Cosford Wellington Colours?

I’ve seen pictures showing MF628 in camouflage at Biggin Hill around the same time, so perhaps it was repainted while it was displayed there?

I photographed it in the hangar at 1961 Biggin BoB and this was after the period of storage at London Airport.

‘Pagen01’ takes the camou scheme back to 1956 Wisley with the obvious Vickers connection to facility.

Mark

.
While I support displaying aircraft in their own colourschemes where ever possible, I also support display of aircraft in the type’s “representative” colours, so I can understand the conflicts this aircraft is bring to this debate.

I understand the aircraft was originally built as a Mark X in 1944, but stored until rebuilt as a T 10 in 1948 when its front turret was removed.

I would agree with Bruce that it would be a large job, and in some ways “damaging history” to try and convert the internals back from its training configuration to a pure bomber configuration, but that doesnt preclude it being presented “externally” as “itself”, fresh from the factory in Bomber Command camouflage, or even fitted with squadron codes even though it didnt carry them, or even in the colours of another aircraft including its serial.

Despite supporting the retention of the internal trainer configuration I personally consider removal of the front turret and display in the silver trainer scheme is a retrograde outcome for the aircraft, I would wonder if the original trainer nose was retained?

With the recovery and restoration of the Mark 1A N2980 at Brooklands in its Bomber Command squadron code and colour schemes and internal original fitout, display of MF628 in a factory delivery scheme without codes would be very appropriate, and another option “might be”? to display MF628 in Coastal Command colours?

I understand the B10 is the basis of a number of the GR marks but also understand there are external differences such as Mast ASV or chin Radar domes, obviously a Coastal Command GR Mark XI colour scheme without ASV masts might be acceptable?

Below is the RAFM history card showing the aircraft was ordered in 1940, delivered in May 1944 and converted in March 1948, retired from operational service in October 1952, so that would seem to suggest 4 years service(storage) in the bomber command factory finish, 4 years service in the silver training finish.

http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/london/collections/aircraft/aircraft-history/69-A-171%20Wellington%20X%20MF628.pdf

I assume the “factory delivery” was the basis of its existing colourscheme?

A Coastal Command GR Mark XI with fairly obvious ASV Masts?

A Coastal Command or Royal Navy???? Mark X? (crew trainer?)

Not sure if this is a BX or an earlier mark?

My personal preference would be the factory delivery colours in standard Bomber command scheme.

Regards

Mark Pilkington

You know what get’s me.. It is their Wellington and they can do it up as they see fit! I for one applaud them for tackling such a complicated and historically significant airframe and once it is complete it will last for a very long time!

What’s with all the PC stuff?

A Bomber Command Museum should display bombers finished as such, or else in OTU-livery. If the Wellington would be finished as a trainer while it was originally built as s bomber does that mean the PC-police is in full swing?? Perhaps rename it the “museum displaying various types of aircraft that were once used by the RAF”

Visitors wouldn’t be bothered.

Cees

I would like to see the Wellington finished as a 201 AFS machine all silver and T-bands. If the interior was opened up the damage to a rare machine in terms of sweaty fingers,overweight people on its seats would take its toll. One only has to look at the rear end of Duxfords B-17 “Mary Alice” to see what fingers touching the airframe and props can do.
I think the Tempest TT.V scheme at RAF Museum Hendon is right for that aircraft and is a tribute to all target towing personnel of the RAF.

From my image in post 6, taken at London Airport, as we knew it then, circa 1960, in storage for the Nash Collection, the livery is Brown/Green/Black.

Why is this and shouldn’t it be silver? Was it painted for a film?

Mark

I’ve seen pictures showing MF628 in camouflage at Biggin Hill around the same time, so perhaps it was repainted while it was displayed there?

How many were built, and where are they? :confused:

re;

I wonder whats going to happen to the replicas now that the new film has been shelved? they would be super in museums.

It was still in silver with yellow training bands when it was ferried from St Athan to Hemwswell in April 1954 for use in The Dambusters film as a camera ship and brief appearences in the film itself.
I thought that it might have been repainted for the film, however I can’t see any referrence to it being painted in the Bomber Command scheme until July ’56 when it was displayed at the Vickers airfield of Wisley at their RAeS garden party.

