Bristol Beaufort help needed

[Pappy]

G'day people,

 

I was given the very lovely ICM 1/48 Beaufort kit for my birthday.

I have decided to build option 5, (MW/R  L9878) on charge with 17QN, RAF St. Eval, Autumn 1941.

 

As usual, I have a few questions  (in bold) for the 'experten'

 

1. What size is the yellow paint on the propeller tips?

 

I am guessing 4" but I usually do jets so no idea really

 

My subject had a gun installed in the port fuselage. ICM provide a separate panel (kit part D12) that I think also doubled as the entry hatch. which could have either a window or gun doors

 

This is the gun door panel provided as an insert (Kit part D3)

 

 

It looks like this had two doors (split vertically) that allowed the barrel to poke out but could be slid apart to use the gun?

The instructions would have you install the doors insert  part into the fuselage hatch (kit part  D12 at step 26b) and install this assembly into the fuselage

 

 

2. During flight, if the gun was used, was the upper part of the entry hatch (kit part D51) opened to afford a better view or was the gun able to be swung inboard to allow both the hatch parts to slide up?

 

The dorsal turret has some internal structure provided. I don't know what sort of turret it is but this is a Mk.1 Beaufort.

Does anyone have any pics or links to the turret internals?

 

Finally, the instructions indicate that the dorsal turret could have a single or double gun installation.

 

3. How many guns should my dorsal turret have?

 

I don't know which one would be appropriate for my subject.

I think that the guns are the .303 Vickers GO type but happy to be corrected.

Given that my subject will be depicted in '41 when the need for greater firepower was evident, I am leaning towards the twin Vickers configuration

 

thanks in advance

 

cheers

 

Pappy

 

 

 

 

Edited August 13, 2023 by Pappy

[Graham Boak]

Look for earlier Beaufort threads on the Airfix kit for these details: there are in particular good discussions and views of these side guns.

 

As for the turret guns, you are probably looking at this the wrong way round. The early examples would be single guns, with the turret uprated later.  I would expect (or perhaps hope that!) the instructions would tell you which arrangement went with which option.

[Duggy]

There are some photos of L9878 here --  http://axis-and-allies-paintworks.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?id=18665

[dogsbody]

I have this, from the IWM:

 

 

 

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/search?query=Bristol Beaufort&pageSize=&media-records=records-with-media&style=image

 

 

 

 

Chris

[72modeler]

That is a great photo, Chris- lots of modeling details present! That is one weird waist gun hatch. Guessing that panel below the opening is armor plate?

Mike

[Pappy]

Thank you all for the help. 

 

Graham, you can hope all you like but the instructions suggest the two options for the early turret installation but provide no further guidance as to which configuration is required for each option.

 

Duggy, gold star mate! 

 

Those pics of L9878 are awesome. Although not conclusive, in the last (enlarged) pic of L9878 I think I can make out two Vickers gun barrels and immediately below them are two parallel shadows which would correspond to a twin gun set-up. In the absence of a conclusive photo to the contrary, that is what I am going with. Those pics also answer another question. The instructions suggest that an additional scoop could be added to the top of each wing just aft and to the right of the carby air inlets. The pic you linked to clearly shows these are not installed, so another win. They also show excellent paint details for weathering cues.

 

Chris, that last pic is very interesting as it looks like it has been posed for the camera to depict an action configuration. I have not seen that plate below the entry hatch before (which does not mean much as my usual fare is jets) but would agree with your assessment as an additional applique armor panel.  think I will just add the two hatches in place and have the beam Vickers poking out,

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

[brewerjerry]

Hi

     i think the number of guns in the turret will depend on what year you base your model on

 

  as graham said,  early on they had one gun in the turret, later two

 

however if you view the instructions carefully the painting scheme shows the turret as having two guns 

 

 

   just incase the luftwaffe attacked from either side

    the ' hatch '  gun mod was on both sides of the fuselage, although the actual hatch was only one side

  

  i would imagine the most guns were fitted to the aircraft shortly before the Sq  move to the Med,  malta i think ? 

 

     cheers

       jerry 

 

Edited August 14, 2023 by brewerjerry

[Phoenix44]

10 hours ago, Pappy said:

Thank you all for the help. 

