Seafire FR.46 - LA546 camouflage scheme ?

[Homebee]

I'm building the Airfix 1/48th Supermarine Seafire FR.46/.47.

I'd like to build her as the Seafire Mk.46 LA546, 900/LM, RNAS Lossiemouth Station Flight, as flown by Capt. Casper John in early 1948.

I've the Model Alliance decal sheet MA-48118

http://www.theaviationworkshop.co.uk/decal...mier/MA-118.php

The instructions suggest EDSG for the uppersurfaces and Sky for the undersurfaces.

But some other sources suggest the uppersurfaces of this aircraft were camouflaged EDSG/Dark Slate Grey. So what ????

And what about the camera fuselage port-holes of this bird at Lossiemouth in 1948? Sealed or not?

Here are some pics of my WIP

Cockpit: Aires, Cowling and Exhaust: Quickboost - the exhausts doesn't look of the right type (fishtails instead of tubulars)??? A Spitfire specialist is required.

V.P.

Edited July 18, 2012 by Homebee

[Test Graham]

Lacking a photo, for the Mk.46 and 1948, I'd go with the single colour EDSG on top. That would be consistent with other usage in the period.

[rod mcq]

LA456 features on page 31 of the companion book On Target Profile No. 5 Seafire Mk.1b to Mk.47 and they quote 2 reference sources

1. Wing of Fame Vol 16 page 84

2. Squadrons of the FAA by Ray Sturtivant, Air Britain Publns. 1984.

There is a photo of LA456 in Wings of Fame and the uppersurfaces looks to be just EDSG. There does not appear to be any camera port visible

[andym]

Can I suggest that you remove the two wedge shaped "lumps" on wings above the flaps. If flaps are up scribe in a similar rectangle shape, it is in fact a door, or if flaps are down you'll have to fabricate the door and flap linkage which pushes through as this is what the lumps are supposed to represent. I simply left the flaps up and scribed in a new door after removing lumps.

HTH

Andy

P.S. Can anyone confirm that the FR.46 had the same enlarged flaps as FR.47?

Edited May 26, 2009 by andym

[Miggers]

Make yourself a member and ask your questions here:

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=90811

Mark12 is the man who can give all the answers you need on LA546.

Mark

[Homebee]

Thanks for your useful informations guys!

Source Mark12 - http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthrea...0811&page=2

- sealed camera holes

- tubular exhausts

- no arresting hook?? Quite logical as she was land based.

- EDSG/Sky or EDSG-Slate Grey/Sky? Most probably EDSG/Sky.

WIP

Vacu form canopy OK

It's Klear time!

V.P.

Edited July 18, 2012 by Homebee

[Doug Rogers]

She's looking good Homebee, I've got a similar scheme to do a MkXVII in as well only that one is in two tone, and has yellow horizontal control surfaces.

[Homebee]

Decals are OK, weathering is now in progress

V.P.

-----------------------

FLY NAVY & RAF

Edited July 18, 2012 by Homebee

[Mike]

Fabulous paintjob there chap One thing I'd say is that the underside isn't dirty enough. Spits, Seafires & their ilk used to leak oil & such from their undersides like a tap, so it would have been rather mucky

[Edgar]

While true for Merlins, it wasn't as bad with Griffons, since a lot of the oil runs were contained inside the crankcase. Merlins were so bad, they tried painting them white, post-war, to make inspection for leaks easier, but eventually found that leaving them unpainted was a better option.

Edgar

[thx6667]

Thread resurrection time!

Some references indicate the fuselage codes had a black outline, I've enlarged that pic (and a slightly better one) and played in Photoshop but nothing seems to be suggesting a black outline, they seem consistent with the tail code. Also, references to the fuselage code and tail "LM" code being around 12 inches, but both are larger than the red centre of the roundel (12 inches on a 36 inch roundel) so I'm guessing around 14 inches?

No sign of camera port either, can only imagine this was either replaced with a plain hatch or painted over, presumably the same for the underside?

[Test Graham]

In the latest work on the Seafire, it is claimed that no aircraft was ever painted like this, and that it is a misunderstanding of the Temperate Sea Scheme. In b+w photos if is often difficult to distinguish the two colours of the TSS apart, especially when fresh and in postwar gloss finish. However, the low demarcation EDSG over Sky scheme was the official standard for about a year, at the time the Mk.46 was being produced. High quality photos do exist which show no sign of two colours on the uppersurface, and a very dark finish. EDSG is very dark when new but fades quite rapidly.

In my opinion, it is most likely (pretty well certain, with some hesitation over potential repaints) that TSS was used on all previous Seafires, but the Mk.46 (and prototype Mk.47) were different.

[Col.]

Lovely work Homebee. Did you ever get her finished?

Since we are on the subject of that Lossiemouth based Seafire does anyone know of information or photos related to any other Seafires operated from Lossie/HMS Fulmar? Got this kit in the stash and would like to model a machine from my 'home' station other than LA546.