From my image in post 6, taken at London Airport, as we knew it then, circa 1960, in storage for the Nash Collection, the livery is Brown/Green/Black.

Why is this and shouldn’t it be silver? Was it painted for a film?

Mark

I do like it displayed in a “traditional” bomber paint job, reminds me of the old Airfix kit.

Ahh, Mr. Cross! Memories indeed!

If its being done right – and I have no reason to doubt that it isnt, it will be finished using materials contemporary with the aircraft – so cellulose dopes and finishes.

Bruce

perhaps some of the leading aviation mags should do a poll, online if need be?. the results should then be forwarded to the RAF musuem. “let the people speak” as they say!…
as far as changing the sqn codes every so often, this is far harder task to perform on a fabric covered aircraft, ive done some of the colour changes on the BBMF aircraft but the hurricanes went away to be recovered/sprayed. also with todays health n safety regs the wimpy would have to be painted outside the Hendon museum area ie moved to another lacation. its not something that can be easily done in situ amongst the other aircraft and general public.

depends on what type of paint you use doesn’t it?

re;

its a total waste that the interior will never be seen. What a shame the RAFM does not have occasional open cockpit days which would generate a heck of a lot of revenue.

As she is already now a little bit of a mixed child as per PA-474, how about leaving her internally and externally as is, but change the unit markings once every two years or so to represent the character of a particular aircraft from the gruelling early 39-42 era such as 75 (NZ) Sqd, 149 etc etc. A little like BBMF but on the ground.

A retro silver turretless external representation will be correct but what really is the point now?

I’ve muted the idea before of museum aircraft being used to represent different schemes as per the BofBMF, so admit I agree with you.

Unless the Wellington is not going back into the Bomber Command Hall, why not finish an aircraft in a standard scheme & periodically apply different Squadron codes using removable vinyl codes & insignia? – In this way you can represent any unit that operated the type – including early, late far Eastern & (admittedly wartime) training units.

I don’t object to the silver scheme, but feel that to finish the aircraft as such will dilute what was achieved by its crews in its primary role as a bomber.

regards Rad.

perhaps some of the leading aviation mags should do a poll, online if need be?. the results should then be forwarded to the RAF musuem. “let the people speak” as they say!…
as far as changing the sqn codes every so often, this is far harder task to perform on a fabric covered aircraft, ive done some of the colour changes on the BBMF aircraft but the hurricanes went away to be recovered/sprayed. also with todays health n safety regs the wimpy would have to be painted outside the Hendon museum area ie moved to another lacation. its not something that can be easily done in situ amongst the other aircraft and general public.

Like the majority of posters I would prefer to see the Wellington painted in the camo that it wore when it left the factory, and indeed no unit markings would be historically correct for this machine which did not see frontline service.
Silver training colours have little or no relevence when the purpose of this airframe is to educate and inspire the museum visitors, the majority of whom will be children. Lets hope authenticity prevails with the exterior restored to as built ex-factory camo!

Duxford´s Mosquito and Hendons TT5 are absolutely magnificent restored in silver, but the Wellington is unique outside of Brooklands and has more important history to represent

As she is already now a little bit of a mixed child as per PA-474, how about leaving her internally and externally as is, but change the unit markings once every two years or so to represent the character of a particular aircraft from the gruelling early 39-42 era such as 75 (NZ) Sqd, 149 etc etc. A little like BBMF but on the ground.

A retro silver turretless external representation will be correct but what really is the point now?

Wimpie

You are correct Bruce, she is internally configured as a T10 and it would be a shame to see her bug@ered around with and the original equipment separated from the aeroplane. Members of the public are not allowed within the aeroplane so to a degree, at least from a public perception perspective, her internal configuration is largely irrelevant. However, in external appearance she would be more representative of the day to day RAF Wellingtons in which so many paid the ultimate price if displayed in a simple un-marked night bomber scheme than in silver markings. I wouldn’t profess to be a psychologist by any means, but I would imagine that more people of our generation would stop and perhaps reflect more on what the bomber crews went through while looking at a Wartime configured (turreted) night-bomber marked Wellington than they would if in post-war trainer silver. Sad, but not necessarily something that can be changed.

That said, we should of course all be grateful that she has survived at all, so let’s just be pleased to have her around regardless of what colours she appears in!

G