Spinner/fuselage stripe color for Spitfire Mk. Vb, W3312 "Moonraker"

[Seawinder]

W3312, coded QJ-J, was the mount of James Rankin, OC 92 Sqn. in summer 1941. It first flew in late June 1941 and was built as a Vb, not converted from a Mk. I like some of the other 92 Sqn planes (QJ-S for example). I've been unable to find any photograph of the plane, and appeals here and at HyperScale have not produced any responses, so I don't know what photographic evidence exists. My question: were the spinner and fuselage stripe painted Sky or Sky Blue? Other photographs of 92 Sqn Vb's, mostly taken in early 1941, show spinners and stripes in a distinctly lighter color than the Sky under surface, this color presumably being Sky Blue. However, would that painting practice still have been employed by mid-1941? Of course, if someone has access to a photograph of W3312 that shows the areas in question, that would be wonderful.

Thanks for any clarification on this.

Pip

Edited August 18, 2014 by Seawinder

[Greenshirt]

There's a photo here: http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aircraft-requests/spitfire-r6882-spitfire-mk-ia-mk-ib-mk-vbulletin-32843.html

Hard to tell, but it may be Sky Blue or just a different batch of Sky that has a slightly different reflectivity, making it look different.

Tim

[Seawinder]

There's a photo here: http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aircraft-requests/spitfire-r6882-spitfire-mk-ia-mk-ib-mk-vbulletin-32843.html

Hard to tell, but it may be Sky Blue or just a different batch of Sky that has a slightly different reflectivity, making it look different.

Tim

Unfortunately, that's a different QJ-J, serial R7161, photographed some months before W3312 was even built, but thanks anyway.

[Edgar]

I'm intrigued by this obsession with Sky Blue, when every order, clarification, and signal, ordered (not advised, but ordered) that Sky (usually using its "other" name of duck egg blue) should be used. When Supermarine produced a camouflage drawing, they included not only the names of the paints, but also the stores reference numbers, so why would they then use a paint for which they had not allowed?

Spinners were also made, painted and balanced, just like propellers, by the propeller manufacturers, so you now have to introduce somebody (or bodies) else disobeying orders.

In February, 1941, 41 Group complained that they were receiving fighters on which the manufacturers had not painted the Sky bands, so Supply Units were having to do it themselves (they did not refer to Sky Blue, or even Sky, in the signal, but called it duck-egg blue.)

[brewerjerry]

.......

In February, 1941, 41 Group complained that they were receiving fighters on which the manufacturers had not painted the Sky bands, so Supply Units were having to do it themselves (they did not refer to Sky Blue, or even Sky, in the signal, but called it duck-egg blue.)

Hi

Interesting ....

did the manufacturers have a supply issue that they did not have the paint to be able paint the sky bands ?

Cheers

Jerry

[Seawinder]

I'm intrigued by this obsession with Sky Blue, when every order, clarification, and signal, ordered (not advised, but ordered) that Sky (usually using its "other" name of duck egg blue) should be used. When Supermarine produced a camouflage drawing, they included not only the names of the paints, but also the stores reference numbers, so why would they then use a paint for which they had not allowed?

Spinners were also made, painted and balanced, just like propellers, by the propeller manufacturers, so you now have to introduce somebody (or bodies) else disobeying orders.

In February, 1941, 41 Group complained that they were receiving fighters on which the manufacturers had not painted the Sky bands, so Supply Units were having to do it themselves (they did not refer to Sky Blue, or even Sky, in the signal, but called it duck-egg blue.)

Hi Edgar.

I'm not "obsessed" with Sky Blue. It's just that posters to other threads I've read, not to mention decal set painting instructions, refer to it as a likely explanation for the photographs of early Mk. Vs in TLS with spinners and fuselage stripes lighter than the Sky under surfaces. Since starting this thread, I found another one -- http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/65834-raf-fuselage-bands-and-spinners-sky-or-light-blue/ -- which started out as a discussion of the same topic but unfortunately drifted into an argument over whether planes in an old color photo were painted TLS or DFS. Near the beginning of the thread, you stated:

"Spinners were Sky, since they were supplied by the propellor manufacturer, and needed balancing, just as much as the prop; if deH & Rotol were told Sky, then that's the colour they'd have used.

