January 14, 2005 at 8:20 pm
Saw this today – I think it’s great.
Discuss ! 🙂
By: Bruce - 18th January 2005 at 15:14
We supplied some of the parts for the TT set up, though not the winch. That said, I cant see any sign of them having been fitted! I was given to understand that they had located a winch, but have heard nothing further.
Cheers
Bruce
By: ChrisDNT - 18th January 2005 at 14:39
Hi all,
Just a little question: will this beautiful Mosquito be hanged on like the Tempest?
Cheers,
By: trumper - 18th January 2005 at 14:00
replace the black and yellow with blue and red and hey presto…
RedBull!!!!!
😉
Add a few more colours and you could sing a rainbow 😀
By: *Zwitter* - 18th January 2005 at 13:41
replace the black and yellow with blue and red and hey presto…
RedBull!!!!!
😉
By: Manonthefence - 18th January 2005 at 13:40
Steve
I’m not sure it ever had the engines in! The bays were empty when she was in the Superhangar.
By: Arabella-Cox - 18th January 2005 at 12:40
As it only ever served as a target tug after several years of non-flying storage, a scheme to show it as a bomber would represent its years in storage and not much else.
I suppose they *could* show it in a representative ‘in open storage’ scheme, by leaving it outside for a few years. Works extremely well on the Shackleton… 😉
Seriously though, I do like the new scheme. For many of the reasons already quoted; it’s the only scheme that this particular aeroplane served in, it is a vast improvement on the previous scheme, and it’s far more likely to catch the eye and prompt visitors to go and learn more about what Mosquitoes (plural – not just this one) actually did in service. Surely that can only be a Good Thing?
Much as IWM come in for criticism (and yes, I do include my Shackleton dig in that…), I really do think that they should be applauded for their efforts. And let’s not forget that they’ve also taken the engines out, which will reduce the weight, and therefore stresses, on this rare airframe when she is eventually suspended. Well done IWM. 🙂
By: TEXANTOMCAT - 17th January 2005 at 17:55
As Brooklands Sywell converted the majority of Mossies into TT’s I’m all in favour!!!
(See Cosford’s Mossie History for more details!)
By: merlin70 - 16th January 2005 at 23:11
Melv,
I have briefed my good lady but can’t go in to too much detail, CAA etc, but you will get the general idea from the attached.
Mark – Zimmerman
😀 😀 😀
By: st170dw - 16th January 2005 at 22:55
It is different.
That is an important thing in a museum, especially one where to the uninitiated there are lots of British WWII aircraft all in the same paint scheme. Some people seeing a Spitfire and a Hurricane for the first time cannot tell the difference because they are painted in the same colour scheme.
It is also historically accurate for the airframe in question. The ‘enthuiasts’ should not whinge if an airframe is portrayed in such a scheme that also challenges the general public to look further at the aircraft in view.
I particularly like the prototype’s portrayal at London Colney. That in my opinion shows off the lines of the a/c to advantage – albeit a little garishly! If we can stimulate interest in aircraft such as the Mossie, a search on the internet can reward Joe Public with a large amount of information. Anything that could generate that initial spark of interest and is historically accurate is good in my book.
By: ALBERT ROSS - 16th January 2005 at 22:53
Neilly,
I defer to your knowledge of the Mosquito, but (if I may say, in a nice tone) I think you are talking rot here. 😉 . The IWM (like most acredited national museums) try and retain / return artifacts to their own colours form, rather than representative of the type. (Yes, thanks, hold that list of exceptions – I’m talking current, core policy of museums, and the conservations they are doing NOW.) There’s no ‘politically correct’ here except the (extremely irritating) same old use of the term by those who don’t agree with the decision.As the UK has a museum dedicated to DH, and several Mosquitos in front line colours, it’s hardly the end of the world. Would you, with your magnificent website want the Mosquito only remembered for a couple of hysterical war films?
As ever we can choose to see and hear what we want to see and hear. Indulge me a moment – I can see some DX visitors talking about the famous wooden wonder on sighting the aircraft. (Quite a few people have heard of it you know.) Noticing the colours, they look at the caption board and read about the brave and unsung TT crews and (pay close attention here…) learn something. – Which is what Museums are for – NOT to reinforce our predjudices (thats ‘pre-judgements btw) but so we have the opportunity to learn.
Having tried to research TT aircraft recently, I was shocked at how little info there is – because of shortsighted, narrow attitudes such as this. Quick let’s paint all the Spitfires into Douglas Bader’s colours. :rolleyes:
As they say, discuss!
Here, here! Exactly what I said earlier on this thread, but not in so many words!
By: JDK - 16th January 2005 at 21:29
This may be a bit controversial but as the airframe is rare and there to be true to it’s own self BUT also to teach people about the types previous usage, why can’t they split the painting scheme down the middle,one side shows the actual airframes scheme and the the other represents the aircrafts most regular use.
It’s a funny old world, eh. The ‘half n half’ is basically what the Spanis Air Force Museum have done for their Spanish Civil War aircraft. One side is in Nationalist colours, the other the Republican paint scheme…
The danger of ‘typical’ schemes is a question of how far do you go. It wasn’t that long ago that it seemed EVERY Grumman TBM (Avenger) in the US was painted in some Junior Lt’s colo(u)rs, because he went onto lesser things*… Understandable, but a bit repetitive. Which Mosquito scheme would YOU choose. OK? Fine. But there’ll be a bunch of other who have a ‘better’ idea. Some may not like the TT scheme, but at least it’s got a justified provenance.
Cheers!
*Chap called Lt (JG) George Bush, USN. Deja Vu?
By: Mark12 - 16th January 2005 at 21:10
That’ll do for the Zimmer frame, what about the rest of you?
Melv,
I have briefed my good lady but can’t go in to too much detail, CAA etc, but you will get the general idea from the attached.
Mark – Zimmerman
By: Melvyn Hiscock - 16th January 2005 at 20:54
As I get ‘nearer the end of the runway’ natural aluminium and lots of Waxoyl sounds just fine. 🙂
Mark
That’ll do for the Zimmer frame, what about the rest of you?
By: Mark12 - 16th January 2005 at 20:50
Mark
What colour scheme would you like to be painted in when we retire you? 🙂
As I get ‘nearer the end of the runway’ natural aluminium and lots of Waxoyl sounds just fine. 🙂
Mark
By: stewart1a - 16th January 2005 at 20:08
😀 what a caffuful 😀 i like its unique! but ihave a two week history with her so you understand why.
By: merlin70 - 16th January 2005 at 19:39
Excellent scheme – and it is only a coat of paint. 🙂
Just as I remember them in the late 1950’s, as this one at a Biggin Hill BoB.
Mark
Mark
What colour scheme would you like to be painted in when we retire you? 🙂
By: Manonthefence - 16th January 2005 at 19:32
Oops sorry freudian slip. I’ll not edit it, it looks so much better they way wot I rote it 🙂
By: merlin70 - 16th January 2005 at 19:30
[QUOTE=Manonthefence]Will we appear to be splif 50:50 here. No bad thing.
QUOTE]
For those who are on Spliffs, I guess you’re seeing some fantastic colours. 😀
By: trumper - 16th January 2005 at 15:57
Excellent scheme – and it is only a coat of paint. 🙂
Just as I remember them in the late 1950’s, as this one at a Biggin Hill BoB.
Mark
Makes you think of the saying “if i knew then what i know now” 😮
By: Mark12 - 16th January 2005 at 15:20
Excellent scheme – and it is only a coat of paint. 🙂
Just as I remember them in the late 1950’s, as this one at a Biggin Hill BoB.
Mark