Brewster Bermuda colour photo, could these be the colours of the Buffalo?

[occa]

Notice the blueish undersides ...

Photo is from Etienne's photostream

https://www.flickr.com/photos/8270787@N07/albums/72157605269786717

The caption says

'Here we see three examples on a test flight in the United States before delivery to Britain.'

https://www.flickr.com/photos/8270787@N07/28040491450/in/album-72157605269786717/

............................................................................................................................................................

Meanwhile I found a bigger version on the net:

http://axis-and-allies-paintworks.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?293

[Dave Fleming]

Fascinating photo (It's sad that the first thought is always 'Are these colourised?')

It's interesting how the 'Sky' goes over the lower part of the roundel. (That does seem the case in some B+W pics)

Edited July 22, 2016 by Dave Fleming

[Rob G]

First rule of the plastic jungle... never trust the colour in a colour photo. There is absolutely no way to know how well it's been reproduced in any of the varied incarnations of its life, and I'd bet that your monitor doesn't show the colours accurately either. Which is partly the monitor, partly the graphics card, partly your browser (use Firefox on PC to remove that variable, or Safari if you're saddled with a Mac.)

Best advice, use written references whenever possible (preferably from official sources), referring to photos only for patterns and general arrangements. When it comes to modelling, I'm not a colour fanatic, TLAR* is close enough for me, but for those who are, colour photos are not a good reference.

Colour reproduction and me...

*TLAR - That Looks About Right.

EDIT: A bit of Googling tells me that the Brits only had 5 of these most unprepossessing aircraft, used by the naval unit at A&AEE Boscombe Down from Jan 1943 for testing. I'd imagine that any colours applied would be to whatever standard was current for aircraft under test at that time. Where's Edgar when you need 'im? :/ Sorry, can't help with the Buffalo.

[Dave Fleming]

EDIT: A bit of Googling tells me that the Brits only had 5 of these most unprepossessing aircraft, used by the naval unit at A&AEE Boscombe Down from Jan 1943 for testing. I'd imagine that any colours applied would be to whatever standard was current for aircraft under test at that time. Where's Edgar when you need 'im? :/ Sorry, can't help with the Buffalo.

The pic is probably in the States, there was an order for 750 of these, although IIRC only about 500 were actually built, and only 200 shipped to the UK. You're right that only about 5 were actually flown/tested.

The colours should be Dark Green/Dark Earth over Sky (Correct bomber colours for that period)

[LDSModeller]

EDIT: A bit of Googling tells me that the Brits only had 5 of these most unprepossessing aircraft, used by the naval unit at A&AEE Boscombe Down from Jan 1943 for testing. I'd imagine that any colours applied would be to whatever standard was current for aircraft under test at that time. Where's Edgar when you need 'im? :/ Sorry, can't help with the Buffalo.

Actually 206 of the 750 ordered made it to Britain.

The aircraft were ordered in 1940 (circa July) about the same time the 339E Buffalo was. The exception being, that the Bermuda had a longer gestation period, the 339E Buffalo arriving around the 2nd quarter of 1941, and the Bermuda arriving July 1942.

I would agree that the Bermuda would have worn similar/same Dark Earth/Dark Green/Duck Egg Blue as the 339E Buffalo

As far as colours go, the MAP requirements for US manufactured aircraft in RAF Service is covered in an AMO December 1940 (DaveCrommie posted a link July 09)

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235005324-raf-wwii-aircraft-markings-codes/

See AMO AMO A926/40 (12 December 1940)

Camouflage Colouring of British Aircraft, including American and Allied Types in use by British Air Forces

6. Colour schemes of landplanes, except Fleet Air Arm aircraft.-

(i) Upper surfaces.-The upper surfaces of all landplanes, except Fleet Air Arm and night fighter aircraft, but including target (pilotless) aircraft, are to be camouflaged in the temperate land scheme, but bomber aircraft with matt black under-surfaces may also have fins and rudder painted black. Night fighters are to be coloured matt black (special night) on all surfaces. National markings are not to be altered or obscured.

(ii) Under-Surfaces.-The colouring of the under-surfaces is to be as follows :-

(a) Operational aircraft.-The under-surfaces of all operational aircraft are to be either black or duck-egg blue, at the discretion of commands, to meet operational requirements. The following classes of aircraft are to be produced with duck-egg blue (Sky Type “S") under-surfaces:-

Day fighters Blenheim bombers

Army co-operation Close support bombers

General reconnaissance Troop carriers

Torpedo bombers Bomber transports.

As to whether the above photo is colourised or actual film from 1940's (The undersides certainly appear "Blueish" on my monitor) no doubt will be debated

Regards

Alan

Edited July 22, 2016 by LDSModeller

[Rob G]

I had wondered if they'd been painted to Brit specs in the US, but didn't want to mention it, just in case. To my eye, that landscape looks English (but I won't argue over it, I'm not all that familiar with large swathes of the US ) On my colour profiled monitor, the undersides are a slightly blue light grey. Topsides are dk green and sand and roundels appear to be correct(ish), if a little dark. All of which means precisely nothing, given that we don't know the provenance of the photo.

[mhaselden]

If the shot was taken over the States, I'd expect the aircraft to be wearing US civilian registration markings.

