dark light

posart

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 103 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Forum Virtual Art Gallery #999096
    posart
    Participant

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]216288[/ATTACH]

    Just finished this one in time for the anniversary. I had never painted the Eder attack before so it was nice to try something different. The basics are that it shows Henry Maudslay’s crew diving past Waldeck Castle during the very difficult approach to attack the Eder, which can be seen in the distance. They were one of the eight crews that failed to return, shot down by anti-aircraft fire on the way home.

    Mark P

    in reply to: Last Dambuster. Johnny Johnson's Account. #999117
    posart
    Participant

    Yes, indeed – but at that height and speed they were outside the parametres for a “hit” weren’t they?

    Charlie, the method of attack against the Sorpe was different from that of the Mohne and Eder. They were briefed to fly down the length of the dam itself and drop the Upkeep as close to the centre as possible, without needing to bounce or spin it. Johnny told me that the aim was to drop it as low and as slow as possible whilst lining up the port outer so that it was over the crest of the dam.

    in reply to: Who are these Battle of Britain pilots? #966222
    posart
    Participant

    Looks like Ken Wilkinson second left with his trademark mop of white hair!

    in reply to: The RAF pilot who dropped the Tricolor on occupied Paris #956089
    posart
    Participant

    …this was my take on the operation for the ‘other’ magazine’s cover. It’s good to see the story getting some nationwide publicity, it was a pretty spectacular idea after all!

    Incidentally we found out that that IWM photo is mis-captioned, it’s definitely not T4800, you can see as much from the serial number!

    Mark P

    in reply to: Is this a Blenheim Mk V? #965945
    posart
    Participant

    OK, here’s my final attempt to prove it’s an ’88!

    The photo shows the ‘mystery’ aircraft alongside a Ju88 in a similar attitude.

    The main identifying points are the very large tailplane (longer than the height of the tail, (Blenheim was about the same), and the curve of the engine nacelles at the rear. The ‘turret’ is a mark on the negative. The cockpit is higher than the fuselage but because of the rear light source most of it blends in with the sky.

    in reply to: Is this a Blenheim Mk V? #966029
    posart
    Participant

    The very distinctive smooth curve at the rear of the (obviously underslung) nacelles and the large tailplane show that it is either a Ju88 or 188. The short ventral gondola says Ju88. Seems very clear to me!

    in reply to: Is this a Blenheim Mk V? #1015807
    posart
    Participant

    I still think it’s an ’88 not a 188, have a look at this photo in our library of a C-6 doing a very similar low level pass…

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/ww2images/6897167661/

    I think the more curved shape of the 88 tail is lost by the over-exposure.

    in reply to: Is this a Blenheim Mk V? #1017899
    posart
    Participant

    I think it’s a Ju88 with a mark on the photo which gives the appearance of a mid upper turret…

    in reply to: Is this a Blenheim Mk V? #1027626
    posart
    Participant

    I think it’s a Ju88 with a mark on the photo which gives the appearance of a mid upper turret…

    in reply to: Dam Buster query #996897
    posart
    Participant

    Op Guzzle was the disposal of the Upkeeps…

    in reply to: Find your nearest bomber station… #1037968
    posart
    Participant

    …apart from Bottesford…!

    in reply to: Lancaster Identity #1054273
    posart
    Participant

    Halley’s book is wrong, 106 codes were ZN, the ZM coded Hampden illustrated is from 185 Squadron.

    in reply to: Lancaster Identity #1055364
    posart
    Participant

    I think the thing to do would be to go through the crews lost on the 25th/26th February raid to Augsburg and see if any did their first tour on 106 Sqn. (Some crews even changed squadrons in mid-tour.) That would probably solve the riddle.

    The phantom Z behind the main ZN code is formed by one of the fuselage windows and probably a scratch!

    The addition of a 2 (or squared) after an id letter was introduced when squadrons started to exceed 26 aircraft and used up the entire alphabet. You’d therefore have ‘P Squared’ not replacing ‘P’ Peter but flying at the same time.

    MP

    in reply to: WWII Spitfire and Hurricane photo help please #1085331
    posart
    Participant

    The Hurricanes are also 32 Squadron, MkIIcs I would have thought.

    in reply to: Heads Up WW1 Top Gun, Revealed. #1086998
    posart
    Participant

    Lovely to see them but don’t know if you’d ever catch me in the gunners position, standing up in the FE.2.

    I was lucky enough to fly in the Fee’s gunner’s position a couple of years ago and can confirm that at no point did I ever feel the slightest urge to stand up and wave the gun around, even when we were joined by the Pfalz! Clinging on bravely to the seatless floor was my choice and I stuck to it…

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 103 total)