The “Spitfire” on show in the Soesterberg outdoor collection was recently repainted. Am I wrong or is it odd looking now. Are these the right form of codes, and camouflage colours (apart from being glossy) for a 1944/45 Spit? BW Roger
By: Mark V - 12th August 2003 at 15:49
Janie, what a flattering introduction! Welcome to the forum by the way.
Yes I am afraid this is a very unfortunate lost oportunity to paint a Spitfire correctly. I always point out that it costs exactly the same amount of money to make an accurate paint job as a bad one. The only difference is taking a little more time in the research, something which many people (some of them on this forum) will do free of charge anyway.
To return to the question in hand:
The grey looks ok but the green does not seem quite right (it is difficult to be sure because of the glossy paint though).
The codes should be parallel sided.
The serial number is missing.
The lines of the camouflage are too linear. Although not a hard and fast rule (and as an example only) the typical Spitfire scheme of this period had a distinctive ‘bump’ on the starboard side below the windscreen, this has not been reproduced.
On the plus side the roundels look correctly positioned and the correct size and proportion (unlike MH434 at the moment).
Enough of my ranting.
By: Chipmunk Carol - 12th August 2003 at 15:24
I say wait for MarkV’s response when he comes on-line tonight. He seems to know more than most about Spitfires.
By: Whiskey Delta - 12th August 2003 at 14:23
How did you get a picture of a spinning prop in the second picture?
By: L9172 - 12th August 2003 at 07:31
Yes, the presentation of the “3” and the “W” are both suspect. I think reference to Flintham and Thomas’ splendid book “Combat Codes” will give you the full gen.
By: EHVB - 11th August 2003 at 23:31
Compare it to this one, also 322 SQ, same period. BW Roger
Sign In
August 11, 2003 at 11:27 pm