Spot the mistake?

Cool!

He made a mistake. As I have, and you. He corrected it. Fair enough, give him some space!

As I said in my previous post…

I’m not aiming my criticisms at any individual

…and I stand by that (and all credit to the bloke for fixing it quickly). I just get a bee in my bonnet when people get the very basics badly wrong on otherwise excellent restorations.

Let’s not get too heated about this. 🙂

Of course not. But a good old-fashioned lively debate is good fun isn’t it? 😀 :diablo:

as Turbo NZ pointed out, by highlighting the shiny issue, all schemes are to some degree a compromise

Fair point. I can forgive the shiny thing though because (although it can look a bit odd) it does last much longer than a matt scheme and hence helps to preserve the airframe.

Yes I have. So your point is…?

He made a mistake. As I have, and you. He corrected it. Fair enough, give him some space!

Let’s not get too heated about this. 🙂 I’ve seen the Wildcat at Oshkosh. The scheme is so far from accurate it’s (IMHO) awful. But it’s not up to me, is it? It’s also a damn sight more important that it’s safe to fly, than it looks nice, for one. And as Turbo NZ pointed out, by highlighting the shiny issue, all schemes are to some degree a compromise.

Cheers!

Never made a mistake in your life then, Mark G?

Yes I have. So your point is…?

I’m saying that the fin flash is a standard part of any RAF aircraft markings. You say you know how to research. Well, it takes 2 seconds to research this particular detail. You can look at any RAF aeroplane from any time period to see which way round it is. I agree with John C, if you’ve got the resources to perform such a restoration in the first place, how can you possibly get something like this so wrong.

Would you be so dismissive if they’d painted the wing roundels with the blue in the middle? I suspect not, but the principle is precisely the same.

He can paint it purple if he wants.

Of course he can. But I’m not aiming my criticisms at any individual. I’m saying that if anyone chooses NOT to paint an aircraft purple and choose to paint it in it’s original service scheme, then they have to research that scheme and then apply it properly.

I’m restoring a couple of cockpit sections and have researched the details of even the most obscure markings. But we’re not talking about obscure stuff here are we? We’re talking about the national markings. The most basic markings there are on the aircraft.

Oh, and that same mistake has been made on another UK Spitfire recently too…

Makes no difference to me where the aircraft is based. We’re talking about the most basic attention to detail here so it shouldn’t happen anywhere.

ahh,….What about the fact that it is so damn shiny ??!?!!

Betcha they didn’t look that clean in 1944/45:D 😮

TNZ

Even if they’d used gloss paint(which they wouldn’t have in wartime) normal wear and tear would have soon taken the shine off it considering the hard use they got, probably a fair bit of the paint too.

From my point of view, if you’ve got the resources to own and operate an aircraft like this (whatever continent you’re on) surely the small amount extra effort to make it authentic has got to be worth it. If a job is worth doing, it’s worth doing well.

The errors here give an impression of someone who (for the sake of argument) has a Spitfire because someone told them it was cool and they could afford it, without an appreciation of what it actually represents. This may be harsh and entirely untrue of the supposed individual, but as I said that’s the impression it gives.

Alternatively if said owner wants the machine red with green spots that’s his/her choice, but an authentic scheme (if chosen) should be correct out of respect for the aircrew that the machine represents (and careless errors could be be seen as disrespectful in some quarters).

I’d be as critical of a UK based US warbird showing the same inaccuracies!

JC

Martlet/Wildcat

Irrelevant. The fin flash is so fundamental there is NO excuse for getting it wrong in the first place.

Ding ding – round two.

I have to say the colour processing of the original colour image posted did the paint job very little favour. Other shots seen subsequently show the scheme with a much more muted hue.

Mark

ahh,….What about the fact that it is so damn shiny ??!?!!

