More Interesting Spitfires with Type 'B' roundels

[Dave Fleming]

While looking for something else, I found these two pics. At first, it looked straight forward - High altitude fighter scheme but look at the second picture

http://cas.awm.gov.au/item/MEA1581

http://cas.awm.gov.au/item/MEA1580

'C' roundels underneath, and it looks like the colours are overall the same - MSG overall?

[Andrew Jones]

While looking for something else, I found these two pics. At first, it looked straight forward - High altitude fighter scheme but look at the second picture

http://cas.awm.gov.au/item/MEA1581

http://cas.awm.gov.au/item/MEA1580

'C' roundels underneath, and it looks like the colours are overall the same - MSG overall?

PRU Pink ?

[Giorgio N]

Very interesting subject in the second picture !

I noticed the tank looks much darker. Wonder if this could have been in azure or light mediterranean blue from some "desert" stock, or it's in PRU blue. The rest of the plane then looks very light wonder if some conclusion can be drawn analysing the contrast with the darker tank.

The plane in the first picture would seem to be in the High Altitude scheme, as the lower engine cowling does show contrast with the rest of the upper surfaces. Interestingly this plane has a light coloured tank, medium sea grey ?

The second plane in line in the first picture also seem to have a C type fuselage roundel while retaning a red/blue fin flash....

[Test Graham]

The top picture has been presented on the internet before, several times on Hyperscale, IIRC. It is an Australian unit defending the Nile Delta with Mk.IXs in Day Fighter scheme, with a number of interesting details. Excuse me if I forget which: I recommend a search on Hyperscale. One of the threads was about the Aboukir filter - rare on Mk.IXs.

[Dave Fleming]

The top picture has been presented on the internet before, several times on Hyperscale, IIRC. It is an Australian unit defending the Nile Delta with Mk.IXs in Day Fighter scheme, with a number of interesting details. Excuse me if I forget which: I recommend a search on Hyperscale. One of the threads was about the Aboukir filter - rare on Mk.IXs.

It's 451 according to the caption. I did wonder if the second shot shows an aircraft in transition between the DFS and the High altitude scheme.

Off to search HS!!

[brewerjerry]

Hi

Thanks for posting the link to the photos, very interesting,

I wish the UK museum would do something similar with their archive collections........

It still seems there are still many non standard schemes out there, yet to be modelled.

cheers

Jerry

[Edgar]

When the high-altitude scheme was introduced, in early June, 1943, it wasn't made retrospective, so any airframe, spanning that date, could have been painted, or not, depending on the C.O.

Edgar

[Steve in Ottawa]

Neat photos and tantalizing markings conflicts; it'd be nice to see these shots in better detail. I clicked further through the links in the photos and got to the 'Order a Copy' page. I just about fainted when I saw the prices for digital copies of the museum's images!

I can't imagine who's ordering copies of any images at these rates.

Edited June 23, 2010 by Steve in Ottawa

[PhilHoff]

Hello,

There are bigger versions of these pictures visible on the internet. I think I saw them on a czech forum, for example. These are very interesting Spitfires.

On the first picture, the Spitfire in the foreground is coded BQ-S, serial MA 466. This is a Spitfire MkIX with a C wing and an Aboukir filter. The camouflage appears to be an overall light color (medium sea grey?), or could be bicolor (high altitude scheme ?), but I think that the difference between the upper and under surfaces could be caused by the shadow of the plane, with the sun almost directly upper it. The spinner is a solid darker color, perhaps red. The code appears to be white with a thin black border. Type B fuselage roundel and fin flash. The wing roundels are not clearly visible on this picture.

The Spit on the second picture is BQ-E, serial MH 324, also a Mk IX with an Aboukir filter. I believe this is the same plane appearing just behind BQ-S on the first picture. The camouflage is clearly an overall light color, including the spinner. Also type C wing, but without the stubs on the outboard cannon position. The code appears to be white, without border, and the roundels appear to be of type C (fuselage and underwing at least), with a type B fin flash.

It is also interesting to note that there is a similar paint patch on the rudder of several planes on the first picture (also visible on BQ-E on the second picture). Gas detection patch?

I hope that my descriptions are understandable, since english is not my mother tongue.

Greetings from sunny Switzerland (at least il was the case today...)

