Jump to content

As a result of the close-down of the UK by the British Government last night, we have made all the Buy/Sell areas read-only until we open back up again, so please have a look at the announcement linked here.

This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Jazzy Jase

Calling Hawker Typhoon experts...

Recommended Posts

I'm building a 198 Squadron Typhoon for the D-Day group build using the 1/72 Academy kit.

I've been doing a little research and it seems the tailplanes are too small. I see that Quickboost and Airwaves make replacements. Is one better than the other?

I have also read that the lights on the leading edge of the wings were removed or covered over on rocket-carrying Typhoons of this period. Is that correct?

EDIT: Would it be covered over with a yellow leading edge strip or was that removed too?

I have found a picture of a 198 Sqn Typhoon. Can anyone tell me what colour the spinner is? Looks black to me, but it is a black and white photo!

may10.jpg

Is there anything else I need to be aware of when building this kit?

Thanks

Jason

Edited by Jazzy Jase

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got some Quickboost tailplanes and they look OK and match published drawings. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't have any problem with the Aeroclub tailplanes. Picture of Tiffies armed with RP's usually show the leading edges with the yellow strip and Medium Sea Grey undersurface made good where the lamp glazing has been replaced. MN526:TP-V is illustrated with a black spinner in the Warpaint book

peebeep

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not pick a different unit Jason?!! You have picked the most contoversial in respect of colours! The photo you have posted is one of the shots which led to 198's codes being illustrated as red and eventually gave birth to the much reproduced 'TP-F' artwork which spawned endless decals sheets. In am not going through all the arguments here (I can hear Edgar sharpening his quill pen) but basically I believe this was wishful (or willfull) thinking. The codes were restored (perhaps repainted) after having been covered by 'D-Day stripes and by whatever process ended up looking darker than 'Sky'.

Tailplanes - if serial earlier than MN307 they should be small - if MN307 or later they should be large (Tempest size).

Yes - around D-Day it seems most (never say all!) RP Typhoons had the landing lights covered with paintwork retouched to match - so yes - yellow LE stripes went over the top of the cover.

It is know that 198 Sqn used coloured spinners on some of their aircraft but although one or two specific examples are known, the colours applied to the squadron as a whole are not known.

We are in the realms of theory and guesswork here but if I was building TP-V in your photo I would go for black spinner, TP on stbd side in MSG, V in Sky (this would not have been covered by the stripes); on the port side I would have TP in front of the roundel in Sky and V behind the roundel in MSG. The small TP on the cowling in white (distemper - applied when the codes were covered by stripes) and a similar V on the port nose.

Academy kit - I am just building one at the moment. Quite accurate but for the canopy which is too high and the wrong shape - replace with an aftermarket one or one from the Heller/Airfix or even Academy Tempest. Although it matches Bentley's plans quite well, the nose looks wrong and the spinner is too small; I have sawn it off and replaced it with the Airix Tempest nose (masochists only). The u/c fits into the wing almost perpendicularly - it should rake forward nearly 18 degrees. If you don't correct that the poor old Tiffie looks as though it is standing on tip-toes. Rockets hang too far below the rails. Exhaust stubs are not good either; look for aftermarket ones to set in slots cut into the nose. Oh yes, level off all those odd raised panels (eg the cannon shell ejector slots).

Best of luck!

Chris Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "Red v everything else" controversy probably stems from a walkround, conducted by a (probably former, by now) IPMS(UK) member, Laurie Robinson, which was published in a 1970 IPMS magazine. For the moment I can't remember the individual letter, but he gave the impression (now) that the particular airframe might have been on-Squadron for some time. I've always been loth to just dismiss his article, mainly because he is so precise about some of the other details, e.g. the spinner was red, only the Squadron codes were red, with the individual letter in sky, which was repeated on the fin. Wheel wells and door interiors were silver, the area on the fuselage covered by the canopy (when closed) was black, and, (possibly the oddest anomaly of all - had this particular airframe been in for lengthy repair?) the "D-day" stripes were, in fact, the old, unequal, Typhoon stripes, and were under the wings only, while the "proper" D-day stripes adorned the fuselage. With all that attention to detail, presumably written down at the time, would he have got the colour of the Squadron codes so badly wrong? Just to help (or hinder) the discussion, it's possible to find photos of 198 Squadron Typhoons with unusually dark Squadron codes, with more normal-looking lighter individual letters.

