Duxford Mossie – The New Colours

Hi Neilly,
Fair point. I don’t agree though. 😀 Innacurate colours missed (I hold my hand up to not spotting the Brown / Green fiasco at Cosford) don’t prove the TT predominance.

I’m not going to convince you though! 😉 We can take smart joe public (often surprising) and dumb joe public (alway predictably moronic) the museum’s job is to take dumb joe public and show ’em (if they’re interested) stuff they didn’t know. Cosford’s Mozzie is far naughtier than the IWM machine because a) it’s in the wrong type of colours (bad and misleading – slapped wrists and inexcusiable) and it’s representing an aircraft that doesn’t exist. :rolleyes:

“Daddy, what’s that?”
“It’s a Mosquito, son. It’s in some famous bloke’s colours. He was shot down and killed in it.”
“Cor, teriffic. This actual one?”
Hmmm.

I do hope the TT gear is fitted. But I’ll agree with Neilly (I’m sure) that the faceted Ju88 style nose was awful looking!

On the RAFM website FAQ It says that they are often asked for details about 633 squadron RAF (not the film!)
mmitch.

The colour scheme looks great, but to truely appreciate it it needs to be seen outside on the grass without any unnessacery clutter, as has been mentioned before some of us would gladly pay the entrance fee and more to simply photo this one aircraft under the right circumstances.

Those fortunate enought to be able to get ‘behind the barriers’ should make the most of the opertunity, in a few years time it will be hung from the roof where nobody with be able to see the detail of the restorers work, the aircraft will gather dust and no inspection / maintance will be carried out. the aircraft with become sad, forgoten and un-noticed by the general public and enthuistist alike.

The design and layout of AirSpace with the mezzanine floor allows perfectly good views of the aircraft. As to your comments that “no inspection / maintance will be carried out”, that is simply untrue. All suspended aircraft both here and at Lambeth Road are inspected and photographed via cherry-picker or similar means at intervals and assessed for conservation needs. If its deemed necessary, they come down and are inspected in more detail and conserved. Our interpretation will hopefully ensure that the Mosquito retains an equally important place in the displays. I would have thought the bright yellow stripes might prevent people from ‘missing’ it, no? Why not wait to see the development before you dismiss it out of hand?

Putting her back into her original TT scheme is good 🙂
There are other Mosquitos in representative wartime markings in Museums so to show one of the main uses post-war is a good thing, provided the descriptive information on display is co-ordinated to illustrate this… :rolleyes:
If this was the only surviving example of the type, then maybe a representative scheme would be more appropiate.
(which is what should have happened with the Hendon Tempest V…. 😡 )

On the other hand hanging her from the roof I can’t and never will agree with, it’s not a ruddy airfix kit….. 😡

Here’s two pics I took in 1997. I quite like the new colour scheme and hope to see it in the flesh soon. The last pic is of the last time I saw her in October.

Has anyone got any photos of TA719 in its old scheme before this more colourful coat was added? I have seen and photographed it but my two photos only show it from the front, and when I photographed bomb sitting beside it in 1993 you can see the tail undersides in the background. So in both pictures it just looks black. Does anyone have good photos of the old scheme? Especially outside in the sun?

The colour scheme looks great, but to truely appreciate it it needs to be seen outside on the grass without any unnessacery clutter, as has been mentioned before some of us would gladly pay the entrance fee and more to simply photo this one aircraft under the right circumstances.

Those fortunate enought to be able to get ‘behind the barriers’ should make the most of the opertunity, in a few years time it will be hung from the roof where nobody with be able to see the detail of the restorers work, the aircraft will gather dust and no inspection / maintance will be carried out. the aircraft with become sad, forgoten and un-noticed by the general public and enthuistist alike.

Hi Neilly,
Fair point. I don’t agree though. 😀 Innacurate colours missed (I hold my hand up to not spotting the Brown / Green fiasco at Cosford) don’t prove the TT predominance.

I’m not going to convince you though! 😉 We can take smart joe public (often surprising) and dumb joe public (alway predictably moronic) the museum’s job is to take dumb joe public and show ’em (if they’re interested) stuff they didn’t know. Cosford’s Mozzie is far naughtier than the IWM machine because a) it’s in the wrong type of colours (bad and misleading – slapped wrists and inexcusiable) and it’s representing an aircraft that doesn’t exist. :rolleyes:

“Daddy, what’s that?”
“It’s a Mosquito, son. It’s in some famous bloke’s colours. He was shot down and killed in it.”
“Cor, teriffic. This actual one?”
Hmmm.

