Wed Oct 22, 2008 4:36 pm
Thanks Steve. It's a little hard with my monitor to exactly pick the colors. Is that dark brown/green on top and sides? Gray or sky blue underneath? Do you have any other photos of that particular Moth? What is the history of that particular color scheme? There's another post one this thread of a black nosed RCAF aircraft. I'm interested because this may be a candidate for Lone Star's repaint.
A nice looking kite!
regards,
Doug
A nice looking kite!
regards,
Doug
Wed Oct 22, 2008 8:02 pm
Here is another shot of the Queen Bee showing the colour scheme.
Dave's link to the Vintage Wings site will show the DH-82C in the yellow scheme.
http://www.vintagewings.ca/page?a=221&lang=en-CA
This site has some details as well for the camo version.
http://www.ipmsstockholm.org/magazine/2 ... r_moth.htm
Dave's link to the Vintage Wings site will show the DH-82C in the yellow scheme.
http://www.vintagewings.ca/page?a=221&lang=en-CA
This site has some details as well for the camo version.
http://www.ipmsstockholm.org/magazine/2 ... r_moth.htm
Thu Oct 23, 2008 8:18 pm
Good photo Steve, thanks. Do you have any pix of a Queen Bee on floats? Flying boats and floats are still my first love.
Between Australian and Canadian friends, we now have six or seven alternative color schemes to the traditional camo over yellow. Thanks ,mates; Thanks, eh?
Doug
Between Australian and Canadian friends, we now have six or seven alternative color schemes to the traditional camo over yellow. Thanks ,mates; Thanks, eh?
Doug
Thu Oct 23, 2008 8:20 pm
Thanks a bunch everyone. I'll be off line for a few days for Wings Over Houston. I'll be back on line Monday night, or maybe Tuesday, depending on how tired I am.
blue skies...
blue skies...
Fri Oct 24, 2008 1:06 am
Hi Doug,
I missed this thread until now. A few points. RAAF Tigers didn't have the anti-spin strakes on the rear fuselage that yours has got (the Queen Bee also is without them, and there are other minor construction differences too) so it would be 'wrong' for an RAAF scheme. If that doesn't bother you, fair enough, of course we'd be delighted if you choose an RAAF scheme.
I'd be happy to help. I'm sure I can get both the official pattern and info on how the schemes really turned out. Bear in mind we aren't talking 'green' and 'brown' here; the RAAF colours are different to the RAF's, and they both initially used a shadow shading scheme with lighter versions of the colours on the lower wings. I should be ale to arrange for exact colour specs and patterns if you let me help - remember I've access to the RAAF Museum's archive.
This is the RAAF Museum's airworthy Tiger:
And seen with a postwar schemed privately owned example:
The museum also has a static Tiger in an overall yellow with blue/white roundels (no red).
All that said, you'd be better to go with an RAF scheme as it's appropriate for your version - a RNZAF or RCAF version could also work (more appropriate for the configuration).
I'll dig up some other sample schemes later.
Cheers
I missed this thread until now. A few points. RAAF Tigers didn't have the anti-spin strakes on the rear fuselage that yours has got (the Queen Bee also is without them, and there are other minor construction differences too) so it would be 'wrong' for an RAAF scheme. If that doesn't bother you, fair enough, of course we'd be delighted if you choose an RAAF scheme.
I'd be happy to help. I'm sure I can get both the official pattern and info on how the schemes really turned out. Bear in mind we aren't talking 'green' and 'brown' here; the RAAF colours are different to the RAF's, and they both initially used a shadow shading scheme with lighter versions of the colours on the lower wings. I should be ale to arrange for exact colour specs and patterns if you let me help - remember I've access to the RAAF Museum's archive.
This is the RAAF Museum's airworthy Tiger:
And seen with a postwar schemed privately owned example:
The museum also has a static Tiger in an overall yellow with blue/white roundels (no red).
