SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

RAF 100th Anniversay GB

85460 views
3404 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Monday, January 29, 2018 4:49 PM

Coming on nicely there AA.

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    March 2017
Posted by Armor_Aficionado on Sunday, January 28, 2018 10:26 AM

Finally got some time to sit down and get some real work done on the last major element of my Battle of Britain diorama: the Airfix 1/48 Hurricane Mk. I.  Got a lot done on the cockpit today:

https://pin.it/pxi5vpwb76gnwo

 

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Saturday, January 27, 2018 3:33 PM

Will be a pleasure to have you on board and looking forward to seeing the Gladiator.

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    October 2009
  • From: Worcester, England.
Posted by aeroplanegripper on Saturday, January 27, 2018 3:29 PM

Thank you Bish for your kind comments, as soon as the Commonwealth GB is announced you can count me in mate. I promise it wont be a Spit! The Gladiator was started today.

 

Stickpusher,Jack, Kamera, Greg, BD and Nick, thanks for the kind words.

 

Best Regards

Mark

"bis vivit qui bene vivit"

 

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • From: Sonora Desert
Posted by stikpusher on Thursday, January 25, 2018 9:21 PM

EBergerud
I wish someone would write an analytical history of camo in WWII. I've got a very complete book on USAAF markings/camo that has chapter/verse on every change. But there's little explanation as to why the change was made. Why did the USAAF decide to call for a whole range of new colors in 1943 (including a new olive drab) and three months later decide they didn't want camo at all for most planes?  
 

 

Take a look at Dana Bell’s ”Air Force Colors” series for the full explanation. In a nutshell the 1943 colors were a result of standardization across the board for Army and Navy Aircraft colors, hence the new “ANA” prefix to the color numbers. As well as for colors to be used on Lend Lease Aircraft. Equivelants were no longer to be used, rather new ANA paints would substitute for the US made RAF/RN FAA Colors. It was not just a USAAF decision. And they were not happy with Olive Drab ANA 319, which  based off of the Army Ground Forces shade #8, and not off of Dark Olive Drab 41.

As far as the decision to go to bare metal, that was a result of tests done where it was determined that unpainted craft saved weight, production time, and allowed for higher (not much though in actuality) airspeeds. As opposed to camouflags value of the paint. Theater and unit commanders were allowed to apply camouflage paints in theater if desired. Certain AAF types continued to be produced in camouflage paint. And many others were camouflage painted at their user units. All this after the official discontinuation of camo paint for fighters, bombers, and attack types.

 

F is for FIRE, That burns down the whole town!

U is for URANIUM... BOMBS!

N is for NO SURVIVORS...

       - Plankton

LSM

 

  • Member since
    April 2006
  • From: ON, Canada
Posted by jgeratic on Thursday, January 25, 2018 8:46 PM

Eric, I know what you mean, it would be great if everything could be under one book cover.   I found this one to be pretty good for RAF fighters of WW2:

Also found this a while ago for Coastal Command, but it sort of overlaps with fighters and have referred to it from time to time;

http://hrmtech.com/SIG/articles/coastal_cam.asp

Still though with the Typhoon discussed above, being part of 2nd Tac (they took it upon themselves to add the yellow rings to the wing insignia), it required separate searches.  Chris Thomas is a very good researcher/author with this latter subject.  Here is one of his response in person on another forum:

http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/archive/index.php?t-14808.html

Anyhow, the addition of the yellow outer ring on RAF roundels is just an extension of the idea already implemented on the fuselage roundels.  It was to make the insignia more noticeable on an otherwise camouflaged surface.  

