +1

[Jochen Barett]

2 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

it's a filter,  not the film.   the film type makes black appear dark, hence the ide that there was a yellow ring.   Except the prop tips are visible.

@JackG  is good on this.

 

 

I'd like to disagree in the most respectful way.

 

In order to make blue "light" on panchromatic film (and I assume we are talking about British roundels in the two pictures I quoted) and get red "dark", one would need a "strong" (deep) blue filter. "Nobody" had a blue filter in those days. It was common to use a yellow or "Sport"s (light yellow) filter to get some distinction between blue sky and white clouds.

 

A few "artists" would have owned an orange filter for a more dramatic effect with the clouds and "improved long distance shots" or maybe a light green filter (to lighten vegetation) and a few "specialists" a red or even an infrared filter (turning "red" to "white" in an black&white print). Yes, anybody working in the color reproduction business or doing the three-color method color photography (good entry point for further reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Prokudin-Gorsky#Three-color_principle ) in those days would have had access to a strong blue filter, but everybody using it for "normal" photography would have been considered crazy. Some cameras (like the Voigtländer Vito introduced in '39) even had a built in yellow filter (that you could fold away in case you needed all the light you could get) in those days.

 

I have no idea about the prop tips and the dark rings around the roundels - but yes, if the prop tips were yellow those dark rings around the rounels were not yellow. In case sombody claims "the roundel size was reduced and we see fresh unbleached paint being darker than older paint on the plane" I'd have a hard time to disagree.

 

But I'm willing to repeat my claim regarding orhtochromatic and panchromatic film and stomp with my foot when writing it (but will not use caps lock to "shout"). Orthochromatic film was still in widespread use in the UK in those days, opposed to Germany where panchromatic film had a larger share of the market.

Edited December 6, 2022 by Jochen Barett
embarrassing typos

[Peter Roberts]

Except, if they have used orthochromatic film how come the prop tips are still pale? Wouldn’t they be virtually indistinguishable from the black blades?

[Mark Postlethwaite]

I think the prop tip is a red (or yellow!) herring.  The lighter colour is scraped metal and the only remaining bit of yellow in the centre is actually quite dark, so I think Jochen is right, it's orthochromatic film, not a filter.

[Jochen Barett]

3 hours ago, Peter Roberts said:

Except, if they have used orthochromatic film how come the prop tips are still pale? Wouldn’t they be virtually indistinguishable from the black blades?

Maybe the prop tips are yellow, maybe they are bare metal. But the representation of the prop tips in a black&white print would be the same with a strong blue filter and with orthochromatic film.

 

The point I try to make is: "Nobody (except an artist) would have used a filter giving that effect, but anybody just shooting common orthochromatic film would have achieved that result."

 

In other occasions (not yet seen in this thread) I was truely surprised how dark (next to black) the "yellow" rings around the roundels can turn out in a black&white print - and yes, I have shot orthochromatic film when I was a few days younger (might still have some in the fridge or freezer).

[Graham Boak]

Because of the widespread use of Yellow undersides on RAF aircraft, UK modellers are well aware of how black any yellow undersides can appear (on ortho film) but are less familiar with the examples where yellow appear light in photographs yet red still appears dark and blue lighter.  They would however have been astonished by your suggestion that the propeller tips may be bare metal, which is never seen on RAF aircraft of the period.

 

The overall impression of this aircraft is common to many of the period with the earlier standard roundel, with or without the temporary yellow surround.  

[tank152]

2 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

 They would however have been astonished by your suggestion that the propeller tips may be bare metal, which is never seen on RAF aircraft of the period.

 

The overall impression of this aircraft is common to many of the period with the earlier standard roundel, with or without the temporary yellow surround.  

If you go back and re read that post you'll see that the poster never mentioned the prop tips would be finished in bare metal! 

He said scraped back to bare metal in other words worn back to it. Looking at the frontal view it certainly looks very worn. 

The blade tip just about the ground looks dark not dissimilar to the outer roundel..

Whilst it is blindingly obvious the spinner is wrong in the profile the outer ring on the fuselage roundel isn't. 

I also suggest the very vast majority of modellers who purchase that decal sheet won't give a monkey's if either are wrong. 😏

[Graham Boak]

You mean those who like to see things right?