 

Graham, you can hope all you like but the instructions suggest the two options for the early turret installation but provide no further guidance as to which configuration is required for each option.

 

Duggy, gold star mate! 

 

Those pics of L9878 are awesome. Although not conclusive, in the last (enlarged) pic of L9878 I think I can make out two Vickers gun barrels and immediately below them are two parallel shadows which would correspond to a twin gun set-up. In the absence of a conclusive photo to the contrary, that is what I am going with. Those pics also answer another question. The instructions suggest that an additional scoop could be added to the top of each wing just aft and to the right of the carby air inlets. The pic you linked to clearly shows these are not installed, so another win. They also show excellent paint details for weathering cues.

 

Chris, that last pic is very interesting as it looks like it has been posed for the camera to depict an action configuration. I have not seen that plate below the entry hatch before (which does not mean much as my usual fare is jets) but would agree with your assessment as an additional applique armor panel.  think I will just add the two hatches in place and have the beam Vickers poking out,

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

I don't think there's two guns - I'd say the other shadow is the aerial mast as it's a different size and shape and appears to have a little attachment point and a thin shadow of the wire.

[Pappy]

3 hours ago, Phoenix44 said:

I don't think there's two guns - I'd say the other shadow is the aerial mast as it's a different size and shape and appears to have a little attachment point and a thin shadow of the wire.

 

Well, I guess we will have to agree to disagree, as I said, in the absence of definitive photo evidence I will build to suit myself,

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

[Dave Swindell]

11 hours ago, brewerjerry said:

the ' hatch '  gun mod was on both sides of the fuselage, although the actual hatch was only one side

It wasn't on either side originally. 22 Sqn did a field modification to fit a vickers VGO in the entrance hatch (see @dogsbody's photo above) before a production modification introduced a gun mounting beam behind the entrance door. The fitting of a gun hatch on the stbd side opposite the entrance hatch was a further, slightly later modification.

 

 

[brewerjerry]

20 hours ago, 72modeler said:

That is a great photo, Chris- lots of modeling details present! That is one weird waist gun hatch. Guessing that panel below the opening is armor plate?

Mike

Hi

     is it possible the plate is just a strengthening plate so the gun mount can be bolted/fitted to the fuselage 

   cheers

       jerry 

[tempestfan]

On 8/13/2023 at 11:43 AM, Duggy said:

There are some photos of L9878 here --  http://axis-and-allies-paintworks.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?id=18665

Many thanks for that link - some very nice pics in there!

5 hours ago, Pappy said:

 

Well, I guess we will have to agree to disagree, as I said, in the absence of definitive photo evidence I will build to suit myself,

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

I second your second gun - I see no way the antenna mast could strike a shadow in that position, by chance completely parallel to the "single" gun. The apparent difference in length is natural IMHO - some guns are longer than others, but in this case I guess caused by the angle of turret traverse.

[Graham Boak]

I can't make out which photo you are talking about.  Is it J?  In which case this is definitely a single gun.  Views in the RAF/IWM selection have  clear examples of the twin installation, the two guns are close together and of identical lengths.  I agree that there is no antenna that would cast a shadow that could be confused with a gun.

 

If you are talking about the colour formation of two E and B, I can't distinguish what you see.  The eye of the believer.  However I see no reason why the turret couldn't have been upgraded at some time.

[tempestfan]

1 hour ago, Graham Boak said:

I can't make out which photo you are talking about.  Is it J?  In which case this is definitely a single gun.  Views in the RAF/IWM selection have  clear examples of the twin installation, the two guns are close together and of identical lengths.  I agree that there is no antenna that would cast a shadow that could be confused with a gun.

 

If you are talking about the colour formation of two E and B, I can't distinguish what you see.  The eye of the believer.  However I see no reason why the turret couldn't have been upgraded at some time.

I assume you are replying to me - it is this photo I am referring to - hope it links right.

[Graham Boak]

You and Duggy.  Thanks for that, but I see a single gun with its underslung support.  (I don't know the technical term.)