The same applied to the band; the whole Force was told to use Sky, and the order was delayed, due to a shortage of paint. The Groups were not told to make do with whatever they could find; the quality of the paint was a different matter, entirely, in fact Ian Huntley said that some was nothing more than distemper, which went white very quickly.

It's possible that decal manufacturers (and they're not alone) are still confused between Sky and Sky Blue."

Graham Boak replied:

"Sky Blue is right, for some aircraft for a certain period (late 1940 to some time in 1941). There is a clear differentiation both in b&w photos and in colour ones, showing the trim (spinner and fuselage band) to be in a paler bluer colour than the underside. The band is shown as a clear contrast on the underside, so it is not "bleed through" of uppersurface colours. For some years this was quoted as an official standard, but if so it seems to have slipped from the knowledge of those listing official documents more recently.

"There are those who argue that Sky was not always a well understood colour in the late 1940s, and we are only seeing examples where the factory underside colour is not well matched by whatever the MU (or squadron) was using to apply the trim. This may be true, but if so it seems to be a remarkably good match for Sky Blue. So it is either Sky Blue, or another colour looking just like it, but coming in a tin labelled Sky? In modelling terms, the result is the same."

I don't know on what Graham based his initial assertion; the thread morphed shortly after his post to the argument over the color photograph.

Whatever the color(s) involved, I'd still love to know if W3312, built mid-1941, would have been likely to have had the same disparity of color between the spinner/stripe and the under surface demonstrated in photos taken some months earlier.

[Greenshirt]

Personally I struggle with reconciling Edgar's very reasonable argument with observed tonal differences between the fuselage band and the undersides. My own theory is that, as noted, some aircraft were delivered without the band, and the simple difference in batch used, further (possibly) exacerbated by mixing and environment result in a slightly different result in the applied paint, albeit both are Sky (duck egg blue) using the proper stores number. To their eyes at the time, it probably looked exactly the same (my own experience painting US Navy aircraft 30 years ago with FS labeled paints bears this out -- the colors looked perfectly matched while painting, but a few days later in different lighting differences could be noted).

On my Spitfire models from that period I replicate that effect by using a different tin of Sky from a different manufacturer, usually with a smidge (very technical that one) of white added. If a modeler decides to use a tin of Sky Blue modeling paint, I won't argue the point. I've tried it on one model and I didn't like it, as it was too blue for my tastes.

Tim

[Daniel Cox]

Hi All,

This Spitfire IIA, P7895 as captured during 1941 appears to feature a Sky spinner.

Cheers,

Daniel.

[Edgar]

I'm not "obsessed" with Sky Blue.

Sorry, Pip, it wasn't meant personally, but as a generality; too often the "they mistook Sky Blue for Sky" is trotted out, when trying to rationalise an apparent difference in colour (usually in a black & white photo,) while probably being unaware that the vast majority of signals, from the Ministry, used "duck-egg blue" as a descriptive term, as well as (and at times instead of) just Sky.

The only oddity, that I've ever found (and it's promptly disappeared) is a June 1940 order, to the C.R.O., specifically to use Sky Blue. How long this continued, I don't know; it might have been quickly rescinded, but I haven't found such an amending order, and it would have been superseded by a general A.M.O., at some time, anyway, but there now seems to be a possibility that repaired aircraft appeared in the "wrong" colour, rather than manufacturers ignoring direct orders.

Right on cue, I've just found that the National Archives are extending their cataloguing system to include repositories across the country, and there's another company, Sankey and Sons, who produced spinners, and whose records are held in the Midlands.

