- Thread starter
- #61
fubar57
General
I like it!
Geo
Geo
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
A4K
Brigadier General
Sounds fair to me. Suits the title better.
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
I agree.
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
A different ZY-V, this is said to be BE634, I'll imagine that BD638 would have looked similar, all black and with red code letters, or?
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
First two are fine old chap - they were on defensive ops., given the anti-shipping was attacking ships carrying cargo to aid the German war effort against the UK. Last one was offensive ops, over the Continent, so not strictly 'Defence of Britain'.
Last edited:
Donivanp
Captain
By this line of last second updates you seem to have make is a Spitfire/Hurricane build off. and at that you have limited it to earlier Spits to type IX or so. By this my Boston is out and a Lysander did not defend anything. It has been said more then once, and I do believe Churchill would have said so, The best defense is a good offence. The use of Heavy, Medium and light bombers were offensive but at the same time ate up German resources so as limit what they could use against Britain. Heavy bombers such as the Fortress and Liberator were not just used against German land targets but were a part of Coastal Command as well, anyway, you are defining this build down to a fighters only build, and at that after build selection are being made. I think this should have been brought up before the build start.
JKim
Senior Master Sergeant
Bummer! I bought my kit specifically thinking that this was a D-Day inclusive GB. Will MH712 without invasion stripes be allowable as No. 302 squadron was based in ALG Deanland in Sussex in April 44? Henryk Dygala was confirmed to be on the 302 roster as in April 44 and 302 received the Spitfire IXc in late 43.
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
Cheers my friend! Could this be the BD638 and the ZY-S be the BE634?
However the Spitfire LF IXC and Spitfire LF IXE (e.g. MH708 -B, MH712 -D, MH726, MH883 -O, MH938 -I) were delivered to the squadron in May 1944.
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
Oh well I thought, off to look for a suitable 1/48 N.F. Mk. IIC Hurricane, jumped on to the 'bay', found the 1/48 Hasegawa Hurricane Mk.IIC 'Night Hurricane', thought to myself....that one looks familiar, lo and behold...
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
Don, I am not making last second up-dates - note that I have already requested clarification of the GB, as I didn't create this one, it's title, or anything else to do with this GB.
Any 'last minute up-dates' so far have been very pertinent suggestions either from fellow judges, or other members who also feel that clarification is needed before the GB proceeds much further.
However, the part of the title "Defence of Britain / Atlantic", to me at least, hangs on the operative words 'defence' and 'of Britain', which would suggest aircraft of the allied Air Forces directly involved in defence, either of the British mainland and geographically close islands, or British interests in the Atlantic, where the secondary operative word 'Atlantic' is included in the title, and the latter could include, for example, offensive aircraft types in a defensive role, such as the Sunderland, Liberator, Fortress, Halifax, Wellington, Blenheim, Anson, Hudson etc etc when operating in, for example, convoy protection/escort, or strikes on enemy maritime operations against Britain itself, or British/Allied interests at sea - E-Boats against shipping in the Channel, enemy maritime strikes against British coastal waters, ports and so on.
Also, in the early years of WW2, even the Lysander and Tiger Moth were, or were prepared to be, used in a defensive role on or from the British mainland.
The GB is far from being limited to Spitfires and Hurricanes as, in the 'fighter' area alone, there is a fairly wide choice of British aircraft, as well as American- built aircraft, either operated by the RAF and Commonwealth Air Forces, or by the USAAF or USN, and could include Typhoon, Mustang, Tempest, Blenheim, Beaufighter, Mosquito etc.
With the inclusion of "... including D-Day stripes", aircraft carrying these stripes, based in the UK as part of ADGB ,including some seconded from 2TAF, were exclusively assigned to 'anti Diver' duties, in defence against the V-1 attacks after June 13th, although the confusion here revolves around the 'up to D-Day' limitation.
Then there is the other area of the GB not yet mentioned - ".. and axis.", which, I presume, would include aircraft operating against Britain, and her interests in the Atlantic, and therefore the cause of the 'Defence' in the title. These could be German or Italian bombers, fighters, fighter bombers, intruders, recce aircraft, sea-planes etc etc etc.
