January 9, 2006 at 8:58 pm
Help required if poss, has anyone got any close up pictures of Donald Duck the art work on the fuel tank panel on Spit EN951 RF-D 303Sqn I have a few pictures but none are close up. Might be AB910’s new paint scheme for 07.
Also any post war MkXVI low back RAF training unit colour schemes
Many thanks
Fluffy
Oh and you will like the Lancs new scheme for 2007 ?????
By: Neil Medcalf - 19th January 2006 at 03:03
just found
I just found this photo for sale on ebay- Item number- 6598379892
Zumbach Spitfire
Note- I’m not associated with this auction, I just found it..
Neil Medcalf
By: Dave Homewood - 12th January 2006 at 22:41
so what will the Lancaster’s new scheme be?
Please be No. 75 Squadron…
By: Fluffy - 12th January 2006 at 16:06
Thanks to everyone for all the help, fingers crossed that this will happen at the end of the year.
Cheers
Fluffy
By: DazDaMan - 10th January 2006 at 23:05
Here’s an old photo of the actual aircraft in question… No one’s posted it yet so I thought I would..
Neil Medcalf
Thanks Neil – now my desktop 🙂
By: Dave Homewood - 10th January 2006 at 23:04
Thanks James,
I guess another way to look at it is Disney should pay sponsorship to the BBMF for advertising their product! I wonder how Old Crow gets on with several Mustangs sporting their bourbon brand…
Was Ralph Lauren also going to sue Marco Polo? He makes mints doesn’t he… The Arabs who own Harrods in London forced the Harrod family in NZ to change their shop’s name! And the Hilton hotel chain sued a small back blocks pub in the village of Blackball on the west coast of the South Island of NZ that called itself The Blackball Hilton. Hilton won and hey had to change teir name by court order. So for the past few years it’s been legally known as “Formerly The Blackball Hilton”. The case put the pub on the map and it’s now taking more tourists than the Hilton!
Cheers
Dave
By: Mark V - 10th January 2006 at 20:39
Certainly a certain private Spitfire owner won’t be paying Disney for putting the peeved Mickey on his Spitfire.
Indeed, more the converse.
By: DazDaMan - 10th January 2006 at 19:28
Spotted on evilBay:
Pity it’s BM144, mind you! :rolleyes:
By: Neil Medcalf - 10th January 2006 at 18:16
Photo
Here’s an old photo of the actual aircraft in question… No one’s posted it yet so I thought I would..
Neil Medcalf
By: DazDaMan - 10th January 2006 at 14:03
They’d like you to… Although I’d think they’d be able to except the BBMF. Boeing wanted royalties from kit manufacturers for the Boeing scale models :rolleyes: I think they got told where to get off. Ralph Laren tried to get the Polo governing body to pay royalties for the use of the word. Possibly the stupidist legal challange in this loony arena.
Certainly a certain private Spitfire owner won’t be paying Disney for putting the peeved Mickey on his Spitfire. But seeing as they lost the last argument with him, I don’t think they’ll try anything with him again…
A good legal defence might be that it represents the colours of a wartime aircraft. The fact that the picture of Donald is there, is meerly ‘accurate’. 😀
It’s like that thing a couple of years back where McDonalds tried to sue the **** off some tiny little burger bar because they used the “Mc” prefix, which McDonalds claimed to be rightfully theirs – until the actual McDonald clan (and possibly a few others) came down on them like a ton of bricks.
Dunno whatever happened with that case, though. Anyone?
By: JDK - 10th January 2006 at 13:11
Just wondering, do you have to pay royalties these days to Disney if you use Donald Duck on an aircraft?
They’d like you to… Although I’d think they’d be able to except the BBMF. Boeing wanted royalties from kit manufacturers for the Boeing scale models :rolleyes: I think they got told where to get off. Ralph Laren tried to get the Polo governing body to pay royalties for the use of the word. Possibly the stupidist legal challange in this loony arena.
