Warburton Spitfire IXc EN290 V-G

[10thumbs]

Spitfire IX EN290 V-G

Former 126 Sq attached to 1435 Flight (Sqn) in which he claimed a Bf 109 on 10 July 1943.

My best guess early model with large cannon fairings, small chin radiator, round rudder, standard wing tips and Day Fighter camo (acknowledging the possibility of Temperate Land upper with Azure undersurfaces, vs. Desert scheme.) overpainted sky tailband, no leading edge yellow stripes, white codes G-V on port, V-G on starboard. Any comments?

[Graham Boak]

That would be a very early example of Day Fighter in the Med, long before its general adoption. I'd expect Desert scheme, as on all the other early F Mk.IXs in the area.

That's not a radiator under the nose, but the air intake. F Mk.IXs had an additional intake in one wing root - off the top of my head I'd say port, but that comes with a warning.

[Iain Wyllie]

nt

Edited August 5, 2014 by Iain Wyllie

[gingerbob]

Cameras were not fitted until early '43, however, I believe.

bob

[VoyTech]

Cameras were not fitted until early '43, however, I believe.

bob

July 1943 is pretty late for "early '43", I guess?

I'd expect Desert scheme, as on all the other early F Mk.IXs in the area.

Which "all other early F Mk.IXs" in Malta you mean?

[gingerbob]

Hi Wojtek,

I was more concerned that there might be earlier evidence, so I'll happily take July '43.

That would be a very early example of Day Fighter in the Med, long before its general adoption. I'd expect Desert scheme, as on all the other early F Mk.IXs in the area.

Emphasis added!

Best wishes,

bob

[10thumbs]

Thanks to all. Desert scheme it will be then. I couldn't find any wing root details in Monforton, save one of a gun camera in the starboard root of an Mk XVI with a caption that gun cameras in the F Mk.IX were in the port wing root.

[Graham Boak]

Monforton does not cover the early Mk.IXs, neither the handful with pre-production cowlings nor any of the F Mk.IX production run. He is confused over the F Mk,.IXB designation - it doesn't mean what he thinks but is an unofficial term for the LF Mk.IX. The best source for the early aircraft is an old Air Enthusiast article by our contributor above VoyTech. Basically as Ian says.

[VoyTech]

Well, "the Med" is a rather broad term.

I wouldn't bet for a Spitfire IX of a Malta-based squadron to be finished in Desert scheme in July 1943.

Temperate Land, Temperate Sea or some makeshift Malta repaint seem at least as likely.

[Edgar]

DTD Technical circular 360, dated 23-2-43, ordered that fighters, destined specifically for Malta, should be in Day Fighter Scheme, with Light Mediterranean Blue undersides.

Only fighters specifically intended for desert areas were to be in the desert scheme, with Azure Blue undersides.

In October 1942, when two Spitfires (presumably Mk.V) flew direct from Gibraltar to Malta, using ferry and overload tanks, Malta complained about them being painted in desert colours, saying they wanted them in temperate colours, as used in the U.K. Gibraltar apologised, saying all aircraft, there, were the same, and they had no temperate paints left with which to do anything about it.

There is talk of the Spitfires being originally intended for "Torch," which would explain the desert scheme.

Edgar

[Graham Boak]

In "Spitfires Over Sicily" there is a photo of 126 Sq.'s EN479/N in a fairly low contrast scheme, which could be accepted as Temperate Land or Day Fighter without any great argument, where it not for the known habit of Malta-based Spitfire units to overpaint the lighter (or both!) of the Desert shades with a blue-grey. However, just below this is MH794 GL.H of 185 Sq with a very high contrast between the colours. I wouldn't recommend betting against that particular one being Desert. Desert camouflaged Spitfire Mk.Vs were seen fairly regularly in 1942, especially away from Takali and 249 Sq., the original source and long proponent of overpainting.

It would be interesting to know the opinion of Brian Cauchi on 1943 Spitfire colours.

This October Malta diktat does run completely against their earlier insistence on maritime colours. I guess we are all allowed to change our minds. or perhaps the normal rotation of staff officers had had its common effect on policies? New brooms, etc. "Malta repaints" were continuing until at least March 1943, at least in 249 Sq. That makes pretty well a year of this "makeshift" habit.

The long range Spitfires that flew directly to Malta were all airframes specially modified for the Malta ferry, with at least 15 examples doing so before the end of 1942. Despite this, the complaint shows that repainting them to specific Malta Command instructions was not a priority (or if you prefer it more bluntly, ignored). Malta's earlier request for maritime colour schemes had been ignored after Bellows (and possibly the linked LB), and these flights are consistent with that. Gibraltar certainly did act as a collecting point for Torch Spitfires, and this must very much have been on their minds in October. However, this didn't prevent the last carrier ferry to Malta which was Operation Train, October 30th 1943. Presumably it helped make space for more Torch aircraft.

How much this apparent ignoring of local camouflage requests has to do with the standardisation of such schemes on the lines to save production time (ie reduction to two) I don't know - I thought this was later but can't quote a date.

[Edgar]

This October Malta diktat does run completely against their earlier insistence on maritime colours. I guess we are all allowed to change our minds. or perhaps the normal rotation of staff officers had had its common effect on policies?