 

You mean that the tip at the front of the propeller would have been worn away leaving the majority of it basically intact whereas the blade that that actually touched the ground still has black further outboard than the bend and a visible light(yellow) tip?  Very selective wear - under normal conditions it is the rear of the blade that wears because this is the part that actually hits the air (and anything in it) as the blade goes around and the front of the blade is shielded.   Can you find any other photo showing this effect: that a propeller tip has had all the paint removed without any significant effect on the rest of the blade?

 

Here we have a set of markings that are entirely typical of an aircraft of the period.  There's no need to go around inventing films and filters to create ifs, buts and maybes.  It is a legitimate approach to doubt, but where's the doubt here?  Occam's Razor: choose the simplest explanation that meets all the evidence.

 

 

[tempestfan]

20 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

 

 

 

I have never been and will never be good in interpreting photos, but what causes the "wrap around leading edge" effect on the centre plane? The rear edge looks too uniform to be worn off white distemper (or similar), and the front quarter lower wing looks too dark (to me) to be Sky or Silver, which may have been the delivery colour.

 

I also find the colour demarcation on the nose of some machines in this thread interesting; looks a bit like early US painted Airacobras (admittedly only a bit). Is this style tied to a specific plant?

[JackG]

I would also put the photo of L2047 in the  Orthochromatic column.    Just looking at the camouflage colours on the top, the tones are quite similar, barely discernible the areas of Dark Green and Dark Earth, a characteristic of the above mentioned film (no filter required).

 

Comparing the tones of the markings may not be all that straight forward.  There were a number changes made, and not all at the same time, so different rates of fading may have to be considered as well?    Was looking at the diary for 87 Squadron, and L2047 seems to show up on the roster during the month of November 1939 (while the air frame may have been factory finished as early as mid-July?).   So it's grey codes could be a good four months fresher than the original roundel markings.   Agreed that the factory applied yellow ring of the roundel was over painted as a result of the Munich crisis of September 1938.   This also included removing the white, but was reinstated just for the fuselage in Nov. '39.  Since the return of the yellow ring coincided with the introduction of vertical fin stripes (May 1st 1940), this clearly is not the case in the discussed photo.

 

Concerning the repair patch, I think the only red would be the outline where the dope was applied as a final seal - but then again I will admit I'm unfamiliar with the process of repair.  Is it known if the fabric was available pre-dyed to conform to the then current aircraft colours?   If so, my choice would be a Dark Earth patch.

 

Also, if you have photo book on the Hurricane from WingLeader publications, there is a better quality photo of the subject on page 42.

 

regards,

Jack

Edited December 7, 2022 by JackG

[Phoenix44]

2 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

You mean those who like to see things right?

 

You mean that the tip at the front of the propeller would have been worn away leaving the majority of it basically intact whereas the blade that that actually touched the ground still has black further outboard than the bend and a visible light(yellow) tip?  Very selective wear - under normal conditions it is the rear of the blade that wears because this is the part that actually hits the air (and anything in it) as the blade goes around and the front of the blade is shielded.   Can you find any other photo showing this effect: that a propeller tip has had all the paint removed without any significant effect on the rest of the blade?

 

Here we have a set of markings that are entirely typical of an aircraft of the period.  There's no need to go around inventing films and filters to create ifs, buts and maybes.  It is a legitimate approach to doubt, but where's the doubt here?  Occam's Razor: choose the simplest explanation that meets all the evidence.

 

 

Occams Razor says ortho film, which was common, not an extremely unlikely blue filter with relatively uncommon pan film. 

[Phoenix44]

21 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

 

Excellent, if this has allowed a correction of the sheet it has been worthwhile.    

 

I'm pleased it has drawn a speedy response and acknowledgement of issues raised.   

 

Please note that the L**** and N**** serials were 6 inch high but are the same overall width, and have quite broad strokes. 

clearly seen on this side shot, very distinctive, and often missed.  

2 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

You mean those who like to see things right?

 

You mean that the tip at the front of the propeller would have been worn away leaving the majority of it basically intact whereas the blade that that actually touched the ground still has black further outboard than the bend and a visible light(yellow) tip?  Very selective wear - under normal conditions it is the rear of the blade that wears because this is the part that actually hits the air (and anything in it) as the blade goes around and the front of the blade is shielded.   Can you find any other photo showing this effect: that a propeller tip has had all the paint removed without any significant effect on the rest of the blade?