Certainly a certain private Spitfire owner won’t be paying Disney for putting the peeved Mickey on his Spitfire. But seeing as they lost the last argument with him, I don’t think they’ll try anything with him again…
A good legal defence might be that it represents the colours of a wartime aircraft. The fact that the picture of Donald is there, is meerly ‘accurate’. 😀
By: DazDaMan - 10th January 2006 at 12:47
Daz, could you post a full shot of your model, please…..
Well Done…Cheers,
Lynn
Sorry, it’s not mine. I Googled Jan Zumbach and came up with several shots of different Spitfire VB models 😮
By: LoneStar Merlin - 10th January 2006 at 12:45
This model shows BM144.
Daz, could you post a full shot of your model, please…..
Well Done…
Cheers,
Lynn
By: DazDaMan - 10th January 2006 at 09:15
Just wondering, do you have to pay royalties these days to Disney if you use Donald Duck on an aircraft?
Good question!!
I wouldn’t have thought so, though. I mean, how many warbirds flying these days have some sort of cartoon character nose-art on them? Never heard of their owners getting into bother about the markings – but that doesn’t mean that they didn’t, I suppose. :rolleyes:
By: Dave Homewood - 10th January 2006 at 09:10
Just wondering, do you have to pay royalties these days to Disney if you use Donald Duck on an aircraft?
By: SteveB - 10th January 2006 at 08:38
Zumbach’s Donalds
There is a small booklet published by Wojtek Matusiak titled “Zumbach’s Donalds” Model Detail Photo Monogrpah No 5 by Rossagraph ISBN 83-916229-5-9. It includes a large number of photographs of this artwork on a variety of Spitfire VBs mainly B&W but also some colour.
“Voytech” used to be a regular on this board.
Steve
By: Guzzineil - 10th January 2006 at 03:46
ah, a colour version….
http://www.militaryimages.net/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/10771/cat/710/si/zumbach/perpage/9
Neil.
By: Guzzineil - 10th January 2006 at 03:37
dunno if you’ve seen this one.. B&W, but similar to how its shown on the model in Daz’s post..
http://www.questionofhonor.com/questionofhonor/photo01.htm
Neil.
By: Bradburger - 9th January 2006 at 22:34
Fluffy,
I seem to recall that there were a couple of threads here a while back with some good close up colour shots of the artwork.
Actually, I think I saved them on my PC for reference! 😉
I can’t find the exact thread, but did find this one which has a fairly close colour shot:
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=28209&page=2&pp=30&highlight=EN951
And thanks for the info about the new ‘Majors’.
I too thought it was a bit soon for AB910 to be having one!
[EDIT] Found this one too. No close ups, but it seems Daz might well get what he asked for! 🙂
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=39492&highlight=BM144
Cheers
Paul
By: DazDaMan - 9th January 2006 at 22:14
Sorry about that, there has been a change with the servicing cycle it used to be 6yrs for a major but because of the hours we do each year it is now 8yrs so we are going to change the a/c paint scheme every 4yrs starting with AB.This only applys to the Spitfires at the moment The Spits that have gone past the 4yr point will stay as they are untill major they are MK, PM and P7 although we are thinking about changing the code letter for the 07 season hope this helps
Fluffy
Fluffy
I know P7 flew with 603 Sqdn, but I’ve always wondered what her individual code letter was, since (correct me if I’m wrong) she’s currently painted up to represent L1067, flown by S/L George Denhom.
:confused:
By: Fluffy - 9th January 2006 at 22:00
Sorry about that, there has been a change with the servicing cycle it used to be 6yrs for a major but because of the hours we do each year it is now 8yrs so we are going to change the a/c paint scheme every 4yrs starting with AB.This only applies to the Spitfires at the moment The Spits that have gone past the 4yr point will stay as they are untill major they are MK, PM and P7 although we are thinking about changing the code letter for the 07 season hope this helps
Fluffy