regards,

Jack

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Berkeley CA/St. Paul MN
Posted by EBergerud on Thursday, January 25, 2018 5:32 PM
A yellow circle to protect against friendly fire? Not quibbling with your data, but that was no easy chore. I suppose it made sense to remove the red circle inside the USN white star in the Pacific: suppose it looked a bit like a meatball. I wish someone would write an analytical history of camo in WWII. I've got a very complete book on USAAF markings/camo that has chapter/verse on every change. But there's little explanation as to why the change was made. Why did the USAAF decide to call for a whole range of new colors in 1943 (including a new olive drab) and three months later decide they didn't want camo at all for most planes? The Brits changed whole schemes - what was the reason why? Friendly fire certainly motivated the application of "invasion stripes" (some apparently dark green instead of black) in June 44. The 9th AF also tried to use P-38s for ground attack close to the US beaches (Jugs a little inland) because everyone would know a P-38, right? Wrong in many cases. The itch to pull triggers overwhelmed aircraft recognition training throughout the war. (Of course, friendly ground troops were often strafed by their own planes.) But details will often be lacking. There's a lot of information about WWII that's simply not there at all. I worked on both WWII and Vietnam - the US was breaking in computers during Vietnam and the records available dwarf in quantity those created by WWII typewriters. Of course megatons of information is now sitting in huge warehouses where it will probably never be disturbed - think of it as a digital way to destroy data. Eric

 

A model boat is much cheaper than a real one and won't sink with you in it.

  • Member since
    November 2009
  • From: SW Virginia
Posted by Gamera on Thursday, January 25, 2018 2:07 PM

Thanks Jack, guess they just kept the yellow on there after the war ended. 

"I dream in fire but work in clay." -Arthur Machen

 

  • Member since
    April 2006
  • From: ON, Canada
Posted by jgeratic on Thursday, January 25, 2018 1:19 PM

Hi Cliff, looking really good there.  Yellow outer rings on all roundels, this was something proposed by 2TAF in Dec. 1944, but only in February of the following year made official through the proper channels.   Basically the yellow was added  to aid in visibilty and avoid friendly fire, from both air and land.

regards,

Jack

  • Member since
    November 2009
  • From: SW Virginia
Posted by Gamera on Thursday, January 25, 2018 7:48 AM

Hey thanks guys! 

Greg: Oh wow, pink!?! Honestly the yellow here is just plain Testors Model Master acrylic yellow right out of the bottle. I didn't even think about matching the roundels at the time. Good luck, I'm sure you'll get a good match, it's just a matter of fiddling with it till it looks right. 

Tony: Now that you mention it I'm not sure I've seen yellow outlines on the roundels before. Then again this is only the second RAF aircraft from the '50s I've built, all my others have been '30s-'40s Second World War era. All the roundels have the same yellow outline, top of the wing and the sides of the fusilage too.  

"I dream in fire but work in clay." -Arthur Machen

 

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Australia
Posted by taxtp on Thursday, January 25, 2018 6:10 AM

Nice work on another of my favourite aircraft Cliff. It's interesting to me that the roundels underneath the wings had yellow rings too, I don't recall seeing that on another aircraft.

Regards
Tony

I'm just taking it one GB at a time.

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Thursday, January 25, 2018 2:06 AM

Gamera

Eric & guys: Thanks! I knew a little about the deployment of Commonwealth troops to Europe and North Africa but learned a good bit there.

BD: Looks really really good there! After my 1/48th Nieport it will be a while before I build up the courage to try another biplane- nice work!

 

I have been slowly decaling. I thought this post Second World War scheme would be easier since no invasion stripes. But still applying the decals for the large ID numbers and letting them partly dry so I could cut them without tearing and have them lay down snuggly was a bit of a task. Still they came out fine.

 

Looking good G, really coming along nicely.

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Thursday, January 25, 2018 2:06 AM

EBergerud

Short history essay coming. I've long been paid for writing this kind of thing, so plunging into it is a kind of occupational hazard. Avoid if you like.