Edgar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've got some Quickboost tailplanes and they look OK and match published drawings. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't have any problem with the Aeroclub tailplanes. Picture of Tiffies armed with RP's usually show the leading edges with the yellow strip and Medium Sea Grey undersurface made good where the lamp glazing has been replaced. MN526:TP-V is illustrated with a black spinner in the Warpaint book

peebeep

If the Aeroclub tailplanes are used it will be necessary to fair in the tailplanes with card/filler at the front and rear of the existing tailplane fairing.

Joseph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the Academy kit you will also need to remove the light fitting from the rear decking behind the cockpit (compare with photo above) as this was a feature of the prototype only.

Otherwise it's a nice little kit!

Cheers,

Rob M.

Edited by Rob M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not pick a different unit Jason?!! You have picked the most contoversial in respect of colours! The photo you have posted is one of the shots which led to 198's codes being illustrated as red and eventually gave birth to the much reproduced 'TP-F' artwork which spawned endless decals sheets.

Academy kit - I am just building one at the moment. Quite accurate but for the canopy which is too high and the wrong shape - replace with an aftermarket one or one from the Heller/Airfix or even Academy Tempest. Although it matches Bentley's plans quite well, the nose looks wrong and the spinner is too small; I have sawn it off and replaced it with the Airix Tempest nose (masochists only). The u/c fits into the wing almost perpendicularly - it should rake forward nearly 18 degrees. If you don't correct that the poor old Tiffie looks as though it is standing on tip-toes. Rockets hang too far below the rails. Exhaust stubs are not good either; look for aftermarket ones to set in slots cut into the nose. Oh yes, level off all those odd raised panels (eg the cannon shell ejector slots).

Best of luck!

Chris Thomas

Cheers Chris.

I'm sure you won't be surprised to learn that the decals I have are for TP-F. I would quite happily build amother aircraft if I could get the decals for it (bearing in mind that this it has to be for daets close to D-Day). Any ideas?

I will order the quickboost Tailplanes, but I don't think I will go as far as changing the exhasts and canopy this time around. Altering the other things I will do as part of construction.

If the Aeroclub tailplanes are used it will be necessary to fair in the tailplanes with card/filler at the front and rear of the existing tailplane fairing.

Joseph

What about the airwaves ones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incidentally, TP-F (RB222) is a completely ficticious scheme!

RB222 was never on charge with 198 Sqn (I have this from the 198 Sqn Association).

The aircraft actually served with 183 Sqn as HF-K.

This scheme originates from artwork for the cover of a book on the Typhoon produced in the 1960's.

For ideas for other schemes, I can't recommend the 2nd TAF books by Christopher Shores and Chris Thomas highly enough!

Volume 1 covers D-Day through to Falaise.

Cheers,

Rob M.

Edited by Rob M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What about the airwaves ones?

The Tempest tailplanes are larger, including the chord at the root, so whichever you use they will need to be faired in.

peebeep

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris hints at it, but the best improvement on the Academy Typhoon is to remove the brick-like stiffening plates on the rear fuselage an dthe other enlarged raised detail

Edited by Dave Fleming

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got a couple of the Academy kits in the stash, and some decals on the way, so I'm making notes!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've got a couple of the Academy kits in the stash, and some decals on the way, so I'm making notes!

Which decals did you order? I can only find the Xtradecals set.

I've a good mind to make the aircraft (TP-V) from the photo at the top of the thread. I've got some 8inch black letter decals for the serial number, so that's not a problem. I could spray the squadron codes if I made some masks. "T" and "V" would be easy. "P" a little trickier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which decals did you order? I can only find the Xtradecals set.

I've been offered an out-of-print set by ADS Decals, but I don't know what's on it yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've been offered an out-of-print set by ADS Decals, but I don't know what's on it yet.

Ah, fair enough.

Thinking about it, I'm quite happy to make any Typhoon that took part on or around D-Day. So is all I need to do is find an aircraft that had standard Sky squadron codes and no fancy markings and then buy some sky decals.

I'm sure someone on here can point me in the direction of an aircaft that I can build? Photos are always useful too.

