"Patty's A VIRGIN"

Is this the ultimate paint argument or what? Fascinating all the same!;)

Hi, I’m Max Sutherland’s grandson and I know very little about him, could you help me with any information/pictures you have of him? I have some wartime pictures of him you might not of seen handed down from my father, any help would be greatly appreciated, my email is [email]gsutherland001@gmail.com[/email]

Hi VoyTech – from a photo I hold of LO-V taken at Skeabrae, along with VII DU-G MD114, 602 put their own LO code on when they got there on 17 Jan ’44 – but 453 kept the LO, and Lion, on the IX’s (presumably to fool the enemy into thinking that 602 were still at Detling?! 🙂 ) and when 602 came back in March they took their “own” IX’s back and, as you saw yesterday, on 8 March ’44 453 took over 20 IX’s from 504 squadron and put their own FU’s on. cheers – Allan

Hello Voytech – I have just spent a few happy hours trawling through my archives and found the 132 (City of Bombay) squadrons ORB for June 1944 – this being one squadron who only recorded individual letters in the form 541 at that time. However, I also found their forms 540/541 for early January 1944 whereby they listed the full serial number, but no letter – presumably a change of clerk later in the year caused the change??!! 🙂

Sounds familiar. 317 Sqn used serials in their ORB until early 1944, then switching to codes only. On the other hand, 308 Sqn used just blank “Spitfire” entries, no code or serial until early 1944, when they changed to serials.

Also the forms 540/541 for 602 squadron for the same period which, as you stated for other years, does contain the full serial number. (I had been assisting with research on withdrawal cover on 7 Jan ’44 for “Forts and Liberators (60 per box) returning from Germany” for my friend Christian Dieppedalle of Orleans). Needless to say MJ586 doesn’t feature in my piece!! 🙂 602 still retained their Lion Rampant when they landed in France on both 15 June (B.2) and 25 June (B.11) and on. 🙂 Your piece “This was 3 months before 602 returned from Skeabrae, so at the time they didn’t have their Mk IXs yet, let alone any badges on them to be deleted.” Whilst they were at Skeabrae their IX’s were operated by 453 squadron still displaying the Lion Rampant and LO codes, this was until 8 March 1944 “125 Wing ORB – 20 Mk. IX Spits ex 504 Squadron arrived for the use of 453 squadron, as 132 and 602 are expected back within the next day or two. By the evening, the squadron letters allotted, “FU”, were painted on, and the kites were all ready for taking over” – however, when they were inspected the following day by the Duke of Gloucester they paraded in front of their ex-602 Lion Rampant equipped Spitfire IX’s 🙂 – cheers – Allan

Do you mean that throughout their stay at Skeabrae 453 Sqn kept their Spitfires with the badges unchanged until they returned? That’s what I would call real brotherhood-in-arms!

Hello Voytech – I have just spent a few happy hours trawling through my archives and found the 132 (City of Bombay) squadrons ORB for June 1944 – this being one squadron who only recorded individual letters in the form 541 at that time. However, I also found their forms 540/541 for early January 1944 whereby they listed the full serial number, but no letter – presumably a change of clerk later in the year caused the change??!! 🙂 Also the forms 540/541 for 602 squadron for the same period which, as you stated for other years, does contain the full serial number. (I had been assisting with research on withdrawal cover on 7 Jan ’44 for “Forts and Liberators (60 per box) returning from Germany” for my friend Christian Dieppedalle of Orleans). Needless to say MJ586 doesn’t feature in my piece!! 🙂 602 still retained their Lion Rampant when they landed in France on both 15 June (B.2) and 25 June (B.11) and on. 🙂 Your piece “This was 3 months before 602 returned from Skeabrae, so at the time they didn’t have their Mk IXs yet, let alone any badges on them to be deleted.” Whilst they were at Skeabrae their IX’s were operated by 453 squadron still displaying the Lion Rampant and LO codes, this was until 8 March 1944 “125 Wing ORB – 20 Mk. IX Spits ex 504 Squadron arrived for the use of 453 squadron, as 132 and 602 are expected back within the next day or two. By the evening, the squadron letters allotted, “FU”, were painted on, and the kites were all ready for taking over” – however, when they were inspected the following day by the Duke of Gloucester they paraded in front of their ex-602 Lion Rampant equipped Spitfire IX’s 🙂 – cheers – Allan

