I suppose it’s a long shot, but wouldn’t it be great if the Dominie could be re-engineered back to original standard – then you could slap CAW markings on it – ahh, Manby… ahh, Strubby… 🙂

The one Newark have obtained is pretty much in original configuration (No new nose sections) having been withdrawn before the mid life update

OOps, didn’t see Dave’s post earlier!

Ah, but is it a “Seafire”, or a “Sea Fire”? 😉

hee hee – Pilots Notes for the respective types say Seafire and Sea Hawk!!

Lee, could you outline the differences for us?

I suppose it depends on whether you view it as merely a part of a whole, or as a historical artefact in it’s own right.

I wonder how many of the type of tourist that visits the Orkneys would be interested in viewing a recovered warbird wing, or how many of us would make the trek up there to see it?

Moggy

The Orkney Museum already has a small section on Orkney during the war – the Spitfire wing would make a fascinating addition to that I’m sure.

I’m glad I asked the original question now. The replies have thrown up far more information and generated far more interest than I ever expected. Strangely enough I seem to have memories of Olive green/ Earth on some of the Army Air Corps Scout helicopters when they were first introduced. Probably brain fade though.

No, your brain is fine! Army Air Corps helicopters followed their fixed wing (Auster) equivalents in being Dark Green/Dark Earth until the early 70s-ish, when they started going green/black, before going green/grey in the 80s. Beavers were the same, although I don’t think any of the remaining ones went green/grey before withdrawal.

Regarding the FAA, the Admiralty changed the orders mid-war (1942 sticks in my mind, but I’d need to check) so that even second line types based on shore were Temperate Sea Scheme, but with yellow undersides.

The other thing to remember about the switch from Green/Earth to Green/Ocean grey is that it was primarily designed to improve concealment at the higher levels the RAF found themselves fighting at in 1941. Not so relevant to Night bombers whose primary purpose for upper surface camouflage was to break up their image when dispersed.

Similar reasons traing types and types such as Austers remained in Green/Earth – they didn’t operate at higher levels.

Interested in where the Fleet Air Arm came in with this change…?

They didn’t, they had their own schemes

More likely it will go into the Treasury’s coffers. This Museum is publicly funded and should not need to make supplementary charges of this type. There is also a danger that charges of this type start to grow, thin end of the wedge syndrome. With volunteer run museums I would take a much different attitude, you can be more certain the money will be used directly for the benefit of the museum and its artefacts.

How about leaving it to a voluntary donation………??

I doubt it, the public money the Museum gets comes in Grant-in-aid form, and from the last published accounts ‘Insufficient Funding’ is seen as the No.1 risk to the future of the Museum. It usually runs at a paper loss, and nny money that goes out the Museum to the Govt is in the form of the usual taxes.

http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/documents/annual_reports/RAFM_2012_13_Published_Accounts.pdf