Edgar

[Stonar]

I guess that's the Joseph Sankey and Sons who made 'aircraft propeller components' at their Albert Street works in Bilston. They are clearly spinners, as seen in this link.

http://www.historywebsite.co.uk/Museum/metalware/sankeys/sankey01.htm

Steve

[Graham Boak]

Daniel: If that's a Sky spinner what's the underside? The two appear to be distinctly different colours, and not just a matter of the underside being in shade. I'd be quite happy calling that a Sky Blue spinner. Pragmatically, if it isn't exactly either colour to two points of decimals on someone's scale then so what? These aircraft, however many they were, appear in a colour that is either Sky Blue or something very similar - but clearly different to the Sky underside. Whatever was specified. Edgar has now mentioned a June 1940 document where it was specifically required, so we not only have it anecdotally and photographically, but also as an instruction. What more is needed?

I'm beginning to wonder if true Sky bands and spinners didn't become universal until the Day Fighter Scheme changed all things around - or are Sky Blue bands and spinners still seen after that? Ooo, heresy!

Edited August 19, 2014 by Graham Boak

[gingerbob]

Not sure about Supermarine, but Castle Bromwich delivered Spits for some time after with no tail band and black spinners (which would, presumably, have been the way the spinner manufacturer supplied them, so that's two companies involved). So, the colour example above, being a Mk.II (CB production) would have had the spinner re-painted somewhere along the way. I suspect that these re-paints and/or additions to existing aircraft are where the apparently different colours enter into it. But who and why I am not prepared to speculate about!

bob

[Graham Boak]

You might prefer the explanation given by one keen observer of the time. Michael JF Bowyer held that the colour of Sky as applied to the underside of RAF fighters in 1940 was much richer and greener than the later paler Sky, as officially defined and used on trim and the code letters with the Day Fighter Scheme. So for a 1940/41 aircraft you could use a greener colour - perhaps Paul Lucas's Eau-de-nil - for the underside and Sky for the trim, this giving the same effect as seen in b&w photos. Not the same as seen in colour photos, sadly, but you can't win them all, it seems. But all pointing to duck egg green undersides, duck egg blue trim. No wonder people were confused at the time and later.

There certainly seems to have been no problem with overpainting spinners, as several photos show with peeling paint revealing differences. In the Middle East, there were at least two different schemes that required overpainting spinners, the early "spaghetti" scheme on Hurricanes and the standardised theatre red later.

[Edgar]

Whatever was specified. Edgar has now mentioned a June 1940 document where it was specifically required, so we not only have it anecdotally and photographically, but also as an instruction. What more is needed?

Yes, all very well, but let's not get too carried away, since that order was in June 1940, and an A.M.O. (which would have also gone to the C.R.O.) was issued in early December, specifically calling for duck-egg blue; if any doubt remained, the order repeated it as duck-egg blue (Sky Type "S") That cuts the "window of opportunity" down to 6 months.

Comparing early and late Sky is fraught with danger, too, since the 1940 Sky was actually quite glossy (and therefore presumably more reflective) than the later synthetic smooth, but matt, paints. Ian Huntley also wrote about some paints being a distemper (and the black port wing was one example,) so there's yet another entry into the lists.

Edited August 19, 2014 by Edgar

[Daniel Cox]

Daniel: If that's a Sky spinner what's the underside?

Hi Graham,

I figure Bowyer's observations as you have mentioned below is relevant to the picture I posted earlier. Excepting all the usual caveats regarding colour images, the spinner colour is reminiscent of that seen on colour pictures that I have posted in the past of a Spitfire IX in Italy circa February 1944.

You might prefer the explanation given by one keen observer of the time. Michael JF Bowyer held that the colour of Sky as applied to the underside of RAF fighters in 1940 was much richer and greener than the later paler Sky, as officially defined and used on trim and the code letters with the Day Fighter Scheme. So for a 1940/41 aircraft you could use a greener colour - perhaps Paul Lucas's Eau-de-nil - for the underside and Sky for the trim, this giving the same effect as seen in b&w photos. Not the same as seen in colour photos, sadly, but you can't win them all, it seems. But all pointing to duck egg green undersides, duck egg blue trim. No wonder people were confused at the time and later.

There certainly seems to have been no problem with overpainting spinners, as several photos show with peeling paint revealing differences. In the Middle East, there were at least two different schemes that required overpainting spinners, the early "spaghetti" scheme on Hurricanes and the standardised theatre red later.

Cheers,

Daniel.