[Pappy]

Well, I also doubt the antenna shadow theory. As for the second gun, it was mounted on its side i.e. rotated 90 degrees. I suspect this was because theere was insufficient room for both drum magazines if both mounted upright so the second drum would now be vertical. As such, although still parallel and the same length, it would have a lower profile and hence the stb'd gun could now obscure it when viewed from the right as in the pic in question. I agree that the turret installation would have begun life as a single gun but the operational need for greater armament would necessitate more guns.

 

It is interesting that the stb'd beam gun has not been incorporated as there is still a window in place. The destructions indicate the port gun hatch mod was added. As Dave mentioned the stb'd beam gun was a 22SQN field mod so perhaps perhaps only the port gun and twin Vickers configuration at this stage. As Graham stated, the twin Vickers mod may have happened at some point after the pic in question, so I am still leaning towards a twin gun turret in the absence of definitive proof i.e. a pic of the turret with one gun only

 

One further question from that pic - what is the red 'splodge' near the wing root inboard of the stb'd engine?

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

[tempestfan]

11 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

You and Duggy.  Thanks for that, but I see a single gun with its underslung support.  (I don't know the technical term.)

I also only see one gun and the gas cylinder beneath, but there are apparently two parallel shadows beneath.

[brewerjerry]

Hi

     if you want a westcountry aircraft

 

      You could always do it as a L9878 at portreath in june 1942 

 

they were there a week or so before going to malta 

 

    more likely to have a twin gun turret then ?

 

    cheers

       jerry 

Edited August 15, 2023 by brewerjerry

[Duggy]

From "The Beaufort File". on all but the earliest Beaufort's, three guns could be bought to bare on any fighter making a beam attack,it is not specific but says 1940.

L9878 is from the third production batch L9851-L9897 of 47 aircraft made at Filton, the two production batches before were 78 and 49 aircraft.

So I would guess a twin turret?

Edited August 15, 2023 by Duggy

[Pappy]

5 hours ago, Duggy said:

From "The Beaufort File". on all but the earliest Beaufort's, three guns could be bought to bare on any fighter making a beam attack,it is not specific but says 1940.

L9878 is from the third production batch L9851-L9897 of 47 aircraft made at Filton, the two production batches before were 78 and 49 aircraft.

So I would guess a twin turret?

 

I agree.

 

The instructions state that L98789 had the stb'd beam/entry hatch gun mod incorporated, which would indicate that the need for greater defensive armament was identified and this was a response, which logically would mean a second gun in the turret. The 'picture' clearly shows one gun visible but I think that the left gun could be obscuring the second turret gun as it was mounted on its side and hence had a lower profile. Even if it had a single gun when the pic was taken, as Graham stated, there is no reason why it could not have had a second gun added at some later point.

 

Everyone is using phrases like I think , could, may etc but nobody really knows but it makes for a great discussion.

On balance it is possible, perhaps probable that the turret in my subject had a twin gun set-up and that will be good enough for me

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

Edited August 16, 2023 by Pappy

[brewerjerry]

23 minutes ago, Pappy said:

.......

Everyone is using phrases like I think , could, may etc but nobody really knows

.......

Hi

    This is because all the reference books themselves are vague

   there could be something on one of the beaufort squadron ORB's at Kew NA that mention them being fitted, but someone needs the spend the time to research them 

     cheers

       jerry

[Dave Swindell]

On 15/08/2023 at 04:20, Pappy said:

Well, I also doubt the antenna shadow theory. As for the second gun, it was mounted on its side i.e. rotated 90 degrees. I suspect this was because theere was insufficient room for both drum magazines if both mounted upright so the second drum would now be vertical. As such, although still parallel and the same length, it would have a lower profile and hence the stb'd gun could now obscure it when viewed from the right as in the pic in question. I agree that the turret installation would have begun life as a single gun but the operational need for greater armament would necessitate more guns.