Commonwealth countries were viewed after WWI as central to any future British war effort - something London had to worry about during the late 30s. One of the reason that Chamberlain had such broad support for "appeasement" was that it was wildly popular in the Commonwealth countries. In all of them there was talk, often heard in the isolationist circles in the USA, warning their governments not to shed blood to save the British Empire. As it was Canada, Oz and NZ all declared war on Germany in 1939 with the UK. But they all supported the war effort with conditions. Full conscription for overseas service took place only in 1943-44 in Oz and Canada. There were, however, large numbers of volunteers. Oz insisted that their units be under Australian command, but allowed their people to directly join the RAF or RN. Bomber Command in particular was very dependent upon Commonwealth volunteers. (Should note that New Zealand was the most cooperative, probably because so many people were first or second generation immigrants. It was the only Commonwealth country that had strong supporters of a hard line policy against Hitler.) Pearl Harbor upset part of the applecart. Australia had raised four divisions of volunteers to serve overseas - Australian Imperial Forces (AIF). Three were serving in the Mideast. (6th, 7th, 9th AIF) Churchill lost his cookies and persuaded Canberra to send the fourth (8th) to Singapore at the last minute where it was lost in the debacle. Oz very publically seperated itself from London and appealed to the US for support. They brought home the 6th and 7th AIF immediately much to Churchill's dismay. They asked for Douglas MacArthur to serve as CinC figuring (correctly) that his high standing in the US would draw US forces to Oz. (Not many - the SW Pacific was not much higher up the strategic totem pole than CIB. MacArthur bowed to necessity and specialized in economy of force until Leyte.) Only with reluctance did Oz PM Curtin allow Montgomery to borrow the 9th AIF for Alamein - the price was the allocation to Oz of the badly crippled 1st Marine Division from Guadalcanal in December. (You can bet Montgomery would have cherished an Australian corps for the campaign in France. The 9th AIF returned to Oz immediately after Alamein. However he had a Canadian equivalent.) The result of all of this was the completely unplanned allied offensive in the Southwest Pacific which ultimately split Japanese defenses in two and largely explained what was considered by Marshall and company to be impossible in early 1944: the defeat of Japan in 1945. 

While all of this was going on Commonwealth volunteers (notably the Canadian Navy) were aiding British combat forces and helping to feed allied armies and Britain itself. They paid a price. Both Canada and Australia lost approximately 40,000 men KIA (50% or so of Australian battle casualties were in Europe: 7,000 perished in Japanese POW camps, the remainder of combat deaths came fighting the Japanese in New Guinea) and New Zealand suffered 11,000 killed, mostly in Europe. It's worth noting that the UK and Commwealth forces all participated in the Cold War. It's also worth pointing out that a major result of WWII was to accelerate the full psychological independence of the Commonwealth nations from Britain.   

Eric

 

We won the war and lost the Empire. Funny how that works out.

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • From: Indiana, USA
Posted by Greg on Wednesday, January 24, 2018 8:25 PM

Brandon, that wing configuration sounds way too complicated for me, but as Bish said, looks like you are having no trouble with it.

Eric, interesting info. Reading things like that reminds me of why they call it a "world" war. What a mess.

Gammy, that underside looks very good. Looks like you did a dandy job matching the yellow leading edges with the outline of the roundel. I am, at this point, so far off it's goofy. I'm horrible at paint mixing. I added a tiny bit of red to my yellow with a toothpick and somehow ended up with flourescent pink. Clueless. Ten zillion dropper thingies of Vallejo, I'd think something would match. Cowboy

  • Member since
    August 2015
  • From: the redlands Fl
Posted by crown r n7 on Wednesday, January 24, 2018 8:07 PM

gamera that looks real smooth .I started masking the meteor I hope this time this build isnt FUBR !!

 

 

 Nick.

  • Member since
    November 2009
  • From: SW Virginia
Posted by Gamera on Wednesday, January 24, 2018 6:51 PM

Eric & guys: Thanks! I knew a little about the deployment of Commonwealth troops to Europe and North Africa but learned a good bit there.

BD: Looks really really good there! After my 1/48th Nieport it will be a while before I build up the courage to try another biplane- nice work!

 

I have been slowly decaling. I thought this post Second World War scheme would be easier since no invasion stripes. But still applying the decals for the large ID numbers and letting them partly dry so I could cut them without tearing and have them lay down snuggly was a bit of a task. Still they came out fine.

"I dream in fire but work in clay." -Arthur Machen

 

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Berkeley CA/St. Paul MN
Posted by EBergerud on Wednesday, January 24, 2018 6:35 PM

Short history essay coming. I've long been paid for writing this kind of thing, so plunging into it is a kind of occupational hazard. Avoid if you like.