I also know that 453 (RAAF) squadron shows changes on AM78’s as taking place on 3 November 1943, when they were at Skeabrae, when the actual change over from 341 (Alsace) squadron took place at Perranporth on 15 October. So the AM 78’s are not a 100% accurate source of information – but, until something better (!!??) comes along, they are an essential part of the jigsaw!! 🙂

Yes, it was quite usual that Movement Cards were filled in with delay, but the 15 June 1944 case is unusual in that it runs accross a number of different squadrons. You might be right about the clerk explanation, or perhaps 15 June is the date when somebody from on high got infuriated at the lack of order in documentation. This may have been the same guy who ordered 602 lions painted out 😀

also, not all 541’s show serial numbers, some squadrons just recorded code letters I believe 🙁

My notes show that 602 Sqn ORB quoted serials in 1942-43 and 1945, so I presume it did so in 1944, too.

Hello VoyTech – I live in Cornwall or I would love to go personally and check at the PRO/NA !! 🙂 🙂 More likely 15 June is the date that some poor harassed clerk at 83 or 84 Group Support Unit wrote up the cards. 🙂
I also know that 453 (RAAF) squadron shows changes on AM78’s as taking place on 3 November 1943, when they were at Skeabrae, when the actual change over from 341 (Alsace) squadron took place at Perranporth on 15 October. So the AM 78’s are not a 100% accurate source of information – but, until something better (!!??) comes along, they are an essential part of the jigsaw!! 🙂 also, not all 541’s show serial numbers, some squadrons just recorded code letters I believe 🙁 – cheers – Allan

With regard to Clostermanns MJ586 – according to M&S this was only issued to 602 squadron on 15 June 1944, coming from 84 GSU (which is strange as 602 was part of 125 Wing/83 Group, so logically should have come from 83 Group Support Unit?) and it was passed to 127 (RCAF) Wing HQ on 17 August. Most of the MJ batch in that number range were shipped out to Casablanca and onto the MTO. – cheers – Allan

Allan, most Spitfire LF.IXs of 131 (Polish) Wing used in the summer 1944 have the same date of allocation – 15 June – in their Movement Cards, and this is clearly incorrect compared to pilot’s log books and ORBs. It seems to me that for some reason all aircraft movements of the first half of June 1944 were put in papers as happening on 15 June (was some sort of inventory done by/on that date?).
Perhaps somebody here is able to pop in to the National Archives (ex-PRO) at Kew and check 602 Sqn ORB (Form 541) to find out when MJ586 first appeared in the paperwork?

602 squadron – Lion Rampant

Just a thought about the painted out Lion Rampant – 2TAF decided to replace the Spitfire IX’s of one of the Wings by higher-performance aircraft; the interceptor and air-fighting role had taken on a new importance with the heavy attacks by higher-performance Luftwaffe aircraft, and 125 Wing was selected for this change-over.It was decided that the three Squadrons of 125 Wing equipped with Spitfire IXE’s, 132, 453 and 602, should exchange these aircraft for 126 Wing’s older Mark IXB’s, which were now in need of major inspection, and return to A.D.G.B. in the United Kingdom, their place in the Wing being taken by Spitfire XIV and Tempest units from home. Consequently, on 27th September 602 Squadron handed over its aircraft, followed on 28th by 453 Squadron and on 29th by 132 Squadron. On this latter date, 132 and 602 flew back to England, but 453 flew a few patrols with the Mark IXB’s before following the other units on 30th, in company with 441 Squadron, all four units flying to Coltishall to join Air Defence Great Britain (A.D.G.B), making way for Tempest V (80 and 274 Squadrons) and Spitfire XIV (130 (Punjab) and 402 (Winnipeg Bear) Squadrons) units. Re-equipped again with IXbs at Coltishall, the Squadron moved to Matlaske to undertake bomber escort duties. They re-equipped with the Spitfire XVI on 27 November at Swannington. So perhaps when it arrived with 126 (RCAF) Wing this photo was taken after an initial repaint? With regard to Clostermanns MJ586 – according to M&S this was only issued to 602 squadron on 15 June 1944, coming from 84 GSU (which is strange as 602 was part of 125 Wing/83 Group, so logically should have come from 83 Group Support Unit?) and it was passed to 127 (RCAF) Wing HQ on 17 August. Most of the MJ batch in that number range were shipped out to Casablanca and onto the MTO. – cheers – Allan