[kspriss]

fine work there mate..just as an aside whats the actual differences between the 46 and 47?..dont know much about spits and as ive got one of these id like to know if ive messed it up completely

steve

<edited to correct poor spelling...finger faster than brain today>

Edited August 23, 2011 by kspriss

[Test Graham]

LA546 appears to have been the only Mk.46 based at Lossiemouth. Sorry.

The main differences (from memory) would be that the Mk.47 had folding wings and an extended carburettor fairing under the nose. It was sometimes seen with underwing slipper tanks - I don't know it they could be used by the Mk.46 or not.

[kspriss]

The main differences (from memory) would be that the Mk.47 had folding wings and an extended carburettor fairing under the nose. It was sometimes seen with underwing slipper tanks - I don't know it they could be used by the Mk.46 or not.

ahh right, cheers...the airfix kit has a contra prop and a 5 blade prop...were they seen on both marks?

steve

[Enzo the Magnificent]

Wow! You got the Aires cockpit to fit!

You did much better than me. When I tried it, I had to remove so much plastic that the fuselage halves collapsed.

[Seahawk]

In the latest work on the Seafire, it is claimed that no aircraft was ever painted like this, and that it is a misunderstanding of the Temperate Sea Scheme. ..... However, the low demarcation EDSG over Sky scheme was the official standard for about a year, ...

By the "latest work on the Seafire" do you mean the From The Cockpit book?

Can you provide dates even approximate for when the low demarcation EDSG over Sky scheme was in effect please?

[Test Graham]

Yes. The comment is from "Winkle" Brown, I believe.

I have published these dates recently, so knew just where to go to find them again......except they weren't there. However, with a bit of digging the low demarcation EDSG over Sky scheme was introduced from 1st October 1946, only for new aircraft or when the paint scheme needed replacing. There was a new set of instructions for the RAF introduced on 15 May 1947, and it is suggested that the FAA went to the high demarcation at the same time. Sources, the two classic Harleyford books. I thought I had a more precise date, perhaps slightly later, but it's not to hand.

[Colin @ Freightdog Models]

There is a colour photo of the remains of LA546 on the key forum here. Not sure if it helps, but looks like a great model either way.

Colin

[thx6667]

While I don't doubt Eric Brown beleives that statement, there's a few things which i'm still trying to square off with regard to the overall low-demarcation EDSG uppers on some 46s (and XVIIs).

Having gone through the FAA museums archiives, one one thing that did strike me - the usual caveats over films stocks and filters in place - was that in the photos of the XVIIs in the EDSG/DSLG low-demarcation scheme, the finish is distinctly glossy and the contrast between the camouflage demarcations is high. Once the finishes start to become matt and worn, the colours start to become indistinct. Now I've seen photos of 46s (and some 47s) fresh in service, with nice glossy finishes in the the low demarcation scheme, and there just isn't the same contrast as with the XVIIs, which given they are both supposed to be in the same scheme TSS scheme is the interesting point. My instinct is that part of the change over to a single upper surface colour was because the TSS scheme almost weathered to such anyway.

When Dick Ward did his researches for the Airfix Seafire schemes in 1996, he was very thorough and in this regard I'm tempted to weigh up the conclusions of someone for whom camouflage and markings is their expertise against Eric Brown who, with all due respect, isn't.

The lack of quality colour photos of late-marque Seafires leaves it a bit of a (dark slate) grey area, there were other low-demarcations schemes with just EDSG on top (Sea Fury), its not unreasonable to imagine that at least during one stage the Seafire's were perhaps finished thus. Perhaps.

Edited August 23, 2011 by Jonathan Mock

[Col.]

LA546 appears to have been the only Mk.46 based at Lossiemouth. Sorry.

Thanks for letting me know Graham. Guess I'll need to track down a set of those markings now. Know there was Mk.17s based there post-war after a conversation with an old pilot, although never found any other evidence of serials or such like, so assumed they were replaced by 46s.

[Seahawk]

Yes. The comment is from "Winkle" Brown, I believe.

I have published these dates recently, so knew just where to go to find them again......except they weren't there. However, with a bit of digging the low demarcation EDSG over Sky scheme was introduced from 1st October 1946, only for new aircraft or when the paint scheme needed replacing. There was a new set of instructions for the RAF introduced on 15 May 1947, and it is suggested that the FAA went to the high demarcation at the same time. Sources, the two classic Harleyford books. I thought I had a more precise date, perhaps slightly later, but it's not to hand.

Many thanks for answers and sources.

[thx6667]

Some of the Charles Brown photos of early FR.47s doing carrier deck landings on Illustrious in May 1947 would appear to be quite definitely one (glossy) colour on top, low demarcation (some with B roundels on uppers), presumably a carry over of the FR.46 scheme. Same goes for some close up pics where the scheme is very glossy and seemingly a single colour.

[Test Graham]

Jonathan has expressed the case well. I remember one relevant snippet from an Ian Huntley article in SAM. He was writing about Fireflies coming back from the British Pacific Fleet, and stated that some were only EDSG on the uppersurfaces. I suspect he then went on to discuss the early post-war FAA schemes, but I'm travelling today so don't have the time to look it up. Sorry about that.