Commonwealth countries were viewed after WWI as central to any future British war effort - something London had to worry about during the late 30s. One of the reason that Chamberlain had such broad support for "appeasement" was that it was wildly popular in the Commonwealth countries. In all of them there was talk, often heard in the isolationist circles in the USA, warning their governments not to shed blood to save the British Empire. As it was Canada, Oz and NZ all declared war on Germany in 1939 with the UK. But they all supported the war effort with conditions. Full conscription for overseas service took place only in 1943-44 in Oz and Canada. There were, however, large numbers of volunteers. Oz insisted that their units be under Australian command, but allowed their people to directly join the RAF or RN. Bomber Command in particular was very dependent upon Commonwealth volunteers. (Should note that New Zealand was the most cooperative, probably because so many people were first or second generation immigrants. It was the only Commonwealth country that had strong supporters of a hard line policy against Hitler.) Pearl Harbor upset part of the applecart. Australia had raised four divisions of volunteers to serve overseas - Australian Imperial Forces (AIF). Three were serving in the Mideast. (6th, 7th, 9th AIF) Churchill lost his cookies and persuaded Canberra to send the fourth (8th) to Singapore at the last minute where it was lost in the debacle. Oz very publically seperated itself from London and appealed to the US for support. They brought home the 6th and 7th AIF immediately much to Churchill's dismay. They asked for Douglas MacArthur to serve as CinC figuring (correctly) that his high standing in the US would draw US forces to Oz. (Not many - the SW Pacific was not much higher up the strategic totem pole than CIB. MacArthur bowed to necessity and specialized in economy of force until Leyte.) Only with reluctance did Oz PM Curtin allow Montgomery to borrow the 9th AIF for Alamein - the price was the allocation to Oz of the badly crippled 1st Marine Division from Guadalcanal in December. (You can bet Montgomery would have cherished an Australian corps for the campaign in France. The 9th AIF returned to Oz immediately after Alamein. However he had a Canadian equivalent.) The result of all of this was the completely unplanned allied offensive in the Southwest Pacific which ultimately split Japanese defenses in two and largely explained what was considered by Marshall and company to be impossible in early 1944: the defeat of Japan in 1945. 

While all of this was going on Commonwealth volunteers (notably the Canadian Navy) were aiding British combat forces and helping to feed allied armies and Britain itself. They paid a price. Both Canada and Australia lost approximately 40,000 men KIA (50% or so of Australian battle casualties were in Europe: 7,000 perished in Japanese POW camps, the remainder of combat deaths came fighting the Japanese in New Guinea) and New Zealand suffered 11,000 killed, mostly in Europe. It's worth noting that the UK and Commwealth forces all participated in the Cold War. It's also worth pointing out that a major result of WWII was to accelerate the full psychological independence of the Commonwealth nations from Britain.   

Eric

 

A model boat is much cheaper than a real one and won't sink with you in it.

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Wednesday, January 24, 2018 2:18 PM

BD, that loks pretty damn good from here. Interesting about the fit of the lower wing. Does not seem like it would be the most secure way of attaching it.

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Wednesday, January 24, 2018 2:15 PM

Greg, your welcome. Us Brits never like to make things simple, better to keep everyone else on their toes.

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    January 2015
Posted by BrandonD on Wednesday, January 24, 2018 12:58 PM

I swear I haven't forgotten this build. For some reason, I tabled my Bristol F.2B after making the propeller for it, and I think it may have been because I didn't have a prop boss for it, but I got a set from Poland, and I pulled it out to get back at it.

I decided on the Brisfit for my first biplane because I got it cheap and I don't care about it compared to other biplanes, so it will be a good test bed for riggin.

What I DIDN'T know is that the lower wing isn't connected directly to the fuselage, but sits on four rods, augmented by the landing gear struts. I don't think I got the geometry 100 percent perfect, so even though the bottom of the fuselage is level with the lower wing, it looks slightly off to one side, which may pose some interesting fit when I attach the cabane struts. We will see. It's only a couple of millimeters, so hopefully not a big deal.

Anyway, it's starting to look like half an airplane now!

 

Untitled

Next step is adding the exhaust, nose and working on the interplane and cabane struts for the wood effect.

-BD-

 

  • Member since
    January 2015
Posted by BrandonD on Wednesday, January 24, 2018 12:53 PM

Mark, that Spit looks amazing, and on such a short build timeframe! Wow!