So, even as it stands, the GB is definitely not limited to fighters, and is possibly the first GB so far to offer such a wide ranging and diverse choice, across an equally wide time span.
Although I can appreciate some of the suggestions put forward concerning bombers, and understand and possibly agree - to a point - there is no way that, for example, a Lancaster engaged in strikes on V-1 sites, or on ops against transport, troop movements, or enemy installations in France prior to D-Day, can be considered to be in a defensive role - it (and similar aircraft) were in either a strategic or tactical offensive role.
Given the admittedly somewhat vague title of the GB, I'm quite surprised that there were no questions, before the commencement of this GB, from members needing clarification concerning what is, and what isn't eligible, if the intended chosen subject perhaps didn't fit neatly into an obviously defensive role, regardless of how it could be construed that, ultimately, the operations concerned could be defending British interests, or safeguarding, in the long term, Britain itself.
When looking at a choice of subject - for any GB - one of the first things which should be considered is "Does this type fit the requirements and, if so, is the specific subject to be modelled relevant to the unit, time frame etc etc ?".
This can be answered by fairly simple initial research, which is the specific reason for the first, overlapping month of every GB, as mentioned in the Rules and Guidelines, when first posted before the very first GB.
The GB's are intended to run for three months, plus the first month for research, assembly of kit(s), materials, information and so on, with the ability to commence the build if an individual so desires, and this was designed to avoid, or at least drastically minimise, situations like the very one which has now arisen, and to prevent the possibility of individuals trying to make a GB 'fit the kit', rather than the other way around.
I'll be honest, when I decided to enter the Spitfire MkVb, I had doubts, at first, as to its validity under the terms as mentioned above, as I was aware that the Squadron, and the specific aircraft and pilot, were engaged on offensive sweeps to the Continent, as well as escort to a range of offensive operations from the UK to the Continent, during the period depicted by the subject aircraft when flown by this specific pilot.
However, just a few minutes preliminary research revealed that the Squadron, and this pilot and aircraft, were also engaged in defensive operations, either against enemy aircraft, or on such duties as coastal or convoy patrols, during the same time period.
Had this not been the case, then I would have either chosen a different subject, and possibly/probably time period, for the same kit, or selected one of many relevant subjects for either kits in my 'stash' or, if needs be, obtained a kit specifically for this GB.
The entry went ahead due to taking advantage of this, the first month of the GB set aside for research.
Using an old military habit - " The Seven P's" (Perfect Planning and Preparation Prevents P*ss Poor Performance) - tends to work most of the time !!
Any 'last minute up-dates' so far have been very pertinent suggestions either from fellow judges, or other members who also feel that clarification is needed before the GB proceeds much further.
However, the part of the title "Defence of Britain / Atlantic", to me at least, hangs on the operative words 'defence' and 'of Britain', which would suggest aircraft of the allied Air Forces directly involved in defence, either of the British mainland and geographically close islands, or British interests in the Atlantic, where the secondary operative word 'Atlantic' is included in the title, and the latter could include, for example, offensive aircraft types in a defensive role, such as the Sunderland, Liberator, Fortress, Halifax, Wellington, Blenheim, Anson, Hudson etc etc when operating in, for example, convoy protection/escort, or strikes on enemy maritime operations against Britain itself, or British/Allied interests at sea - E-Boats against shipping in the Channel, enemy maritime strikes against British coastal waters, ports and so on.
Also, in the early years of WW2, even the Lysander and Tiger Moth were, or were prepared to be, used in a defensive role on or from the British mainland.
The GB is far from being limited to Spitfires and Hurricanes as, in the 'fighter' area alone, there is a fairly wide choice of British aircraft, as well as American- built aircraft, either operated by the RAF and Commonwealth Air Forces, or by the USAAF or USN, and could include Typhoon, Mustang, Tempest, Blenheim, Beaufighter, Mosquito etc.
With the inclusion of "... including D-Day stripes", aircraft carrying these stripes, based in the UK as part of ADGB ,including some seconded from 2TAF, were exclusively assigned to 'anti Diver' duties, in defence against the V-1 attacks after June 13th, although the confusion here revolves around the 'up to D-Day' limitation.