Betcha they didn’t look that clean in 1944/45:D 😮

TNZ

Irrelevant. The fin flash is so fundamental there is NO excuse for getting it wrong in the first place no matter what the nationality of the ‘painter’

Never made a mistake in your life then, Mark G? At least he made the effort to tidy that bit up. And I have to say that the amount of invicative he got, I’m surprised he did that. He can paint it purple if he wants. Oh, and that same mistake has been made on another UK Spitfire recently too… 😀

Hi CrazyMainer,
I don’t own the aeroplane, but I do know (like you) how to research. I now know (having talked to a few people who know) where the info for the Martlet scheme came from, and it is not an authoritative source; as the person using it should know, as because of what it is, it isn’t firsthand. It’s about 5th hand. There is no evidence that that scheme is accurate. It is, also, not just innacurate, it’s way off.

Fine. The pity is that a number of people offered to help provide the right details; tragically too late. I don’t normally get too bothered by dubiously accurate schemes; but this a/c does bother me because it’s so far off. Still, it’s not my plane, and it’s the owner’s call, and i respect that. Don’t, however tell me it’s accurate. It isn’t I’ve seen the info, there are no W.W.II photos ‘proving’ it, it’s wrong. Sorry.

Everyone tends to be a bit more cavaleer about ‘foreign’ a/c; British, US, etc; it’s a question of familiarity with home turf. However I’ve had two Americans(indipendantly) tell me that:
a) The airshow public in Britain seem to know a lot about the a/c.
b) the airshow public in the US can’t tell one a/c from another.
While this is an exaggaration, standards are forced to some degree by knowlegeable viewers…

Cheers

He had the TAIL-Flash change by the end of the next week

Irrelevant. The fin flash is so fundamental there is NO excuse for getting it wrong in the first place no matter what the nationality of the ‘painter’.

Principles, old boy… 😉

If Americans think we shouldn’t mind if they paint French tail markings on an RAF aircraft, presumably they wouldn’t mind a Mustang with American stars on the wings and Russian stars on the fuselage.

I do know the French fin flash was normally actually on the rudder, but was/is it always rudder and not fin?

I do remember a big Fuss by all of my UK friends when the CAF redone their FM-2 into a Martell-IV. The fin flash was back-arse and boy did they recieve alsorts of Nasty comments.

…and so they damn well should. Good God, it’s not difficult to get right now is it?

There are certain mistakes that creep into a paint scheme that you can forgive up to a point, but to get something as obvious and fundamental as the fin flash the wrong way around is absolutely, totally indefensible in my view.

If you have even half an eye then how can you possibly get something like this wrong?

It’s not even as though it’s a detail unique to certain aircraft or a certain time period. It’s a feature of just about every RAF aircraft that there’s ever been. You don’t even need to have details of the original paint scheme of this Spitfire – details of ANY RAF aircraft will tell you which way around to paint the flash for crying out loud. It beggars belief.

Pathetic. 😡

That was only one of the innacuracies. Guess my American friends wouldn’t mind a Mustang painted with the star pointing down?

Will stick my neck out here, but it seems to me that our American friends have had a liberal attitude towards painting anything that is not of U. S. manufacture. :dev2: If you have a P-51 then it is a matter of getting it all right down to the smallest letter, but if you have a Spit/Sea Fury etc just splash some colors on it which might be in the neighbourhood of the correct one, and nobody cares, cause it ain’t American!

T J Johansen

I do remember a big Fuss by all of my UK friends when the CAF redone their FM-2 into a Martell-IV. The fin flash was back-arse and boy did they recieve alsorts of Nasty comments.

That was only one of the innacuracies. Guess my American friends wouldn’t mind a Mustang painted with the star pointing down?

I remember a mate of mine attempting his first Airfix Spitfire 1a – that fin flash in photo 3 is fairly reminiscent (despite tutelage from me!) :rolleyes:

How does this happen?

When I photographed LA255 at Wittering in August 1981, photo 1, it had a very reasonable representation of its 1 Sqd. livery carried just post war, see photo 2.

How, whilst in the continuous custody of the 1 Sqd. museum collection, it acquired its current ghastly livery, is quite beyond me. This is a throw back as to how the RAF painted its Spitfire heritage in the early 1960’s.

I can see at least seven fundamental errors in the current scheme, seen here at Cottesmore in 2001, photo 3.

They are aware. 🙁

Mark

Love that fin flash…..maybe it’s going to fly backwards..