a mosquito question

[r16]

recently ı watched the 633 Squadron on TV . Know it is fiction , accept the book is better as the movie version is somewhat sanitized and the visual effects are unconvincing for us the born in the 70s generation . Anyhow the planes surprised me in that many of them had flat bomb aiming panels in the nose ; the noses were painted to resemble the planes to Mk.VIs but as ı said the flat panels were unmistakeable . Doubtless they were late model reconnaissance types that had survived up to that day , while an Air International article of 1984 wellcomes the solitary flying Mosquito of the period ( a trainer version that played in the movie and sponsored by the RR , no less ) had finally given up the untruthful markings of HT _ E . What makes me specially wonder is that the visual effect showing gun firing by the Mosquitos has a clear unpainted panel . The relation of this to SPF is , were there any attempts to fit guns to versions with glass noses ? ı have both Airfix and Matchbox 1/72 models ,still in their boxes and the instructions for the latter show that Mk IX had 20 mm guns which ı find unconvincing . But maybe there were intruder versions .

 

[Justo Miranda]

Original cover art represents FB VI standard version

 

[funkychinaman]

Finding out that the producers destroyed a Mosquito while making such a mediocre film made me throw up in my mouth.

 

[zerstorer1946]

totally agree with you there funkychinaman!
that film is so bad. and we have one less mossie in the world because of it!!!

 

[r16]

thanks for the answers and Justo Miranda , ı will admire your posts forever , ı like that image so much .

the film is not a stunner , ı agree but it has played an important part in inspiring Star Wars , something ı for my part should thank for .

 

[cluttonfred]

Original cover art represents FB VI standard version

Something odd about that cover art...where are the Mossie 20mm cannons?

 

[funkychinaman]

It wasn't a TERRIBLE flick, it just wasn't great, certainly not good enough to justify destroying a warbird, even in the 60's. It was fun, it was exciting, it was horribly miscast. (George Chakeris playing a guy from Norway?) I spent half the movie wondering why Cliff Robertson was flying for the RAF that late in the war.

I netflixed it at the same time I had Dambusters, if you compare the two, yeah, mediocre.

 

[BSG-75]

Original cover art represents FB VI standard version

Something odd about that cover art...where are the Mossie 20mm cannons?

Been a LONG time since I read the books, but IIRC they had "specials" with two .303 machine guns and two 20mm short barrelled/breach cannon so they kept a full size bomb bay which would tie up with the version painted above - If I'm right ?

 

[r16]

and as far as ı remember the Turkish book never mentioned rockets , ı had long imagined they were on a anti-nuke mission .

 

[Yellow Palace]

My recollection is that 633 Squadron's Specials had four short-breech cannon and no MGs, but I suppose the difference is mostly academic.

I don't believe the book stated that the target was associated with nuclear weapons, though it was strongly implied. The change to rocket fuel for the film was probably something to do with public acceptance: the public knew about German rockets, but would have found Nazi nuclear bombs hard to swallow.

 

[cluttonfred]

Were these Mossie "specials" (bomber variant bomb bay on a modified fighter-bomber with reduced armament) completely fictional or based in actually sub-Marks or field modifications in WWII?