Then there is the other area of the GB not yet mentioned - ".. and axis.", which, I presume, would include aircraft operating against Britain, and her interests in the Atlantic, and therefore the cause of the 'Defence' in the title. These could be German or Italian bombers, fighters, fighter bombers, intruders, recce aircraft, sea-planes etc etc etc.
So, even as it stands, the GB is definitely not limited to fighters, and is possibly the first GB so far to offer such a wide ranging and diverse choice, across an equally wide time span.
Although I can appreciate some of the suggestions put forward concerning bombers, and understand and possibly agree - to a point - there is no way that, for example, a Lancaster engaged in strikes on V-1 sites, or on ops against transport, troop movements, or enemy installations in France prior to D-Day, can be considered to be in a defensive role - it (and similar aircraft) were in either a strategic or tactical offensive role.
Given the admittedly somewhat vague title of the GB, I'm quite surprised that there were no questions, before the commencement of this GB, from members needing clarification concerning what is, and what isn't eligible, if the intended chosen subject perhaps didn't fit neatly into an obviously defensive role, regardless of how it could be construed that, ultimately, the operations concerned could be defending British interests, or safeguarding, in the long term, Britain itself.
When looking at a choice of subject - for any GB - one of the first things which should be considered is "Does this type fit the requirements and, if so, is the specific subject to be modelled relevant to the unit, time frame etc etc ?".
This can be answered by fairly simple initial research, which is the specific reason for the first, overlapping month of every GB, as mentioned in the Rules and Guidelines, when first posted before the very first GB.
The GB's are intended to run for three months, plus the first month for research, assembly of kit(s), materials, information and so on, with the ability to commence the build if an individual so desires, and this was designed to avoid, or at least drastically minimise, situations like the very one which has now arisen, and to prevent the possibility of individuals trying to make a GB 'fit the kit', rather than the other way around.
I'll be honest, when I decided to enter the Spitfire MkVb, I had doubts, at first, as to its validity under the terms as mentioned above, as I was aware that the Squadron, and the specific aircraft and pilot, were engaged on offensive sweeps to the Continent, as well as escort to a range of offensive operations from the UK to the Continent, during the period depicted by the subject aircraft when flown by this specific pilot.
However, just a few minutes preliminary research revealed that the Squadron, and this pilot and aircraft, were also engaged in defensive operations, either against enemy aircraft, or on such duties as coastal or convoy patrols, during the same time period.
Had this not been the case, then I would have either chosen a different subject, and possibly/probably time period, for the same kit, or selected one of many relevant subjects for either kits in my 'stash' or, if needs be, obtained a kit specifically for this GB.
The entry went ahead due to taking advantage of this, the first month of the GB set aside for research.
Using an old military habit - " The Seven P's" (Perfect Planning and Preparation Prevents P*ss Poor Performance) - tends to work most of the time !!
Donivanp
Captain
Thank you Terry I was not directing my commits at you but at the whole string. and they were my thought's. I can pull the Havoc/Boston and find something else.
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
Can always do a two (or four) engined bomber out on a gardening mission.... 
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
No problem Don.
If you, or any other member participating, or intending to participate in this GB, or future GBs, have any questions, doubts or problems, or need clarification of any point(s), however basic or stupid the query might seem to the person(s) concerned, then ASK - remember that the only stupid question is the one that isn't asked !
It should also be remembered that the listing of GB's, those past and those to come, was drawn up based on suggestions from members, with the bulk of the current listings being compiled by Vic, in his spare time, and involving a lot of work in shuffling things around and planing ahead regarding dates and running order, based on basic and sometimes rather nebulous information gleaned from these suggestions, and inevitably this is open to some rather 'loose' descriptions in relation to what the GB actually covers, and more so the further down the list a GB is, when the details of original ideas have been 'clouded' by the passage of time.
This is another, and very important reason, why the GB's overlap by one month, with that first month being available to clarify what the GB actually covers, what is relevant and eligible and, if necessary, via questions and discussion, to 'iron out' any problem areas and reach agreement either by common consent and/or the decision of the judges as to what exactly can be included, what the time-span is, the geographical area(s) covered and so on. An example of how well this works could be the original BoB GB, and the first MTO GB, where opinions varied on dates, for example, for the first, and the geographical area for the second, due mainly to interpretation of these 'events' varying in different countries, and the way history might be taught, or perceived, in those countries.