-BD-

  • Member since
    January 2015
Posted by BrandonD on Wednesday, January 24, 2018 12:53 PM

Greg - since that's the only paint on the model at this point, if I were you and wanted to clear up the paint drip, I'd wet a paper towel with lacquer thinner and gently rub it off. That will take the paint down to bare plastic with a little elbow grease, and you can just re-shoot it. Just don't dunk the thing in thinner and you'll be ok.

-BD-

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • From: Indiana, USA
Posted by Greg on Wednesday, January 24, 2018 10:56 AM

jgeratic
Greg, perhaps too simple an answer.....

Oh, no no, Jack. Not too simple at all!! Embarrassed I should be careful around this group, I am not a good student of history and expecially not of the two world wars, though I do continue to learn albiet at a slow pace.

That is very interesting information, and I enjoyed reading the link about the Article XV squadrons. There is even a link to the 486 Squadron, the variant I am planning to model with the boring black bottom.

Thanks Jack!

And Bish, thank you for your additional info and I'm glad I still qualify. I was a bit baffled why a NZ Squadron had such RAF-looking markings, but thanks to all the info from you and Jack, now I get it.

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Wednesday, January 24, 2018 2:10 AM

Greg

What I don't understand it what a NZ sqaudron was doing in GB. And does this still qualify for the GB.

And yes, they were apparently unarmed, except for the wing cannons, I presume. the underside looks funny in black with no armament hanging around.

 

And to answer your question, yes it does qualify. The NZ Sq's, as well as Australian, Canadian, Polish, Czech and other were under RAF command.

It should be remembered that the UK has very close links with its Dominions and Colony's. Even now anyone from a Commonwealth nation can join the UK's armed forces.

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    April 2006
  • From: ON, Canada
Posted by jgeratic on Tuesday, January 23, 2018 10:24 PM

Greg, perhaps too simple an answer, but after the fall of France, Britain was the only Allied country where air forces could operate from in support of the Western front?

There is also this which should answer the second question:

Article XV of the Empire Air Training Scheme

 

regards,

Jack

 

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • From: Indiana, USA
Posted by Greg on Tuesday, January 23, 2018 7:41 PM

What I don't understand it what a NZ sqaudron was doing in GB. And does this still qualify for the GB.

And yes, they were apparently unarmed, except for the wing cannons, I presume. the underside looks funny in black with no armament hanging around.

  • Member since
    April 2006
  • From: ON, Canada
Posted by jgeratic on Tuesday, January 23, 2018 6:12 PM

Looked up the Eduard profile for the night fighter Tiffy - and yes it did exist, but was short lived.  486 (NZ ) squadron began replacing it's Hurricanes with Typhoons in July 1942, where it continued the experiment of working in tandom with No. 1453 Turbinlite Flight.  This latter unit were Douglas bombers carrying radar and a searchlight in the nose, but no armament.   In September though, the Typhoon unit was re-assigned as day fighters.

regards,

Jack

  • Member since
    August 2015
  • From: the redlands Fl
Posted by crown r n7 on Tuesday, January 23, 2018 6:03 PM

Hi mark beautiful job on that bare metal spitfire . I use post it notes for masking Especially when I use testors Metallizer paints it’s real low tack stuff

 

 

 Nick.

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Tuesday, January 23, 2018 5:17 PM

I have not heard of a night fighter Typhoon eitehr, that will be interesting. I didn't know about those straps until i was about to get the Brengun 72nd kit and read some reviews. That kit does not have them but the PE set they sell seperatly does. On;y very ealy aircraft would not have them, those already in service were with drawn and modifie.

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • From: Indiana, USA
Posted by Greg on Tuesday, January 23, 2018 4:34 PM

jgeratic

The photo I had linked of the typhoon's tail section is from  a museum - not a scale model.  The strengthening strips (or fish plates) were added after a flying accident in August 1942.   

Not at all familiar with the night fighter version, but I suppose if they were still being used in that capacity after the date of said accident, it's possible they were repaired in the field?


regards,
Jack

 

Well, don't I feel silly. A museum aircraft. And here I was all set to make an appointment with you to teach me how to detail with that amount of precision. Surprise

Interesting about the 1942 accident leading to the strenghthening strips. It amazes me how much history many of my peers here have of various aircraft.

I know nothing about the night fighter variant I think I will do except for the Eduard narrative.

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS
FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.