All that said, you'd be better to go with an RAF scheme as it's appropriate for your version - a RNZAF or RCAF version could also work (more appropriate for the configuration).
I'll dig up some other sample schemes later.
Cheers
Fri Oct 24, 2008 1:57 am
You can go for a smack in the eye scheme. This is the Shuttleworth Collection's example:
Pre-war Central Flying School Aerobatic Team colours.
Doug, get ahold of Stuart McKay's 'The Tiger Moth' picture book - your library should be able to help.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tiger-Moth-Havi ... 1857800613
Pre-war Central Flying School Aerobatic Team colours.
Doug, get ahold of Stuart McKay's 'The Tiger Moth' picture book - your library should be able to help.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tiger-Moth-Havi ... 1857800613
Fri Oct 24, 2008 10:51 am
Doug
The DH 82B Queen Bee on floats. Like James states there were some structural differences as well. The Queen Bee had the DH.60-type wooden fuselage in place of D.K.82 metal-and-fabric type, with 130 hp Gipsy Major I engine, a larger fuel tank in centre section and radio control gear in rear cockpit.
from this site:
http://www.jaapteeuwen.com/ww2aircraft/ ... %20BEE.htm
The DH 82B Queen Bee on floats. Like James states there were some structural differences as well. The Queen Bee had the DH.60-type wooden fuselage in place of D.K.82 metal-and-fabric type, with 130 hp Gipsy Major I engine, a larger fuel tank in centre section and radio control gear in rear cockpit.
from this site:
http://www.jaapteeuwen.com/ww2aircraft/ ... %20BEE.htm
Mon Oct 27, 2008 8:39 pm
Steve, Thanks for the Bee on floats. Sir Winston and Tommy don't look very impressed, though.
James, Glad you're here and thanks for the pix. That 692 Moth is pretty nice looking. I personally like the 'delete red' markings of the SW Pac. theatre. I talked to Tommy Saturday briefly about the project and he wants to see all the illustrations I've gotten. We're keeping all options open and it will be a while before we need to seriously plan the painting.
Our Moth has a single exhaust poking out the right cowl panel. I see yours have the four downpipes. Was one setup particular to one air force? Who had strakes and who didn't? This will be good to know. It wouldn't be a problem having an RAAF plane with strakes to us-we're used to explaining odd variations of our warbirds. ( I just spent a weekend at Wings Over Houston telling everyone that our Dauntless is actually an Army A-24 painted blue with a tail hook.)
Any structural differences between various nations' Moths would be good to know.
I think the 'Smack in the Eye' concept is also viable, especially since I just saw a white wing/red fuse. Moth fly into WOH Friday. Ed Martin in Lousiana built it and friend of his flew it in. Ed actually flew his Stinson Reliant.
Also if anyone knows anything mechanical that we need to be aware of or look out for, please let us know. I'm planning on going down there next weekend to look it over closely and maybe photograph parts of it.
I do a bit of public relations with the aircraft at airshows (when I'm not draggin towbars for the tug) and any good stories or Tiger Moth lore would be good to have.
thanks and keep it up,
Doug.
James, Glad you're here and thanks for the pix. That 692 Moth is pretty nice looking. I personally like the 'delete red' markings of the SW Pac. theatre. I talked to Tommy Saturday briefly about the project and he wants to see all the illustrations I've gotten. We're keeping all options open and it will be a while before we need to seriously plan the painting.
Our Moth has a single exhaust poking out the right cowl panel. I see yours have the four downpipes. Was one setup particular to one air force? Who had strakes and who didn't? This will be good to know. It wouldn't be a problem having an RAAF plane with strakes to us-we're used to explaining odd variations of our warbirds. ( I just spent a weekend at Wings Over Houston telling everyone that our Dauntless is actually an Army A-24 painted blue with a tail hook.)
Any structural differences between various nations' Moths would be good to know.