Or maybe they were aware of the plans to use Malta as a springboard for the invasion of Sicily, and felt that, for offensive operations over land, instead of defensive operations mostly over the sea, DFS was preferable? Edited August 1, 2014 by Edgar

[gingerbob]

We're talking October '42, right? (Year typo, Graham?) If so, obviously Torch is the big thing.

bob

[Graham Boak]

October 1942 is a bit early for Malta to be abandoning "defensive" colours. Shortly after that would be more convincing, and it is understandable that Malta Command would be considering the possible ramifications of Sicilian operations even before Torch. However that may be, well before October they had felt no constraint about using their defensively-camouflaged fighters for striking at Sicily. Early carrying of bombs underwing on Spitfires is also linked to 249 Sq., the prime exponent of the grey (or greys) but not green. I suspect however sensible it seems to us to think of Defensive and Offensive colour schemes in a Malta context, such thoughts don't seem to have dominated operations at the time. A dislike of the Desert scheme seems to be the only common factor, but not to the extent of completely shunning it.

Moving on from purely Malta requirements (which were shortly to become irrelevant anyway) the Desert scheme was still common well into the Sicilian and even Italian campaign, supplemented more by the simple conversion to Temperate Land than any comprehensive change to Day Fighter. This did eventually happen, but I don't know of evidence for any rapid response to such an early request. What evidence I have seen suggests a melange of schemes, but a few more photos of Spitfires in this period would certainly be welcomed!

[gingerbob]

Just trying to get the chronology straight!

DTD Technical circular 360, dated 23-2-43, ordered that fighters, destined specifically for Malta, should be in Day Fighter Scheme, with Light Mediterranean Blue undersides.

Only fighters specifically intended for desert areas were to be in the desert scheme, with Azure Blue undersides.

In October 1942, when two Spitfires (presumably Mk.V) flew direct... Malta complained about them being painted in desert colours, saying they wanted them in temperate colours, as used in the U.K. Gibraltar apologised, saying all aircraft, there, were the same, and they had no temperate paints left with which to do anything about it.

This October Malta diktat does run completely against their earlier insistence on maritime colours. I guess we are all allowed to change our minds. or perhaps the normal rotation of staff officers had had its common effect on policies? New brooms, etc. "Malta repaints" were continuing until at least March 1943, at least in 249 Sq. That makes pretty well a year of this "makeshift" habit.

However, this didn't prevent the last carrier ferry to Malta which was Operation Train, October 30th 1943. Presumably it helped make space for more Torch aircraft.

[That's the date I questioned.]

Or maybe they were aware of the plans to use Malta as a springboard for the invasion of Sicily, and felt that, for offensive operations over land, instead of defensive operations mostly over the sea, DFS was preferable?

While there may have been some anticipation, there's no way formal planning (at this level) for an invasion of Sicily could have begun until early '43. I wondered if Edgar might have been misled by Graham's "1943".

October 1942 is a bit early for Malta to be abandoning "defensive" colours. Shortly after that would be more convincing, and it is understandable that Malta Command would be considering the possible ramifications of Sicilian operations even before Torch.

To review: early April '42: Malta's request for "sea camouflage" is apparently met for 'Calendar'

Late Apr '42: Hurri IICs for Malta to be camouflaged to meet Malta's requirements. "Duck-egg blue underneath and plain Mediterranean blue above."

[Whether this was done, or the Hurris came to/remained at Malta, is another question.]

Oct '42 (per Edgar's quote): Malta wants day fighter camouflage, not trop, but Gibraltar is fresh out. [i'm afraid it's a bit runny, Sir...] 25 October is when the first two "direct flight" Spits arrive at Malta from Gibraltar.

23 Feb '43 (again per Edgar's quote): DTD Circular 360 says fighters for Malta (specifically) should be Day Fighter Scheme with Light Med Blue undersides. [is this what Malta, or rather someone paraphrasing Malta, meant by "Duck-egg blue" underneath?]

Early June [43, I believe?] "Comparative flying tests now completed..." [sea] Grey Medium for upper too light, best is Identification Blue. Alternative colours Med Blue Dark, Dark Sea Grey and Dark Green. Disrupted pattern unnecessary. [so they would take any of those as an overall upper colour? EDIT: This appears to refer to the new "high altitude" scheme of MSG above and PRU Blue below?] Under surfaces PRU Blue... Red/Blue upper wing and fuselage roundels (with narrow black ring if Ident Blue uppers). Also red/blue fin flash, no white. [Might this possibly help to explain the use of red/blue on some Spit Vs in the region?] The reply, however: Quite impossible. We'll do as many as we can in Temperate Scheme, though. [Edit: Hmm, so if they're respraying the top surfaces of high altitude scheme (this probably on VIIIs, and perhaps some IXs?) might the bottoms be left in PRU Blue?]

These are the "Malta camouflage" waypoints I immediately find from docs or references that Edgar's shared. I have not distilled the book(s) on Malta paint schemes, so can't compare these clues with other evidence. I hope this helps- I did it mostly because I'm only a casual follower of this subject, so I get confused with all these "but earlier... but later..." comments!

bob

Edited August 3, 2014 by gingerbob