The questions were very quickly and easily answered by basing the period, and the area, on the 'Official' versions, thereby allowing entrants to get on with planning their entries, and collecting, collating and disseminating the relevant research material, often with the help of questions put to members and/or the judges via a thread in the relevant GB forum, allowing those members to then ensure that the correct kit was used, and allowing time to locate and acquire any other materials or information that may have been required to successfully complete their entry or entries, and still have a full three months in which to complete the model(s).
Believe it or not, the initial thoughts, when the idea of GB's was first discussed, was to have each GB running for one month, and it was only after much chin-wagging between members that the current format, including the one month overlap, was agreed upon, with the common feeling that one month of planning and preparation, plus three full months of actual building, was more than enough time to complete a model - yeah, right!
To conclude, one piece of advice I'd offer to potential entrants, is to approach the stated subject of a GB in a similar fashion as if it were an examination question - that is RTFQ - the polite translation of which is 'Read the FULL Question'!
It's surprising how many percentage points are lost, or even how many failures occur, in examinations, by the candidate failing to read the question fully. The advantage here though, is that, having read the title and any guidelines for a particular GB, if it is not fully understood, then questions can be put forward to ensure that it is understood !
If you, or any other member participating, or intending to participate in this GB, or future GBs, have any questions, doubts or problems, or need clarification of any point(s), however basic or stupid the query might seem to the person(s) concerned, then ASK - remember that the only stupid question is the one that isn't asked !
It should also be remembered that the listing of GB's, those past and those to come, was drawn up based on suggestions from members, with the bulk of the current listings being compiled by Vic, in his spare time, and involving a lot of work in shuffling things around and planing ahead regarding dates and running order, based on basic and sometimes rather nebulous information gleaned from these suggestions, and inevitably this is open to some rather 'loose' descriptions in relation to what the GB actually covers, and more so the further down the list a GB is, when the details of original ideas have been 'clouded' by the passage of time.
This is another, and very important reason, why the GB's overlap by one month, with that first month being available to clarify what the GB actually covers, what is relevant and eligible and, if necessary, via questions and discussion, to 'iron out' any problem areas and reach agreement either by common consent and/or the decision of the judges as to what exactly can be included, what the time-span is, the geographical area(s) covered and so on. An example of how well this works could be the original BoB GB, and the first MTO GB, where opinions varied on dates, for example, for the first, and the geographical area for the second, due mainly to interpretation of these 'events' varying in different countries, and the way history might be taught, or perceived, in those countries.
The questions were very quickly and easily answered by basing the period, and the area, on the 'Official' versions, thereby allowing entrants to get on with planning their entries, and collecting, collating and disseminating the relevant research material, often with the help of questions put to members and/or the judges via a thread in the relevant GB forum, allowing those members to then ensure that the correct kit was used, and allowing time to locate and acquire any other materials or information that may have been required to successfully complete their entry or entries, and still have a full three months in which to complete the model(s).
Believe it or not, the initial thoughts, when the idea of GB's was first discussed, was to have each GB running for one month, and it was only after much chin-wagging between members that the current format, including the one month overlap, was agreed upon, with the common feeling that one month of planning and preparation, plus three full months of actual building, was more than enough time to complete a model - yeah, right!
To conclude, one piece of advice I'd offer to potential entrants, is to approach the stated subject of a GB in a similar fashion as if it were an examination question - that is RTFQ - the polite translation of which is 'Read the FULL Question'!
It's surprising how many percentage points are lost, or even how many failures occur, in examinations, by the candidate failing to read the question fully. The advantage here though, is that, having read the title and any guidelines for a particular GB, if it is not fully understood, then questions can be put forward to ensure that it is understood !
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
Bl**dy well written old boot! 
A4K
Brigadier General
With Jan - well put Terry!
JKim
Senior Master Sergeant
Still prior to D-Day without the invasion stripes so the question still remains unanswered... does it qualify?
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