I think the 'Smack in the Eye' concept is also viable, especially since I just saw a white wing/red fuse. Moth fly into WOH Friday. Ed Martin in Lousiana built it and friend of his flew it in. Ed actually flew his Stinson Reliant.
Also if anyone knows anything mechanical that we need to be aware of or look out for, please let us know. I'm planning on going down there next weekend to look it over closely and maybe photograph parts of it.
I do a bit of public relations with the aircraft at airshows (when I'm not draggin towbars for the tug) and any good stories or Tiger Moth lore would be good to have.
thanks and keep it up,
Doug.
Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:00 pm
One thing that distinguishes the Canadian 82C is that it had metal interplane struts which were much thinner than the wood ones used on the British Tigers. That is the easiest way to spot a Canadian Tiger with its canopy removed pretending to be a British one (Cavanaugh's is one such). In this thread, the pic of #8869 in Dave's post shows the thin struts. Don't think an RCAF scheme would look right on your 82A.
August
August
Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:07 am
Hi Doug,
I was at the museum today, got some interesting stuff, thanks to a colleague of mine. How about a foliage green with red crosses and blue/white roundels?
Looks like I'm going to start revising my Tiger info!
Stuff to look out for? It's a broad question. Th official, and reliable stuff comes from the DH Heritage that I gave you the link to. If you have specific questions, I can ask, but there's better experts than me on other forums, I suspect.
More soon.
(PS, thanks August.)
I was at the museum today, got some interesting stuff, thanks to a colleague of mine. How about a foliage green with red crosses and blue/white roundels?
Looks like I'm going to start revising my Tiger info!
Stuff to look out for? It's a broad question. Th official, and reliable stuff comes from the DH Heritage that I gave you the link to. If you have specific questions, I can ask, but there's better experts than me on other forums, I suspect.
More soon.
(PS, thanks August.)
Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:28 am
Canso42 wrote:I think the 'Smack in the Eye' concept is also viable, especially since I just saw a white wing/red fuse. Moth fly into WOH Friday. Ed Martin in Lousiana built it and friend of his flew it in. Ed actually flew his Stinson Reliant.
For those who weren't there...
Ryan
Wed Oct 29, 2008 12:31 am
G'day James,
I was wondering when the ambulance version would come up and I almost suggested it myself earlier in the thread. That one would require a modified turtle deck but would truly be a novelty. I have seen photos of two different RAAF ambulance Tigers but for the life of me I can't seem to find them now.
I'm sure they were on the net and I know they are in an Aussie book on the subject of Tiger Moths and 2 other standard RAAF trainers but I can't even remember what they were for sure even though I have the book somewhere. If you google for Connellan Airways Tiger Moth ambulance you'll find a couple of pics of a post war ambulance used in the NT by Connellan Airways. It's pretty much as the RAAF ones were but was a post war conversion.
Also on the subject of anti-spin strakes, as far as I know the RAAF ones (or aircraft built here but supplied to New Zealand or South Africa) were the only ones that didn't have them during the war. British and Canadian wartime produced birds had them.
Cheers,
Ross.
Fri Oct 31, 2008 8:51 pm
Just a quick link:
http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/p ... p?p=242742
More soon, lots of interesting research.
http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/p ... p?p=242742
More soon, lots of interesting research.
Sun Nov 02, 2008 9:16 pm
RyanShort1 wrote:For those who weren't there...
Thanks, (I think) Ryan. Nothing wrong with that, it's a very accurate copy of a wind-up tin-toy scheme.
Sun Nov 02, 2008 10:09 pm
OK, a couple of answers, thoughts.
The RAAF Museum has a US supplier of RAAF camouflage paint colours, and FS numbers for them, as used on the RAAF Museum's Tiger.
There seems to have been some Australian Tigers in Foliage Green (as per the example I posted in the main Hangar, and the example representing A17-489) but loaned to US units and with US Star & Bar - that would be very different, and of US interest, IMHO! I've not been shown /found photos yet, but I'll keep on it.
