CWH Bolingbroke restoration update

jamesintucson · **Joined:** Sat Jan 29, 2005 1:42 am **Posts:** 546

k5083 wrote:

Any resemblance between the Pima restoration paint job and actual RAF colours and markings is entirely coincidental.

August

The errors in the fin flash color order and the size of the yellow in the roundel were fixed at least a year ago. The rest of the paint scheme was copied from a wartime photo. The colors were matched to the generally accepted standards for the RAF desert scheme.

I'll post a current photo later. The one thing on the plane that is totally messed up is the one thing nobody has ever complained about.

James

Michel Lemieux · **Posted:** Thu May 07, 2009 1:48 pm

Quote:

The one thing on the plane that is totally messed up is the one thing nobody has ever complained about.

The turret ?

Matt Gunsch · **Posted:** Thu May 07, 2009 1:59 pm

Michel Lemieux wrote:

Quote:

The one thing on the plane that is totally messed up is the one thing nobody has ever complained about.

The turret ?

The nose, every one looks like it was hit by a sewer pipe and caved in, it must have happned to the jig at the factory.

Michel Lemieux · **Posted:** Thu May 07, 2009 2:10 pm

I wonder if James was talking about a resto error or something else :?:

Michel Lemieux · **Posted:** Thu May 07, 2009 2:59 pm

Quote:

The nose, every one looks like it was hit by a sewer pipe and caved in, it must have happned to the jig at the factory.

Kept the pilot happy on the ground.........made it a "bit" more complex for the guys bending metal at the factory

jamesintucson · **Joined:** Sat Jan 29, 2005 1:42 am **Posts:** 546

Michel Lemieux wrote:

I wonder if James was talking about a resto error or something else :?:

Here is the current photo. Taken today.

It is a restoration error and you can see it in the photo.

James

Matt Gunsch · **Posted:** Thu May 07, 2009 3:59 pm

The nose is dished in on the Starboard side as well

Where's my pony ?

BLR · **Joined:** Mon May 03, 2004 2:47 pm **Posts:** 425

Thanks for the updated photo.

Re: the restoration error, as pointed out, the glass on the right hand side of the nose looks pushed in, also the pitot-static tube mast on the nose looks to be missing.

Brian.

Michel Lemieux · **Posted:** Thu May 07, 2009 4:47 pm

More obvious on the new pic

Tks.

Is the window replicated in metal or plastic ?

jamesintucson · **Joined:** Sat Jan 29, 2005 1:42 am **Posts:** 546

Michel Lemieux wrote:

More obvious on the new pic

Tks.

Is the window replicated in metal or plastic ?

It is plastic. The company that did them for us couldn't follow instructions and took so long that by the time we got them the plane had to go on display with the bad one. Actually they made two and screwed them both up. Although they did do a good job on the windows for the other side.

Matt,
A link to your pony: http://www.pimaair.org/project.php?rid=8

James

JDK · **Posted:** Thu May 07, 2009 10:04 pm

jamesintucson wrote:

k5083 wrote:

Any resemblance between the Pima restoration paint job and actual RAF colours and markings is entirely coincidental.

The errors in the fin flash color order and the size of the yellow in the roundel were fixed at least a year ago. The rest of the paint scheme was copied from a wartime photo. The colors were matched to the generally accepted standards for the RAF desert scheme.

Well, a big thumbs up to the Pima folks for 'getting it right'. It's easy to criticise, harder to put a scheme out there and face the critics, and rare that errors are corrected. Thank you! :prayer:

BTW, are you sure the underwing roundel had the yellow ring? (Runs, hides...) :hide:

Matt Gunsch · **Posted:** Thu May 07, 2009 10:05 pm

James,
Call me when it is ready, I'll have to move some things in the backyard to make it fit.........

jamesintucson · **Joined:** Sat Jan 29, 2005 1:42 am **Posts:** 546

JDK wrote:

jamesintucson wrote:

k5083 wrote:

Any resemblance between the Pima restoration paint job and actual RAF colours and markings is entirely coincidental.

The errors in the fin flash color order and the size of the yellow in the roundel were fixed at least a year ago. The rest of the paint scheme was copied from a wartime photo. The colors were matched to the generally accepted standards for the RAF desert scheme.

Well, a big thumbs up to the Pima folks for 'getting it right'. It's easy to criticise, harder to put a scheme out there and face the critics, and rare that errors are corrected. Thank you! :prayer:

BTW, are you sure the underwing roundel had the yellow ring? (Runs, hides...) :hide:

Surprisingly enough, yes. Just proves that they often got it "wrong" at the time too. A total lack of consideration for future curators and modelers is what it is. The RAF painters obviously didn't know that everything always exactly follows the published regs and that changes are always made at the exact momement those regs change.

The reference photo is in a book at work but I'll track down the citation for you tomorrow.

James

Forgotten Field · **Posted:** Thu May 07, 2009 10:54 pm

I heard the yellow ring was to actually show a piece of equipment NOT given by the Americans...

Not only ducking, but wiring in, digging deep, not even a patrol tonight....

JDK · **Posted:** Thu May 07, 2009 11:00 pm

jamesintucson wrote:

JDK wrote:

BTW, are you sure the underwing roundel had the yellow ring? (Runs, hides...) :hide:

Surprisingly enough, yes. Just proves that they often got it "wrong" at the time too.

Thanks, it would be nice to see the pic too.

Cheers,

Warbird Information Exchange

CWH Bolingbroke restoration update

Who is online