 

Here we have a set of markings that are entirely typical of an aircraft of the period.  There's no need to go around inventing films and filters to create ifs, buts and maybes.  It is a legitimate approach to doubt, but where's the doubt here?  Occam's Razor: choose the simplest explanation that meets all the 

 

the serial digits are too close together, and too slim 

 

Then perhaps the French publication  copied you.   

Whatever,  the profile, and the  decals share the same issues,  I have carefully explained the faults with the decal artwork vs the photos as I see it.  Oh, and before I forget, if the patch was 'red' why is not dark like the roundel centre.  

I have carefully detailed the areas that I see as being in conflict with the photos,  posted for reference, and so far no-one on here has said my points are in error.   

 

So,  you need to redraw the code letters, the roundels, the serial, and add some underwing roundels, as these were standard for operations over France, which is dealt with below.   

You might want to add the modellers notes that the L**** series had 5 spoke wheels (visible in the 3/4 shot) and lack the 2nd rectangular hatch on the starboard side,  as well as the noted pole aerial,  otherwise all the bits are in the Arma Hobby Mk.I

 

No, I don't know what the underwing roundels looked like,  given the overpainted factory roundels, likely still as applied at the factory,  though they evidently varied.   I think the centre are the factory type from when underwing serials were still being applied, as they are closer to the tip. 

 

 

 

If you did you may make less mistakes.    Or ask for help in proof reading artwork,  it's easy to lose perspective and not 'see' an issue when you have been gawping at it for hours.    And sure getting those details right takes time , and I presume you get a flat fee for a sheet, and I presume it's job, not a hobby. 

 

But,  even though you asked for help and advice back in 2014 for the 75th Anniversary BoB sheets STILL has mistakes, and not even  the courtesy of a complimentary sheet for any assistance rendered, (or would that be a matter take take up with Hannants )

 

The thread in question has gone, (removed by you?)  but I recall having to draw lines on a photo to prove a point to you Jon as just the photo wasn't good enough, the longer stroke of the The F in the UF of 601 Sq code was specific example.   

 

Yes,  there is plenty of  noise on websites, but there is a lot of information to be gleaned if you cut through that.   You could just contact people directly and ask.   

 

Maybe, maybe not.    I just saw this and went "oh here we go again"    

This got fast response though.  If it fixes it, even better.   

     

This is ongoing, we have had far too many threads on here about Xtradecal sheets being almost but not quite right.  And plenty of older ones still being punted out with mistakes.    

I don't know how many designers they use, but it's come up a regular basis.   

 

It was pure chance  I spotted this and it's my pet subject.

And it's depressing to end up posting the same corrections up again and again, or see models  where the builder has followed the instructions in good faith.  

 

it's a filter,  not the film.   the film type makes black appear dark, hence the ide that there was a yellow ring.   Except the prop tips are visible.

@JackG  is good on this.

 

 

I doubt it's a filter. As has been stated, they are rarely used in b&w photography as the effects are rarely desired. And a blue filter would darken yellow. So if the argument is the prop tips are yellow (rather than lacking paint in many places) but aren't dark, then there's no blue filter. The prop tips cannot disprove ortho without also disproving a blue filter.

[Phoenix44]

2 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

You mean those who like to see things right?

 

You mean that the tip at the front of the propeller would have been worn away leaving the majority of it basically intact whereas the blade that that actually touched the ground still has black further outboard than the bend and a visible light(yellow) tip?  Very selective wear - under normal conditions it is the rear of the blade that wears because this is the part that actually hits the air (and anything in it) as the blade goes around and the front of the blade is shielded.   Can you find any other photo showing this effect: that a propeller tip has had all the paint removed without any significant effect on the rest of the blade?

 

Here we have a set of markings that are entirely typical of an aircraft of the period.  There's no need to go around inventing films and filters to create ifs, buts and maybes.  It is a legitimate approach to doubt, but where's the doubt here?  Occam's Razor: choose the simplest explanation that meets all the evidence.

 

 

It's not inventing films and filters to say that b&w photographers usually use a yellow filter and usually use the type of film common at the time. Rather its ifs, buts and maybes to say they did not.  And the picture clearly shows a great deal of paint wear on different parts of the aircraft that nobody is able to explain at this point.