See below - but yours is good.
See below, again. Basically only British examples had them, but once introduced, ALL British eamples had to have them. (Incidentally, the Dutch insisted on a different fin design, of a long triangle, which looked awful and no-one else thought necassary. There's now one flyer in Holland left with it on, I believe.)
The only structural difference was the Queen Bee's wooden Moth Major fuselage. The rest are bolt on/off variations, albeit of major components.
I assked our Tiger-maintaining Techos. The answer to 'anything in particular to watch out for?' apparently is 'Anything with de Havilland on it'.
More seriously, joining the de Havilland Moth Club and getting a complete list of the tech orders from de Havilland Support is sensible - basically vital, I'm told. (In the US the certification process essential exempts you from having to get the right documentation, and getting to the current mod-state but elsewhere, you need it - ergo you need to be in contact with DHS.) You could do without, but it's the hard way, and is risky that you might miss something. de Havilland Support are there to ensure your Tiger is 'safe', current and right.
www.dhmothclub.co.uk - And this gives a very good idea of what the Club's about: http://www.dhmothclub.co.uk/article.html de Havilland Support: http://www.dhsupport.com/
Tiger variations.
I'm no expert, and I've not yet found a good short summary as to the differences between types. However, here's a start. I may be wrong, corrections welcome. Part of the problem is that the Tiger is made up on main components that can be bolted together, erector-set or Meccano style and this it's all-too-easy to change a Tiger from one version to another.
DH-82
With the 120hp Gipsy III engine Sometimes known as the Tiger Moth I in RAF use.
DH-82A
As above but with the Gipsy Major engine, officially the Tiger Moth II in RAF use, but rarely seen or heard - AFAIK, the II supplanted the few I and so the numeral was generally ignored, they being assumed to be DH82As. Early British Tigers did not have anti-spin strakes fitted but when brought in they were a mandatory fitment. Later British Tigers had the ply leading edges fitted, this ply was standard on Australian production from the start.
DH-82B
The Queen Bee. This had a WOODEN Moth Major type fuselage with the rest of the Tiger components and also remote control gear fitted, filling the rear cockpit. Mostly flown with floats fired from a catapult. There's an airworthy example (without the RC gear, IIRC) and a non flyer at the DH Heritage Museum with the gear fitted.
DH-82C
Canadian version. 145 Gipsy 1C engine, metal wing struts, and often (not always?) fitted with a Perspex canopy, heating (and longer exhaust pipe), and wheel brakes. No anti-spin strakes. Some (136?) fitted with the 120 hp Menasco Pirate engine. Also two part engine cowling (rather than three), slightly forward raked undercarriage (gear) to counter the brakes+trainee effect, a different instrument panel, tailwheel rather than skid, trim-tabs on the both tailplanes (horiz stab) rather than the one spring-loaded one. Wooden or metal skis could added where required.
Australian-built Tiger Moths
General Motors Holden built Gipsy engine. No anti-spin strakes, but ply leading edges fitted. Dust filter on the carb-air intake, and a metal strap-retained oil tank, rather than the bolted on version on British production. The four direct exhaust pipes seems to be a postwar Aussie variation, rather than the one 'siamesed' long pipe seen generally on wartime Aussie and British examples.
I think that's all correct!
And a couple of spelling points to impress and retain credibility with the Tiger troops: It's 'Gipsy', and there's a space, no capital 'd' but capital 'H': 'de Havilland', but 'DH' is the correct abbreviation.
Cheers,
The RAAF Museum has a US supplier of RAAF camouflage paint colours, and FS numbers for them, as used on the RAAF Museum's Tiger.
There seems to have been some Australian Tigers in Foliage Green (as per the example I posted in the main Hangar, and the example representing A17-489) but loaned to US units and with US Star & Bar - that would be very different, and of US interest, IMHO! I've not been shown /found photos yet, but I'll keep on it.
