Jump to content

Medium Sea Grey / Black scheme on NF Mossies


JasonC

Recommended Posts

I'm interested to find out more about the use and provenance of the grey over black post-war scheme. Does anyone know of the scheme as applied to NF Mossies? The example in the link below looks as if it's come from a Squadron Signal book, so one would hope it's based on something concrete, but you never know...

http://img.wp.scn.ru/camms/ar/77/pics/9_36.jpg

Doubts (aside from being unable to find a photo) are twofold:

- The Sharp/Bowyer tome suggests that Mosquito night fighters wore the Dark Geen/MSG scheme to the end of their service.

- Thirsk's Illustrated History (Vol. 2) has a photo of 139 Sqn B.35s in the scheme, and it's described as the RAF Night Bomber sheme. All the NF.36s in this book appear to be in DG/MSG.

The scheme also appears on Beaufighters & Brigands (Malaya?) which presumably were not classed as bombers, so there's some evidence in favour of the scheme on fighters. So what were the circumstances which would dictate the application of this scheme rather than DG/MSG?

I've also just remembered the Lucas volume on post war schemes, but checking that will have to wait until this evening.

TIA,
Jason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, this was a bomber scheme, and yes this was entirely appropriate for the Brigand, which certainly was classified as a bomber - and indeed never used as anything else. The Beaufighter is perhaps another matter, although we need to look at what role the aircraft was actually in at the time. It certainly wasn't that of night fighter.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Graham. To my admittedly modern way of thinking, the Brigand and Beau would have been strike/attack aircraft (i.e. fighters), but maybe the distinction was different at the time. I also note that 199 Squadron (artwork above) appears to have a been a ECM unit that was concurrently equipped with Lincolns. So perhaps there is a Bomber Command or bomber support connection there.

J.

Edit: I see the Brigand carried a 'B' prefix, which more or less settles that discussion!

Edited by JasonC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The grey/black scheme was formally adopted in October 1945 and was to be used by "Bombers which had both a day and night role". It consisted of Medium Sea grey uppersurfaces with glossy black undersurfaces to Pattern No.2 (that means the demarcation was high on the fuselage. The scheme was adopted and a 5 years interval was set before a revision of the camouflage policy (which did occur in 1950 and involved most RAF schemes).

Regarding the use, it was applied to all bombers entering service between 1946 and 1951 (Early Canberras, Lincoln, some Lancasters, Brigands). And then there were the abovementioned Beaufighters...

199 Sqn. was indeed part of Bomber Command, guess they applied to their NFs the same standard scheme used on their Lincolns

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The RAF have never quite accepted that strike/attack aircraft were fighters, quite rightly in my opinion. (OK, apart from a wobble in the second part of WW2.) When "Bombers" as a term became restricted to the large types the RAF introduced the term "Ground Attack" shortened to GA, and later just to G, which is still applied to the appropriate types.

Only the Americans classify dedicated bombers "Fighters": I don't think that we should sink that low.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with the many US designations came when the USAF dropped the A designator after WW2. From then on there were bombers and fighter. A type like the Beaufighter would have likely been designated A-something before 1948, but what would have been its designation post 1948 ? Maybe B-something as the A-26 was renamed B-26. It makes some sense under such designation system that types like the F-101A/C and F-105 ended up being designated as fighters although their main role was actually dropping nukes on enemy forces and they were really tactical bombers. Different story for the F-111 that only got an F designation for political reasons

The USN followed a different logic and after the war got rid of many earlier designation but anything with an F was a fighter and anything with an A something designed to drop ordnance on someone's head (although of course most USN fighters also operated succesfully in the attack role).

When in 1968 the designation system was unified the A designator came back in existance, although the USAF has not really added many types (one only really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...