- Thread starter
- #361
Snautzer01
Honourably banned
- 43,128
- Mar 26, 2007
As an eBay Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
eBay: North American B-25 Mitchell
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
- Thread starter
- #362
Snautzer01
Honourably banned
- 43,128
- Mar 26, 2007
As an eBay Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
- Thread starter
- #363
Snautzer01
Honourably banned
- 43,128
- Mar 26, 2007
As an eBay Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
special ed
2nd Lieutenant
- 5,689
- May 13, 2018
No dorsal gun turrets on the 25 in post 362.
No armament at all - it's a "hack". Of interest is that this is a former modified "commerce destroyer" (see the steel plate with 4 holes in the nose) sans the guns and I believe stripped off paint.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #367
Snautzer01
Honourably banned
- 43,128
- Mar 26, 2007
As an eBay Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
- Thread starter
- #368
Snautzer01
Honourably banned
- 43,128
- Mar 26, 2007
As an eBay Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
- Thread starter
- #369
Snautzer01
Honourably banned
- 43,128
- Mar 26, 2007
As an eBay Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Nice shots!
Dunno man, I can tell you that it's North American Mitchell Mk.I FK161, the RAF's first B-25.
- Thread starter
- #373
Snautzer01
Honourably banned
- 43,128
- Mar 26, 2007
Notice P of prototype.
So she had to be repainted. Here a shot showing her in June 1942 during trials. Please note the "P" marking wasn't applied there.
Another Mitchell tested by the RAF
the source: AMERICAN AIRCRAFT IN RAF SERVICE 1939-1945: NORTH AMERICAN NA-82 MITCHELL.
Another Mitchell tested by the RAF
the source: AMERICAN AIRCRAFT IN RAF SERVICE 1939-1945: NORTH AMERICAN NA-82 MITCHELL.
These are two different a/cs: the top one is B-25B (Mitchel I) and the second one is B-25C (Mitchell II) - note the open and covered tail skid.
FK161 is Mitchell I (B-25B) and the a/c in post # 341 is Mitchell I. The colours in the first photo (post #341) appear very bright and contrasting (like North African camouflage) but they are not. They are the same as in post #357. A different type of negative film was used for the first photo (e.g. red appears almost white).
Cheers!
Last edited:
Taking a close up look at the pics and details you maentioned I agree that these are two different Mitchells, And you are right. A good catch.
Regarding the pics in post # 241 and 375 above .... both images were taken with the yellow filter what caused the red colour looking so light. And yes, contrary to that the first shot in the post #374 was taken with the orthochromatic film what can indicate the dark and almost unseen yellow ring of the RAF roundel. However it doesn't seem there was applied the two tone camo on tops. The second picture there was taken with the common negative I would say. But there is not any trace of a such camo there as well. In the case the Dark Earth and Dark Green should be noticed as the difference in tones would be more visible. It is very likely that the second colour could be added later what may indicate the different shape of the camo spots seen on the fin and rudder. in both #375 post pic and the first of the #374. It's possible that both the Mitchell I and II could get there some of paint to overspray the US serials only and for making of the background for the RAF fin flashes at that time.
PS... the post edited. THX Yves.
Regarding the pics in post # 241 and 375 above .... both images were taken with the yellow filter what caused the red colour looking so light. And yes, contrary to that the first shot in the post #374 was taken with the orthochromatic film what can indicate the dark and almost unseen yellow ring of the RAF roundel. However it doesn't seem there was applied the two tone camo on tops. The second picture there was taken with the common negative I would say. But there is not any trace of a such camo there as well. In the case the Dark Earth and Dark Green should be noticed as the difference in tones would be more visible. It is very likely that the second colour could be added later what may indicate the different shape of the camo spots seen on the fin and rudder. in both #375 post pic and the first of the #374. It's possible that both the Mitchell I and II could get there some of paint to overspray the US serials only and for making of the background for the RAF fin flashes at that time.
PS... the post edited. THX Yves.
Taking a close up look at the pics and details you maentioned I agree that these are two different Mitchells, And you are right. A good catch.
Regarding the pics in post # 241 and 375 above .... both images were taken with the yellow filter what caused the red colour looking so light. And yes, contrary to that the first shot in the post #374 was taken with the orthochromatic film what can indicate the dark and almost unseen yellow ring of the RAF roundel. However it doesn't seem there was applied the two tone camo on tops. The second picture there was taken with the common negative I would say. But there is not any trace of a such camo there as well. It is very likely that the second colour was added later what may indicate the different shape of the camo spot seen on the fin and rudder. in both #375 post pic and the first of the #374. It's possible that both the Mitchell I and II got there some of paint to overspray the US yellow serials and for the background for the RAF fin flashes.
PS... the post edited. THX Ives.
Wojtek, the B-25B (Mitchell I.) in your post # 374 is FK 165 as per the original source:
Mitchell Mark I, FK165, on the ground at Hamble, Hampshire, following erection at Air Service Training Ltd. This aircraft was one of three Mark Is (B-25B) initially delivered to the United Kingdom for trials at the Aeroplane and Armament Experimental Establishment, which rejected them for operational service. FK165 was then sent to West Raynham, Norfolk, where it served as an operational trainer with Nos. 98 and 180 Squadrons RAF.
The B-25B (Mitchell I.) in you post # 375 is FK161. Supposedly this is the same a/c as in the earliest post #341.
These are 2 different a/cs and their camos and national insignia are completely different in the photos. I believe the photos of FK161 are from later period (see late type RAF-roundels) and eventually with new camouflage.
RAF received 23 B-25-B (Mitchell I): FK161(1) and FK162-183 (22). FK165 (photo from the IWM) is from the second batch.
AFAIK (Dana Bell is the one to prove it or not
) Mitchells for RAF have been delivered in OD/NG from the factory and not in RAF-type camouflage. FK161 was probably overpainted in Britain at a later stage. Here she is again:Copy from "British Warplanes of WWII" by Daniel J. March found in our forum here: RAF B-25's?
Cheers!
P.S. A photo of Mitchells I. en route to Great Britain:
Photo from this Canadian site: Harold A. Skaarup web pages
Last edited:
Oh .. just grasped. I have confused the FK 161 and FK 165. Now all is clear.
Yves, again thank you very much for the correction and the explanation. Oh boy. I really need a new pair of glasses and getting a new hardware with larger displayer. The smartphone isn't a great device for such work.
smiles,
Yves, again thank you very much for the correction and the explanation. Oh boy. I really need a new pair of glasses and getting a new hardware with larger displayer. The smartphone isn't a great device for such work.
smiles,
Wojtek, you are welcome!Oh .. just grasped. I have confused the FK 161 and FK 165. Now all is clear.
Yves, again thank you very much for the correction and the explanation. Oh boy. I really need a new pair of glasses and getting a new hardware with larger displayer. The smartphone isn't a great device for such work.
smiles,
I've had this discussion in one or another way before and I knew the obvious differences between some of the RAF-Mitchells. I haven't seen the photo in post # 341 (the one that started the questions) though.
From my collection of photos (mostly from books and the internet, but before 2010) I found a nice colour photo of a B-25C (no additional block number) prepared for RAF, but never delivered, with US-insignia on both wings (probably covering the RAF-roundels) and RAF-style fin flash. Similar photos can be found in several books, sometimes with the information, these are a/cs prepared for North Africa. The camouflage is the standard OD/NG.
And one more thing: some interesting details about the OTU 111 in the Bahamas (where most of the Mitchell I. went) can be found here OTU Nassau 42-43
Cheers!
Last edited:
