[Hornchurch]

Originally Posted by hawkonevoodoo

The third picture from the top shows 6K K ready to launch and the fin-flash is the same as on the model, the red section is present with just the small white portion separating the blue and red.

hawkonevoodoo - take a GOOD LONG LOOK at JW 723 = '6G' in the

nose up attitude, second photo from bottom.

(it SHOULD have similar markings to 6K*K).

Yes the photo's are monochrome - BUT, are you telling me that the 'Red'

that you believe is in the Fin-Flash = is not one and the same shade as

those painted-over sections in the fuselage (& particularly) the upper wing

roundels ???????? - I don't accept that.

There is EVERY chance that the 'Blue' (that I believe) is the 'overpainted'

shade in the roundels (and Fin-Flash) IS or MAYBE, of a different shade

or consistency from the outer-blue ring, that was originally applied BEFORE

these F.6-F's reached their allocated 'Carrier'.

The Fin-Flash that you describe is appropriate to the 4th photo down 'M'

(1943/44 type markings); a pic' that is out of chronological order to the

rest, evidently.

Those Later-War pix would show F.6-F's devoid of ANY 'Red' in their

national markings, Fin-Flash included, whilst operating against the Japs.


The overpainted 'Blue' would be more hastily applied (on-Board Ship), as

would the prominent broad 'White' I.D. stripes on wings & tail surfaces.

Don't take my word for it. Contact Yeovilton & their Archives.

[hawkonevoodoo]

These are pictures I have, so whatever, I'm NOT going to get into a p-----g match with you. As far as I'm concerned I was going by these, maybe they are right maybe they are wrong but at the time these are what I use as a reference. In the end the model is a very nice one, that's all.
The picture on the left is just to show the blue roundels and the tricolor fin flash. This from the FAA Archives, that's the web address along with the pictures name.

[SKUNKY]

Originally Posted by hawkonevoodoo

I'm going to get into a p-----g match with you.

Jim has graciously volunteered to referee......

[hworth18]

Originally Posted by Hornchurch

hawkonevoodoo - take a GOOD LONG LOOK at JW 723 = '6G' in the

nose up attitude, second photo from bottom.

(it SHOULD have similar markings to 6K*K).

Yes the photo's are monochrome - BUT, are you telling me that the 'Red'

that you believe is in the Fin-Flash = is not one and the same shade as

those painted-over sections in the fuselage (& particularly) the upper wing

roundels ???????? - I don't accept that.

There is EVERY chance that the 'Blue' (that I believe) is the 'overpainted'

shade in the roundels (and Fin-Flash) IS or MAYBE, of a different shade

or consistency from the outer-blue ring, that was originally applied BEFORE

these F.6-F's reached their allocated 'Carrier'.

The Fin-Flash that you describe is appropriate to the 4th photo down 'M'

(1943/44 type markings); a pic' that is out of chronological order to the

rest, evidently.

Those Later-War pix would show F.6-F's devoid of ANY 'Red' in their

national markings, Fin-Flash included, whilst operating against the Japs.


The overpainted 'Blue' would be more hastily applied (on-Board Ship), as

would the prominent broad 'White' I.D. stripes on wings & tail surfaces.

Don't take my word for it. Contact Yeovilton & their Archives.

I think we are counting rivets on the rivet...
It looks to me like the "red" in the upper wing roundels is still present, they just painted the white circle in the middle of it and the "red" on the roundel (which is still present) matches the "red" in the fin flash on JW 723 = '6G'..
I think it is hard to say exactly what this plane looks like from B/W photos in the regards that everyone knows that directives weren't always followed "in the field" because there sometimes wasn't enough time to do things right.. ID markings were hastily applied in some cases and not always done to specs, so I think a little "lee-way" can be applied in this instance, unless someone actually has a better pic of 6K*K and can prove it wrong..

[hworth18]

Here is a quote I found regarding this particular Hellcat..

This came out of a book titled Fleet Air Arm - British Carrier Aviation, 1939-1945 by Ron Mackay. The caption beside this profile reads: This 804 Sqdn Hellcat Mk II (6K-K/JV316) operated from several East Indies Fleet escort carriers from January of 1945 until the war's end. The fighter retained the standard fin flash with the SEAC (Southeast Asia Command) roundels.

The accompanying pic (with the quote) is the same one as provided by Mr Voodoo..

[hawkonevoodoo]

I'm NOT going to get into a p-----g match with you

Sorry about the original post, what a difference a word can make. I accidentally left out the NOT but I have since corrected the error. I apologize for this and any upset or hard feelings it may have caused. What I was trying to say was, end of discussion, we could beat this to death and in the end nobody would win, only cause animosity. Also like Harry said, counting rivets on rivets, the bottom line is it is a nice model regardless.

[Captain Eddie]

What's a rivit?

Seriously, though, I have (almost) never looked at my models all that critically. If they look nice, they look nice, never mind all the little minor details.

It's not that I would choose inaccuracies, but I do not take a magnifying glass to them, or try to compare each and every square inch to pictures of the real thing.

Perhaps this is a matter of "ignorance is bliss," but I'm happy with it!

[SKUNKY]

Originally Posted by hawkonevoodoo

I accidentally left out the NOT but I have since corrected the error. I apologize for this and any upset or hard feelings it may have caused.

Darn it all!...and here I thought I had my night all planned out.....

[hawkonevoodoo]

Originally Posted by SKUNKY

Darn it all!...and here I thought I had my night all planned out.....

Stick around Skunky, I'm sure I'll screw up again