Edited by Jazzy Jase

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chris hints at it, but the best improvement on the Academy Typhoon is to remove the brick-like stiffening plates on the rear fuselage an dthe other enlarged raised detail

Couldn't agree more. I have some of those plates in my garage - attached to a piece of wreckage from Normandy. They are approx 1mm thick! 1/72? forget it. They do show up over a Sky band though - and would best be represented by a decal.

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The "Red v everything else" controversy probably stems from a walkround, conducted by a (probably former, by now) IPMS(UK) member, Laurie Robinson, which was published in a 1970 IPMS magazine. For the moment I can't remember the individual letter, but he gave the impression (now) that the particular airframe might have been on-Squadron for some time. I've always been loth to just dismiss his article, mainly because he is so precise about some of the other details, e.g. the spinner was red, only the Squadron codes were red, with the individual letter in sky, which was repeated on the fin. Wheel wells and door interiors were silver, the area on the fuselage covered by the canopy (when closed) was black, and, (possibly the oddest anomaly of all - had this particular airframe been in for lengthy repair?) the "D-day" stripes were, in fact, the old, unequal, Typhoon stripes, and were under the wings only, while the "proper" D-day stripes adorned the fuselage. With all that attention to detail, presumably written down at the time, would he have got the colour of the Squadron codes so badly wrong? Just to help (or hinder) the discussion, it's possible to find photos of 198 Squadron Typhoons with unusually dark Squadron codes, with more normal-looking lighter individual letters.

Edgar

Time you looked at the IPMS mag (Feb 1970) again Edgar. The caption to the photo of TP-E MN882 thanks Laurie Robinson for the photo and information quoted; nowhere does it say he performed a 'walkaround' or was even there. He may have been of course - but the info in the caption has the hallmarks of the editor - the late Bob Jones. The bit about 'no AEAF stripes at any time on these Typhoons, but they did retain their original black/white special i/d bands' is bunkum. The aircraft in the photo obviously has standard D-Day stripes under the wings, although a shadow could mislead you into thinking they were the old 'i/d' stripes. In fact the Typhoon in the photo did not leave Gloster's production line until 4 months after the 'i/d bands' (which were factory applied had been dispensed with (7 Feb 44). The 'Normandy red letters and i/d bands' seems to have originated with Profile 81 which was published in 1966.

The aircraft in the IPMS mag photo (which has appeared elsewhere, eg in the original and revised 2nd TAF books) shows TP-E MN882 which was Sqn Ldr Paul Ezanno's aircraft. He has stated that it did not have red letters or red spinner. I did see a posting on another site, Edgar, in which you dismissed this, as he was not with 198 until August 1944 (which I assume came from Rawlings' 'Fighter Squadrons' ). In fact Ezanno took over command of the squadron when Sqn Ldr Davies was killed on 22 June 44, and he had already been with the squadron for some weeks as a supernumarary. Just goes to show you trust everything you read ...

Incidentally, the aircraft taxying towards the camera in the photo at the top of this thread is TP-E MN882; the 'E' on the nose clearly visible in an original print..

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have looked, again, at the magazine article, and realise that there were some items that I'd missed, like the whole code being repeated on the fin, with "TP" in 3", and "E" in 6" letters, with the "E" repeated either side of the spinner, under fuselage white stripes overpainted in Sea Grey Medium. Then there's also the item about the rockets being black, with the rear of the fins painted white to show up better on cine film.

That sounds like the sort of information only a member of the Squadron might have, and, as far as I know, Bob Jones was not on a Typhoon Squadron, most of his photos being of Spitfires (and 41 Squadron, at that.)

I've also learnt not to always trust the word of pilots; Peter Cooke was asked to build a late-war Beaufighter, and the former pilot was adamant that the codes were grey, even though there are photos of the Squadron's aircraft, in colour, and the codes were red.

Edgar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have looked, again, at the magazine article, and realise that there were some items that I'd missed, like the whole code being repeated on the fin, with "TP" in 3", and "E" in 6" letters, with the "E" repeated either side of the spinner, under fuselage white stripes overpainted in Sea Grey Medium. Then there's also the item about the rockets being black, with the rear of the fins painted white to show up better on cine film.

That sounds like the sort of information only a member of the Squadron might have, and, as far as I know, Bob Jones was not on a Typhoon Squadron, most of his photos being of Spitfires (and 41 Squadron, at that.)