I do hope the TT gear is fitted. No major conversion was planned, so I’m pleased to agree with Neilly (I’m sure) that the faceted Ju88 style nose was awful looking!

Hi Neilly,
Fair point. I don’t agree though. 😀 Innacurate colours missed (I hold my hand up to not spotting the Brown / Green fiasco at Cosford) don’t prove the TT predominance.

I’m not going to convince you though! 😉 We can take smart joe public (often surprising) and dumb joe public (alway predictably moronic) the museum’s job is to take dumb joe public and show ’em (if they’re interested) stuff they didn’t know. Cosford’s Mozzie is far naughtier than the IWM machine because a) it’s in the wrong type of colours (bad and misleading – slapped wrists and inexcusiable) and it’s representing an aircraft that doesn’t exist. :rolleyes:

“Daddy, what’s that?”
“It’s a Mosquito, son. It’s in some famous bloke’s colours. He was shot down and killed in it.”
“Cor, teriffic. This actual one?”
Hmmm.

I do hope the TT gear is fitted. But I’ll agree with Neilly (I’m sure) that the faceted Ju88 style nose was awful looking!

If they didn’t know TA 639 was in the wrong colours

I always thought it looked wrong, but couldn’t be sure……I found it difficult to believe that Cosford could have made such a fundamental mistake and presumed they had some evidence for the non standard scheme!

Call it suspension of disbelief……c*ck-up in progress, July1987.

Not while ITV and BBC keep trotting out 633 Squadron… 😉

JDK,

Moondance & Old Eagle have just answered one of my arguements, about Joe Public. If they didn’t know TA 639 was in the wrong colours etc. & we’re assuming (sorry guys) that they know a lot more about aviation history the average man in the street, then given time, the Mosquitoes war record will br deminished to that of a target towing wooden aircraft! Joe Public will believe that’s all that nice pretty silver & yellow aeroplane did!

TTFN,
Neilly

KB267 was a BXX, and so had short engines. It also had a standard bomber camouflage of Medium Sea Grey undersides, Ocean Grey and Dark Green disruptive camouflage. So TA639 doesnt represent Gibsons aircraft at all! The irony is that RAFM do have a piece of the fuselage of KB267, which includes part of the roundel, which will give all the original colours!

Funny how it takes a little back water museum like ourselves to get the colours right, something the nationals consistently failed to do at the time!

Bruce

Surely yes if that’s what KB267 used to wear ?

Moondance, isn’t TA639 in standard bomber scheme, one she perhaps used to wear, or maybe just painted to represent one ??
DC

TA639 is painted to represent (I think) KB267, AZ-E, of 627 Squadron, in which Guy Gibson lost his life on 19/9/44…..but my question was, are standard bomber colours appropriate for the Mosquito it is supposed to represent?

Remembering the sights and sounds at Exeter…….IMHO TA719 looks great and it’s a good scheme, correct for the a/c !

Moondance, isn’t TA639 in standard bomber scheme, one she perhaps used to wear, or maybe just painted to represent one ??
DC

I’m not sure it ever had the engines in! The bays were empty when she was in the Superhangar.

Pretty comprehensively engineless in this 1988 photo.

We (myself included) tend to get upset at inaccurate paint jobs – seems odd to me that that such an authentic scheme causes so much discussion. If it wasn’t for 3 CAACU, the world Mosquito population would be considerably poorer – I think it looks the dogs b*llocks, well done the IWM.

The Mosquito which confuses me, as Neilly alluded to, is TA639 at Cosford. Brown/green camouflage, red codes??….is that accurate?

How about a thread on whether to hang the designers of some of the rubbish ways we exhibit the airframes in this country,spending millions and STILL getting the basics wrong warrants them being hung :diablo:

To hang or not to hang

I am not a great fan of hanging aircraft but the Yugoslavs have made a pretty good job of it.

If there is any interest in taking trip round the then new 1990 museum, store and environs, I’ll start a new thread.

Mark

I like the colour scheme, I spose that if there were more mossies about then we would all be pleased with this choice.

I just know that I would rather see one fly than hang, but it is always a pleasure to see a mossie.

Yep.

Hopefully they’ll fit the correct winch first, to make it an accurate representation of a TT-Mossie rather than a bomber-configured aircraft painted as a Target Tug. Does anyone know any more on this?

(welcome to the forum, BTW Chris)

And thanks for your welcome
🙂

I was asking the question, because I find a little bit sad to see rare aircrafts only on very restrict and unnatural placement like the Tempest V for instance (I would have dreamt to take shots of this aircraft in front of his hangar), but I understand many museums have problems with the room available.