Philippe

[Ed Russell]

Your information is correct - Spitfire IX, BQ-E MH324, Corsica 1944. It is in the High Altitude Fighter Scheme (MSG/PRU Blue). There is a bit of contrast under the nose along the panel line. Thanks to Steve Mackenzie for confirming this. The patch on the rudder is more clearly visible in other photos (particularly MA486 BQ-S) and may well be the gas detection paint alluded to. If so, it solves a long-standing mystery about this picture. With no disruptive pattern to the camouflage it makes sense that the splotch was painted as an approximate square on aircraft in the High Altitude Fighter Scheme.

The Spit on the second picture is BQ-E, serial MH 324, also a Mk IX with an Aboukir filter. I believe this is the same plane appearing just behind BQ-S on the first picture. The camouflage is clearly an overall light color, including the spinner. Also type C wing, but without the stubs on the outboard cannon position. The code appears to be white, without border, and the roundels appear to be of type C (fuselage and underwing at least), with a type B fin flash.

It is also interesting to note that there is a similar paint patch on the rudder of several planes on the first picture (also visible on BQ-E on the second picture). Gas detection patch?

[Steven Eisenman]

Put away your bi-focals...

451 Squadron, Corsica 1944.

Edited June 25, 2010 by Steven Eisenman

[Edgar]

Thank you, Steven, for some clarity; I fear, gentlemen, you're allowing your heart to rule your head (and eyes.) Visible, now, is a "something" at the rudder's trailing edge, possibly a second light (Gawd know's what for, though.) This would mean that the area is simply a repair patch, probably red-doped, where the fabric has been replaced after the work.

However you consider it, gas detection paint doesn't fit, since "High Altitude Scheme" = 20-30,000', and gas was designed to roll along the ground, dropping into trenches, etc., not sail along 4 miles high. All of the gas patches, that I've seen, are visible from the cockpit (or mid-upper turret, on bombers,) and I fail to see what use it would be on the rudder, where only groundcrew can see it. If the airfield has been attacked, the groundcrew would be fully aware, and one would hope that a warning would have been radioed to the pilot. If it wasn't, and everyone was immobilised, it wouldn't help the pilot, much, to get out into the middle of a contaminated area (and that includes the ground, not just the air.)

Edgar

[Dave Fleming]

Thank you, Steven, for some clarity; I fear, gentlemen, you're allowing your heart to rule your head (and eyes.) Visible, now, is a "something" at the rudder's trailing edge, possibly a second light (Gawd know's what for, though.) This would mean that the area is simply a repair patch, probably red-doped, where the fabric has been replaced after the work.

However you consider it, gas detection paint doesn't fit, since "High Altitude Scheme" = 20-30,000', and gas was designed to roll along the ground, dropping into trenches, etc., not sail along 4 miles high. All of the gas patches, that I've seen, are visible from the cockpit (or mid-upper turret, on bombers,) and I fail to see what use it would be on the rudder, where only groundcrew can see it. If the airfield has been attacked, the groundcrew would be fully aware, and one would hope that a warning would have been radioed to the pilot. If it wasn't, and everyone was immobilised, it wouldn't help the pilot, much, to get out into the middle of a contaminated area (and that includes the ground, not just the air.)

Edgar

I must admit to agreeing with Edgar here. I think these are repair patches.

Still remain to be convinced that the splotches seen on Spitfies and Mustangs aren't Gas detection paint though! The Italias had a history of using gas in the 1930s, I'm sure it was the late Ian Huntley that published that GD paint became availble in camo colours.

[Super Aereo]

I'd agree with the repair patches on those particular Spitfires.

Mind you, the only real danger from mustard gas in Italy seems to have been from Allied stocks, rather than from any the Regio Esercito might still have held...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Raid_on_Bari

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harvey_(ship)

[Terry McGrady]

I must admit to agreeing with Edgar here. I think these are repair patches.

Still remain to be convinced that the splotches seen on Spitfies and Mustangs aren't Gas detection paint though! The Italias had a history of using gas in the 1930s, I'm sure it was the late Ian Huntley that published that GD paint became availble in camo colours.

Yes Dave ,

It's strange that those " repair" patches are in exactly the same place on each A/C .Whether they are " Gas Detection " patches is another matter

Regards

Terry

[Ed Russell]

It would be nice to have identified those patches but it may never be known what they really are. A few thoughts.....

1. The position is no less visible to the pilot than the patches on the rear spine (or the Mustang rudder)

2. You may well be right about repairs but it seems a rather large patch for a small 'light' if that's what it is. I suppose there might be a large area required to re-balance the rudder? Presumably there is (was?) a mod diagram? I hate to give you yet another diagram to look for, but it would be nice...... (:>) You do seem to find or have a lot of interesting and worthwhile stuff....

