It is just over a year now since Jaguar T2A – XX829 was acquired by Newark Air Museum. The aircraft has sat at Winthorpe with little or no comment about its markings until the last few days.
About a week ago the 54 Squadron markings on each side of the fuselage were repainted to slowly start the process of refurbishing the overall airframe. Since that work was carried out the museum has received comment that the markings are the wrong way round.
All that has been done is reapply paint to the faded markings that were already on the airframe when it arrived at Newark. You can see a photograph in here!
Does anyone have any photographs of XX829 in service, with the markings the ‘wrong-way round’ and more intriguingly does anyone know why the markings were applied in such a way?
Over to you guys and gals!
By: TwinOtter23 - 23rd May 2013 at 19:33
I managed to grab a quick look at the aircraft yesterday and they do indeed appear to be transfers of some type that are applied to XX829.
They have both been over-painted by NAM members and it is only the side that was shown on the NAM website, where the transfer is the wrong way round. (They must have big saucers down in East Anglia!) :highly_amused:
By: TwinOtter23 - 15th May 2013 at 11:34
Once again thanks for the shared thoughts and feedback.
The reason I’m trying to get some information relates to one of the roles that I assist with at NAM and this involves responding to ‘comments & complaints’.
It’s always good to try and be ahead of the game on such matters and as they’ve already had ‘incoming comments’ about the markings since they were reapplied; I felt it prudent to make a few enquiries.
It can also provide some fascinating insights into the service career of individual airframes. Recent feedback has come in regarding the Operation Heliotrope markings on the Hastings. I’ve been led to believe that for the first Heliotrope markings, the mouth of the fish was closed – however following the success of the film Jaws, these DayGlo fish were reapplied with their mouths open as ‘homage’ to the film!
With that thought in mind I pondered whether some ‘wag’ on 54 Squadron had similar ideas re-the Squadron markings on XX829?
By: TonyT - 15th May 2013 at 10:18
I wouldn’t read to much into variances, they do happen, we redid the RN wet dreams down at Cranfield, and the drawings had the roundel painted onto a RN blue wing, so all you would see was a white circle with a red dot in it as the blues were the same, it took a lot of back and forth chat until we got permission to add a white circle around the blue so you could see the roundel.
When I worked on them they were all painted on, suppose as they moved around a lot in later years a removable decal would mean it could chop and change squadrons without a repaint.
By: ghaynes - 15th May 2013 at 10:14
The markings on the 41 Sqn and 6 Sqn GR.3s that I’ve seen stored at Bentwaters over the years were certainly decals as some (most) were fading and peeling off.
Graham
I’m not sure whether it was a decal or not; and certainly on the photograph of the repainted markings the ‘checks’ also seem to have been reversed as well.
The next time I visit NAM I’ll have a look on the other side as well – I’ve gone through all of my photographs from since the time it arrived and I’ve only ever photographed it from the ‘sunny-side!’
By: TwinOtter23 - 15th May 2013 at 08:21
I’m not sure whether it was a decal or not; and certainly on the photograph of the repainted markings the ‘checks’ also seem to have been reversed as well.
The next time I visit NAM I’ll have a look on the other side as well – I’ve gone through all of my photographs from since the time it arrived and I’ve only ever photographed it from the ‘sunny-side!’
By: ghaynes - 15th May 2013 at 07:39
Looks like the Colt paint shop have used a starboard decal instead of a port one!
Graham
By: ozjag - 15th May 2013 at 00:57
Hi Howard
Are the checks the wrong way around as well? In TonyTs photo it is blue on top at the front whereas yours is yellow on top. I have seen similar things with the 31 Sqn checks although I know there is a correct way (can’t remember at the moment though).
Paul
By: Thunderbird167 - 14th May 2013 at 21:58
Was marked in this manner when at Sproughton
http://www.flickr.com/photos/78891834@N05/8213631311/
along with XX146
http://www.flickr.com/photos/78891834@N05/8213636145/in/set-72157632086840029
Both lions are facing the wrong way apparently
By: TwinOtter23 - 14th May 2013 at 21:54
Thank you for your initial suggestions – the non-flipped stencil does seem plausible.
What would be nice is to try and work out is how long the error has been on the airframe!
By: TonyT - 14th May 2013 at 21:30
‘Tother side
http://www.paulnann.com/Make.asp?Make=SEPECAT&Family=%20Jaguar&ImageRef=pn_w2771.jpg
How it should be
By: TonyT - 14th May 2013 at 21:26
Normally as with a flag flying they go on the side as it would look from either side of the flag, so the lion would face forward on both sides, one suspects they either only had one stencil and either missed flipping it over or the guy applying it didn’t know, it won’t be the first or the last, one Ten carried French fin flashes as they got them reversed on one side. Similar there are a myriad of reversed union flags, which incidentally is a sign of distress.
Sign In
May 14, 2013 at 8:09 pm