I've also learnt not to always trust the word of pilots; Peter Cooke was asked to build a late-war Beaufighter, and the former pilot was adamant that the codes were grey, even though there are photos of the Squadron's aircraft, in colour, and the codes were red.

Edgar

"with the 'E' repeated either side of the spinner" ... you'd think so, looking at the photo wouldn't you? but I have two photos from the front which show it was only present on the starboard side.

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I realise that I'm held in some contempt, in some circles (not you, Chris,) for my views on this sort of thing, but I'm increasingly concerned about the apparently growing trend for the view that "It shouldn't have happened, so it didn't." Either we have a man who made notes of what he saw (and, from those notes, there's a suspicion he might have actually been involved in the painting,) or we have a man who, for some (malicious?) reason, writes down a whole pack of lies, in a magazine with a circulation of only around 1000. To what purpose?

The plain fact, of course, is that I don't know, but, as the writer is probably dead, by now, I feel that someone has to defend him, and, how about this for a radical thought; instead of just airily dismissing his evidence, why not look for a reason, or two, that he might have been right?

Edgar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I realise that I'm held in some contempt, in some circles (not you, Chris,) for my views on this sort of thing, but I'm increasingly concerned about the apparently growing trend for the view that "It shouldn't have happened, so it didn't." Either we have a man who made notes of what he saw (and, from those notes, there's a suspicion he might have actually been involved in the painting,) or we have a man who, for some (malicious?) reason, writes down a whole pack of lies, in a magazine with a circulation of only around 1000. To what purpose?

The plain fact, of course, is that I don't know, but, as the writer is probably dead, by now, I feel that someone has to defend him, and, how about this for a radical thought; instead of just airily dismissing his evidence, why not look for a reason, or two, that he might have been right?

Edgar

I'm afraid I spent a lot of years doing just what you suggest in your last sentence. It was only after meeting and talking to a number of pilots and groundcrew, dating and examining closely original prints of photos of 198's machines, that I drew the conclusions I present above. I do not see how Mr Robinson leaps from photo-donor to Typhoon painter. Enthusiasts are a strange bunch: an example - there was a letter in Airfix Mag after it used a colour photo of Typhoon HH-N on the cover (the first time it appeared in print). It was an awful reproduction and a letter was published quoting 'notes from a friends father who was there - very convincing detail - that explained various markings and idetified the part obscured serial. Subsequent research has shown much of the letter was fabrication, including the serial. Why bother? Beyond you and I Edgar but people do it. I hereby close by end of this debate. Whadya mean 'about time'!?

CT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Academy kit - I am just building one at the moment. Quite accurate but for the canopy which is too high and the wrong shape - replace with an aftermarket one or one from the Heller/Airfix or even Academy Tempest. Although it matches Bentley's plans quite well, the nose looks wrong and the spinner is too small; I have sawn it off and replaced it with the Airix Tempest nose (masochists only). The u/c fits into the wing almost perpendicularly - it should rake forward nearly 18 degrees. If you don't correct that the poor old Tiffie looks as though it is standing on tip-toes. Rockets hang too far below the rails. Exhaust stubs are not good either; look for aftermarket ones to set in slots cut into the nose. Oh yes, level off all those odd raised panels (eg the cannon shell ejector slots).

Best of luck!

Chris Thomas

Interesting! Reading this awakens a long-suppressed desire to build a decent car-door Typhoon in 1/72. Grafting an Airfix Tempest nose onto the Academy Typhoon sounds minor compared to some of the desperate methods I've tried in the past - how about Frog wings on a heavily-modified Matchbox Tempest Mk VI fuselage? However, those were pre-Academy-kit days. One serious question, though: What are you going to use for wheels? To my eye, one of the outstanding features of the "Tiffie" is those big balloon tires on relatively small-looking five spoke wheels. I have at least one example of every 1/72 Typhoon kit ever made, as well as the Aeroclub white metal wheels, and none of them gets this detail even close, as I recall. The closest I could ever come was to adapt a pair of 1/48 resin wheels for the early Spitfire (True Details #46017, as a matter of fact - I went to the basement and dug out an old project to check!). These are closer to being right than the Academy kit wheels, but still not quite there. Do you have any suggestions? Thanks in advance!

John

Share this post


Link to post
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...