One pot of paint but two brushes.

Very likely. What a fantastic shot showing just how crudely the stripes were applied and these chaps may even have been trying extra hard for the camera. Still difficult to envisage a moden day warbird owner going for the completely authentic look and taking it this far though (at least not with permanent paint).

602 squadron – Lion Rampant

I have a clear photo of a 602 squadron Spitfire IX at B.2 Bazenville taken on 16 or 17 June 1944 – “125 Wing ORB – At 20.40 on 16 June 1944 125 Wing (132, 453 and 602) landed safely at B.2 Bazenville where they spent a not very pleasant night in slit trenches whilst being bombed by the Luftwaffe who flew in considerable numbers over the beaches.” this clearly shows a Lion Rampant, which appears to be red on a yellow background, and matches that of several 602 profiles. I also have a few photos of Spitfire VII DU-G MD114 flown by Plt Officer Ian Blair DFM, who, in company with Flt Lt W G Bennett, shot down a high flying Bf109G-6 (20357, A6+XH of Aufklärungsgruppe (Reconnaissance unit) 1.(F)/120 – Oblt Helmut Quednau missing) over the Orkneys on 20 February 1944 whilst based at Skeabrae. MD114 is still wearing its previous squadron markings – that of 312 (Czechoslovak) Squadron – although nominally part of the station flight at Skeabrae. Spitfire LF VB LO-V (too small for serial) is visible in the background, but not enough of it to show any crest. Also, on 9 March 1944, The Duke of Gloucester, attended by Group Captain Lord Willoughby de Broke, visited 453 Squadron RAAF at RAF Detling and inspected personnel of the squadron. 453 Squadron had taken over 602’s Spitfires and kept them in their original markings whilst they were away at Skeabrae and the nearest IX in my photo clearly shows the Lion Rampant crest. cheers – Allan

AMO unit badge reinstatement. I haven’t read this Order but if they are being re-instated it confirms that they were ordered to be deleted. 🙂

Post no. 54 earlier in the same thread:

A.1246/43 of 2 December 1943 said:
[I]1. Unit badges or other special markings must not be carried on aircraft or other RAF property

This was 3 months before 602 returned from Skeabrae, so at the time they didn’t have their Mk IXs yet, let alone any badges on them to be deleted.

Photo via IPMS Canada.

The photo adds nice flavour to the earlier argument about cleaning (or not) aircraft surfaces before painting anything on…

Yoy Tech.

One pot of paint but two brushes.

1 – off 1/2″ for the shield.

1 – off 6″ for the stripes.

AMO unit badge reinstatement. I haven’t read this Order but if they are being re-instated it confirms that they were ordered to be deleted. 🙂

Mark.

Photo via IPMS Canada.

A thought – as the invasion stripes were black and white, could the possible ‘painting out’ of the 602 Sqdn badge simply have been done at the same time by the same hand with the same brush, out of convenience?

Logical and has already been suggested.