[Seawinder]

Gentlemen, I really appreciate the foregoing discussion, based upon which I now plan to use a mix of Sky (Model Master enamel) and 35622 (also Model Master, what they call Duck Egg Blue!) for the fuselage stripe, and Sky lightened with a small amount of white for the spinner. That way everything will still look Sky-ish, but there'll still be some color diversity.

Incidentally, am I right in thinking that there was a fairly ragged edge where the bottom of the stripe joined the under surface? ... as if they only masked the sides of the stripe.

Cheers,

Pip

[MilneBay]

There certainly seems to have been no problem with overpainting spinners, as several photos show with peeling paint revealing differences. In the Middle East, there were at least two different schemes that required overpainting spinners, the early "spaghetti" scheme on Hurricanes and the standardised theatre red later.

Yes that was my thought also. And one might include in that various pics of dented spinners as well. Balancing would be vital on the blades but not spinners as the colours on these were often changed at unit level by many air forces.

[Edgar]

Note the last sentence:-

[MilneBay]

And what were the effects on balance?

Edit: I'm not doubting the veracity of the document but I would suspect that such attention to detail would have been fine in the UK but an hour or two of ops in the desert would have abraded the paint sufficiently to create balance problems if the balance issue was important. So if that was the case the spinner would have to be repainted at unit level given that coloured spinners of various sorts served as theatre markings.

So then if your aircraft were not to be permanently grounded spinners would have to be repainted regularly at unit unit level, either to maintain the theatre marking, or to cover up any abrasions or dings to the paint - all of which if that minute is to be believed would would be forbidden as it would create potential balance problems thus grounding your aircraft for most of the time. So thanks for the ref, but to me it just looks like a bit of make work or a subtle means of dissuading squadron commanders from giving aircraft minor distinctive markings.

Edited August 20, 2014 by MilneBay

[Edgar]

You are missing the point; the entire discussion is on painting, and I'm simply (!!!!) pointing out that the spinner manufacturers were supposed to balance them, with paint on, so there was yet another layer of personnel whose job it was to apply paint.

The manufacturer painted the airframe, very often the Supply Unit had to paint the tail band, the spinner manufacturers had to paint their product before delivery, but some had left theirs black, meaning yet more repainting somewhere in the chain, so there was far more chance of non-matching colours than some (want to) believe.

Edited August 20, 2014 by Edgar

[MilneBay]

Not missing the point at all - it is the minute that raises the matter of unbalancing the prop by units painting them different colours which as I surmised was not a realistic situation in field conditions. My view having seen lots of photos of spinners in various stages of poor paint finish despite being completely operational is that perhaps the AM desk wallah should have got out more. But then that is a problem common to all desk wallahs.

[Edgar]

OK, have it your own way; when he says that the spinner suppliers were supposed to deliver them properly balanced (and therefore pre-painted) he was telling lies, just so that modellers, 75 years later, could score points off those doing research on their behalf.

[Dave Fleming]

Light sea grey, now there's another cat amongst the pidgeons. And not a bad description for that spinner photo!

[AnonymousAA72]

the spinner manufacturers had to paint their product before delivery, but some had left theirs black, meaning yet more repainting somewhere in the chain, so there was far more chance of non-matching colours than some (want to) believe.

Well, FWIW', I concur. I have little doubt that the non-matching of colours was quite common, just due to the sheer number of links in the various chains....there's plenty of anecdotal evidence to support this. We know that there were '"standard's" to which everyone was supposed to comply with , and I'm sure most involved would have done their utmost to follow these, but there are just too many variables involved. Incidentally, I seem to recall Airfix had a "Duck Egg Blue" and a "Duck Egg Green" in their paint range and that their very old Spitfire IX used both -one for the lower surfaces and one for the Sky Band and spinner. Now given that the Mk IX should have had Medium Sea Grey lower surfaces, I may have that memory wrong!

[brewerjerry]

Light sea grey, now there's another cat amongst the pidgeons. And not a bad description for that spinner photo!

Hi

The memo is date 24 apr 1946,

so presumably only applicable to post war spinners / photos ?

cheers

jerry