3. The responsible authorities probably appreciated that while mustard gas is designed to be delivered as a cloud at low altitude, the circumstances at Bari - massive explosions projecting it high into the atmosphere - meant that due to its non-volatile condensate and microdroplet nature it would hang around for a long time at unknown heights.

4. In any event, despite 451's having some of its Spitfires in HA camouflage, that wasn't their main task - here's a quote from a comtemporary pilot's story -

I then flew to Corsica and 451 Squadron which was now under the command of the U.S. Tactical Air force who were flying "Liberator" bombers which were attacking bridges being used by the retreating Germans.

For the next 4 months we escorted them to their targets and as well our job was to do low level strafing on all forms of transport. In that period we destroyed or damaged 427 trucks including troop transports, 7 locomotives and 7 ships attacked. We also shot down 12 aircraft and destroyed many on the ground

Edited May 24, 2011 by Ed Russell

[Seahawk]

Are these aircraft fitted with Aboukir filters or is it just the early carburettor air intake?

I think it's time an enlightened trader gave us transfers for these aircraft. The High Altitude scheme looks very fetching on Spitfires and the codes are unusual in style, colour and outlining. Are you listening, Mr Freightdog? 1/72 please!

Nick

[Ed Russell]

The only roundels here aren't B-type but this Spitfire has a few things in common with the others.

1. High Altitude Fighter scheme although 5 FS seemed to also be doing low-level and ground attack tasks

2. Based in Corsica and Italy 1943-1944

3. Description of "mustard coloured" gas detection patch.

[Steven Eisenman]

The light colored patch on the spine is also been said to be a gas detection patch. But notice that these patches are light in color.

What are those squares above the "M". Could be nothing more than a patch over where a round went through the spine.

Edited June 27, 2010 by Steven Eisenman

[Edgar]

In the top print, the negative has been reversed, so that MX reads XM (XM was used by 182 Squadron,) which means that the patches should both be on the starboard side, and that's exactly where the exit hole, for the Plessey (upward-firing) recognition device, was set. That's another reason for my scepticism over these "gas detection patches"; why site them exactly where the recognition device is placed?

Edgar

Edited June 27, 2010 by Edgar

[Steven Eisenman]

In the top print, the negative has been reversed, so that MX reads XM (XM was used by 182 Squadron,) which means that the patches should both be on the starboard side, and that's exactly where the exit hole, for the Plessey (upward-firing) recognition device, was set. That's another reason for my scepticism over these "gas detection patches"; why site them exactly where the recognition device is placed?

Edgar

But what are those odd shaped light colored marking on the spine in front of the fuselage band on all the Spitfires of 253 Squadron?

Picture now in correct position.

Edited June 27, 2010 by Steven Eisenman

[Dave Fleming]

In the top print, the negative has been reversed, so that MX reads XM (XM was used by 182 Squadron,) which means that the patches should both be on the starboard side, and that's exactly where the exit hole, for the Plessey (upward-firing) recognition device, was set. That's another reason for my scepticism over these "gas detection patches"; why site them exactly where the recognition device is placed?

Edgar

The ones on the 253 aircraft seem further back than the one on the US aircraft (Which I'd agree with you and Steve re being a repair patch)

[Edgar]

Hypothesis = guesswork, which I'm not very keen on, but the 451 Squadron a/c appear to have no recognition device "holes," which indicates that they might have been removed (and plated over?) So, what if 253's a/c also had the device removed, and the resultant area was covered by a metal patch, rather than fabric, with the bottom part brought down far enough for the rivets to go onto the longeron, which runs from the bottom edge of the cockpit transparency back to the transport joint? Far-fetched? Possibly, but any more far-fetched than gas patches where the pilot can't see it?

Edgar

Edited June 27, 2010 by Edgar

[Test Graham]

But the ground crew can. The pilot flies the Spitfire by himself, but is not uniquely responsible for it. I'm not clear just what the pilot could actually do in the air should he see the patch change colour, as opposed to what the ground crew would have to do should he land with it changed.

However, if the later years did see the introduction of camouflage shades of gas-detector paint, there'd be no need for this obvious patch.

[Edgar]

The pilot get outs, on the port side; on the Mk.V the groundcrew were not permitted to climb on the starboard wing, so would approach from, and climb up on, the port side. So what's the point of putting a warning patch on the starboard side? And why put it slap over the recognition device, where it will be scorched, or otherwise contaminated if it's fired?

Edgar