 

It is interesting that the stb'd beam gun has not been incorporated as there is still a window in place. The destructions indicate the port gun hatch mod was added. As Dave mentioned the stb'd beam gun was a 22SQN field mod so perhaps perhaps only the port gun and twin Vickers configuration at this stage. As Graham stated, the twin Vickers mod may have happened at some point after the pic in question, so I am still leaning towards a twin gun turret in the absence of definitive proof i.e. a pic of the turret with one gun only

 

9 hours ago, Pappy said:

The instructions state that L98789 had the stb'd beam/entry hatch gun mod incorporated, which would indicate that the need for greater defensive armament was identified and this was a response, which logically would mean a second gun in the turret. The 'picture' clearly shows one gun visible but I think that the left gun could be obscuring the second turret gun as it was mounted on its side and hence had a lower profile. Even if it had a single gun when the pic was taken, as Graham stated, there is no reason why it could not have had a second gun added at some later point.

Hi Pappy

I'm wondering if you're getting port & stbd confused, or I'm misreading the above?

The Beaufort entrance hatch is on the Port (left) side of the fuselage. 22 sqn trialled the fitting of a VGO in this position as shown in the photo above (I doubt the plate is actual armour plate, rather a strengthening plate for the mounting which co-incidently may have provided some extra protection - the production mount didn't have this plate) There was no window for the stbd (right side) beam gun, when fitted, it was a solid hatch that was either open or closed. The gun itself could be moved from side to side or stowed internally if not in use (the gun swivel had a spigot that slotted into a hole in the gun mounting beam on the lower edge of the hatch) I doubt that 2 guns would be fitted here due to the extra weight, lack of room for 2 men to operate them simultaneously and lack of crew to man the extra gun - there was only the wireless op in this area of fuselage.

Regarding the turret armament, the twin VGO setup had both barrels on the same horizontal plane, the left gun (from the operators point of view) was mounted normally with the drum horizontal, and the right gun was mounted rotated 90 degrees to the right, with the drum vertical and outboard. Note this right hand gun is the original single gun configuration, see the 22 sqn photo above where it can clearly be seen mounted on it's side. See above linked turret thread for illustrations of beam gun fittings and turrets.

As to L9878 MW*R and the colour photo's, lighting is from high on the rear stbd quarter, so any shadows are thrown forward and slightly to port, so aerial mast shadows can be ruled out. The top long dark line emanating from the turret is a single VGO barrel, the bottom shorter lighter line is consitent with being the shadow of the single VGO gun barrel. The shorter darker inverted T between these two is difficult to interpret, too short for a second barrel, too dark for shadow. I can't explain this and my feeling is this is a single gun turret (or a twin turret with only one gun fitted)

The red splodge on the inner stbd wing is most likely red oxide primer, note there are similar patches midspan on both tailplane leading edges as well

[Pappy]

G'day Dave,

 

No I don't think I am confused. I was referring to the left and right guns viz the twin VGO turret combination. The pic clearly shows that the aircraft does not have the stb'd beam gun modification as trialled by 22 SQN. Unfortunately, there is no pic of the port side, but I will defer to the painting guide and install the entry hatch/port beam gun modification.

 

I agree with almost everything else and have said as much in my post but cannot concede that the pic of MWR is conclusive evidence of a single VGO turret installation. If I understand this correctly, the original single VGO gyn was horizontally mounted with the drum magazine vertical. The additional (second) VGO was added to the left side of the turret gun chassis in a vertical orientation, i.e., the drum magazine horizontal. In that case the in-flight pic of L9878 with the clearly vertically orientated VGO barrel visible would suggest that it is the twin VGO gun turret configuration. Perhaps it is my unfamiliarity with the subject, but the pic is not conclusive evidence for me. 

 

I have also just read through the Beaufort turrets link, wow what a huge boon of info and very helpful!

 

I eventually want to build an RAAF DAP Mk.VIII, so also hugely relevant. It also answered my earlier question on how the entry hatch beam gun mod worked in practice and there is a wealth of reference material that will help with the addition of details to the rear turret, I had no idea how much stuff was missing.,

 

Big ups to the BM massif,

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

 

 

[brewerjerry]

Hi

    is there a conversion for the larger  tail RAAF DAP Beaufort ?

 

    or are you scratchbuilding ?

 

     or are icm releasing it ? 

 

       cheers

          jerry

[Ed Russell]

answers in @brewerjerry format! 😃

 

not at this stage hiplanes expressed lack of interest someone else may do one

 

it would be the only way at the moment

 

icm said to me they would not