Mark12, with your experience in aircraft painting etc., what size brush would you suggest for painting out the badge? And how long it would take to apply D-Day stripes with brush of this size?
And if

the most logical explanation is that pre D-Day, a directive was given to “remove or paint out any ‘personal’ markings that could directly be attributable to a squadron or unit”.

then why the September 1944 AMO that reinstated unit badges on aircraft referred to that December 1943 regulation, and not the hypothetical “pre D-Day directive”?

Ah yes – must be true then!

A thought – as the invasion stripes were black and white, could the possible ‘painting out’ of the 602 Sqdn badge simply have been done at the same time by the same hand with the same brush, out of convenience?

Mark V,

Logical and has already been suggested.

In both cases the ‘Artwork’ may yet to have been applied but for my money the most logical explanation is that pre D-Day, a directive was given to “remove or paint out any ‘personal’ markings that could directly be attributable to a squadron or unit”. Oh yes and while you are there “stick some black and white stripes on the fuse and wings”.

Mark

A thought – as the invasion stripes were black and white, could the possible ‘painting out’ of the 602 Sqdn badge simply have been done at the same time by the same hand with the same brush, out of convenience?

Let’s not forget that there is a third Spitfire with the unit marking either removed or half-applied, the US one that began this thread. It is all quite a mystery.

What we have here, are two different Spitfire IXs (or could it be one aircraft at two moments in time?) of 602 photographed in June/July 1944 with what appears to be a blank (but certainly no snow-white) shield. A mystery to me, that’s what it is. Now, is it possible that all three photos show Pierre Clostermann’s Spitfire(s)? And is it possible that (hypothesis 4bis) he himself had a different motif applied on his personal aircraft? I don’t have his book to check if he ever mentioned anything like that.

Voy Tech,

Close examination shows that the camou demarcation line, although similar, is different. It is two separate aircraft.

Mark

VoyTech,

On that photo of Closterman’s Spitfire taken side on, how do you explain the red of the roundels and finflash being so dark if the camera filter has eliminated the red of the lion? It simply makes no sense to me, sorry. I am convinced that the unit crest markings were removed physically with white paint.

Dave, your reasoning is quite right.
I have withdrawn my filter theory as soon as I learned the lion was positively red

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark12
OK we have four possibilities.
Originally Posted by VoyTech
Well, if the lion was red, we don’t.

Surprising as it may seem, I really didn’t know the colour of the lion until this thread, and my reasoning was that if it was blue, it could disappear when a yellow/red-enhancing filter was used.

And it still makes no sense to me that the crest markings were removed (as opposed to “not applied”), because:
602 Sqn was up north at Skeabrae until March, equipped with non-Mk IX Spitfires there. In March it returned down south and re-equipped with Mk IXs. So your theory is that they applied their full badges in March 1944 (or later), and then (in March 1944 or later) removed them because of an Air Ministry Order dated December 1943? Why would they apply them at all? Wouldn’t it be wise to wait until the order was cancelled (which did happen in September). Or, if they chose to apply their badges ignoring the order, what would make them change this? If it was some high brass who specifically said “Hey, you there in no. 602, get rid of your emblems, it’s forbidden”, then I still doubt this particular nit-picking high brass would content himself with anything short of removing the entire emblem inculding its white shield. (Dave, please remember, I never referred, or am going to refer to what Germans knew or didn’t know about badges, shield shapes etc. What matters is the opinion of the RAF commanders who issued the non-badge orders and controlled if these were carried out. And they were in position to know these details.)

What we have here, are two different Spitfire IXs (or could it be one aircraft at two moments in time?) of 602 photographed in June/July 1944 with what appears to be a blank (but certainly no snow-white) shield. A mystery to me, that’s what it is. Now, is it possible that all three photos show Pierre Clostermann’s Spitfire(s)? And is it possible that (hypothesis 4bis) he himself had a different motif applied on his personal aircraft? I don’t have his book to check if he ever mentioned anything like that.
I know a case where a 316 (Polish) Squadron Hurricane carried the prescribed squadron badge base (white triangle), but the motif in it was not the official badge of no. 316, being rather the badge of the pilot’s pre-war Polish squadron.