Our Moth has a single exhaust poking out the right cowl panel. I see yours have the four downpipes. Was one setup particular to one air force?
See below - but yours is good.
Who had strakes and who didn't? This will be good to know.
See below, again. Basically only British examples had them, but once introduced, ALL British eamples had to have them. (Incidentally, the Dutch insisted on a different fin design, of a long triangle, which looked awful and no-one else thought necassary. There's now one flyer in Holland left with it on, I believe.)
Any structural differences between various nations' Moths would be good to know.
The only structural difference was the Queen Bee's wooden Moth Major fuselage. The rest are bolt on/off variations, albeit of major components.
Also if anyone knows anything mechanical that we need to be aware of or look out for, please let us know. I'm planning on going down there next weekend to look it over closely and maybe photograph parts of it.
I assked our Tiger-maintaining Techos. The answer to 'anything in particular to watch out for?' apparently is 'Anything with de Havilland on it'.
More seriously, joining the de Havilland Moth Club and getting a complete list of the tech orders from de Havilland Support is sensible - basically vital, I'm told. (In the US the certification process essential exempts you from having to get the right documentation, and getting to the current mod-state but elsewhere, you need it - ergo you need to be in contact with DHS.) You could do without, but it's the hard way, and is risky that you might miss something. de Havilland Support are there to ensure your Tiger is 'safe', current and right.
www.dhmothclub.co.uk - And this gives a very good idea of what the Club's about: http://www.dhmothclub.co.uk/article.html de Havilland Support: http://www.dhsupport.com/
Tiger variations.
I'm no expert, and I've not yet found a good short summary as to the differences between types. However, here's a start. I may be wrong, corrections welcome. Part of the problem is that the Tiger is made up on main components that can be bolted together, erector-set or Meccano style and this it's all-too-easy to change a Tiger from one version to another.
DH-82
With the 120hp Gipsy III engine Sometimes known as the Tiger Moth I in RAF use.
DH-82A
As above but with the Gipsy Major engine, officially the Tiger Moth II in RAF use, but rarely seen or heard - AFAIK, the II supplanted the few I and so the numeral was generally ignored, they being assumed to be DH82As. Early British Tigers did not have anti-spin strakes fitted but when brought in they were a mandatory fitment. Later British Tigers had the ply leading edges fitted, this ply was standard on Australian production from the start.
DH-82B
The Queen Bee. This had a WOODEN Moth Major type fuselage with the rest of the Tiger components and also remote control gear fitted, filling the rear cockpit. Mostly flown with floats fired from a catapult. There's an airworthy example (without the RC gear, IIRC) and a non flyer at the DH Heritage Museum with the gear fitted.
DH-82C
Canadian version. 145 Gipsy 1C engine, metal wing struts, and often (not always?) fitted with a Perspex canopy, heating (and longer exhaust pipe), and wheel brakes. No anti-spin strakes. Some (136?) fitted with the 120 hp Menasco Pirate engine. Also two part engine cowling (rather than three), slightly forward raked undercarriage (gear) to counter the brakes+trainee effect, a different instrument panel, tailwheel rather than skid, trim-tabs on the both tailplanes (horiz stab) rather than the one spring-loaded one. Wooden or metal skis could added where required.
Australian-built Tiger Moths
General Motors Holden built Gipsy engine. No anti-spin strakes, but ply leading edges fitted. Dust filter on the carb-air intake, and a metal strap-retained oil tank, rather than the bolted on version on British production. The four direct exhaust pipes seems to be a postwar Aussie variation, rather than the one 'siamesed' long pipe seen generally on wartime Aussie and British examples.
I think that's all correct!
And a couple of spelling points to impress and retain credibility with the Tiger troops: It's 'Gipsy', and there's a space, no capital 'd' but capital 'H': 'de Havilland', but 'DH' is the correct abbreviation.
Cheers,