As to the colours, the contrast between the upper surface camo colours seems far more marked than is represented in monochrome images of the B339E. Pics of RAF Buffalos that have had the original camo overpainted in Singapore (with, presumably, British-sourced paint) suggest that the Brewster applied paint was actually slightly darker in tone than the British paint. However, we don't know what filters were applied which could drastically alter the appearance of the camo on monochrome film.

[Kevin Callahan]

*TLAR - That Looks About Right.

Which is, ultimately, what most model color decisions boil down to anyway...

[dalea]

Have just checked the Steve Ginter book on the Bermuda/Buccaneer

The only photo of one with civilian marks is first prototype (intended for the Dutch). Small NX389 on fin.

In no case does the underside colour encroach over the roundel

First flight of a British machine was 11 August 1942. Plenty of time for the R.A.F. procurement officers to tell Brewster how to do it. Lockheed managed to do it with the Hudson.

The underside looks blue to you? The ground looks blue to me.

[Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies]

Whether or not it's genuine, those colours look to me to resemble Light Green / Light Earth rather than Dark Green / Dark Earth or Middle Stone - i.e. the colours found on Grandslam Lancasters.

The underside reminds me of Sky Blue.

[Seahawk]

I read the 2 serials as FF-840 and FF-841. Air Britain serials FA-FZ and Pearcy's Lend-Lease Aircraft in World War II both agree that there is no record of serials after FF633 arriving in the UK so the photos were taken in the US. The aircraft were built at Johnsville, Bucks County, Pennsylvania, which probably looks more "European" than many bits of the US.

British Bermuda receipts, from 2 orders totalling 750 aircraft, were 370 aircraft, of which 152 were reduced to spares and produce leaving 218 available for export from the US (source: Meekcoms: The British Air Commission and Lend-Lease (Air Britain)). Presumably the aircraft had to be test flown prior to formal acceptance even if they would subsequently be reduced to produce: maybe this is a test or acceptance flight.

With the exception of 5 tested by A&AEE (not the RAF and even less the FAA), the aircraft which reached the UK were placed in store until struck off charge. One was tested as a target tug but judged inadequate even for that.

There are various photos around showing US-operated Bermudas in odd mixtures of British and US markings: Special Hobby covered several in their RAF boxing of the Buccaneer/Bermuda, presumably for lack of being able to find any more warlike markings.

One of the greatest wastes of natural resources and human energies in aviation history, in a field not exactly short of competition.

Edited July 22, 2016 by Seahawk

[occa]

Yes the caption says 'test flight in the US before delivery to Britain'

I added it to the OP ...

[grahamf]

Id say the landscape is UK, lots of little fields with little wooded areas here and there.

[Dana Bell]

Hi All,

The original 4x5 color transparency was taken by US photographer Rudy Arnold (in the US); the image is in the NASM/Smithsonian collections. The serial of the near aircraft is indeed FF-841 (with the hyphen), listed as Bermuda Mk.I in Bruce Robertson's British Military Aircraft Serials; 1911-1971.

As for the colors, it has been mentioned before that there was a good bit of confusion in the US about the proper application of RAF colors - this is just more proof. I don't know about any color shift on this, but the pale blue bottom is what the original tranny appears to show.

Cheers,

Dana

[Nick Millman]

Hi All,

The original 4x5 color transparency was taken by US photographer Rudy Arnold (in the US); the image is in the NASM/Smithsonian collections. The serial of the near aircraft is indeed FF-841 (with the hyphen), listed as Bermuda Mk.I in Bruce Robertson's British Military Aircraft Serials; 1911-1971.

As for the colors, it has been mentioned before that there was a good bit of confusion in the US about the proper application of RAF colors - this is just more proof. I don't know about any color shift on this, but the pale blue bottom is what the original tranny appears to show.

Cheers,

Dana

Colour photographs are not proof of any paint colour.

Nick

[Max Headroom]

Just an idle thought, but the national markings look 'normal' colours to me, whilst the camouflage is a bit on the light side. Is it possible for a photograph to exhibit this trait as some sort of developing aberration between the two, or does this photo really show, normal markings with 'unknown' camouflage colours? I'm discounting that it's colourised - or is that an explanation too?

I have no views on this and am certainly not going to open the "what colours are they?" worm can, but rather am curious as to what others may think.

Trevor

[stevehnz]

I had a wee play around with the colours in Urfanview which is my photo tidy programme. Try as I might, I couldn't make the tan colour appear like a Dark Earthy sort of colour, without giving the background & other features totally ridiculous shades. The green doesn't look too far off but fwiw, I'd go for some sort of sand for the browny colour & probably light grey for the underside taking into account the blueish overtone of the original image, & I appreciate this accounts for nothing as to a real world situation, its all just a reflection on what I see as looking about about right.

Steve.

[Dana Bell]

Colour photographs are not proof of any paint colour.

Nick

Hi Nick,

Of course they're not proof of what the color was, but color photos can often prove what something wasn't. Even a glance at the original shows that this was not the standard you would expect for the Temperate Land Scheme.

BTW, everyone, the apparent overspray of the insignia with the underside color is an artifact of the scanning process - the original and high resolution scans just show shadows where the insignia and camouflage intersect in the normal hard edge.

Cheers,

Dana

[Dave Fleming]

They can confirm what was intended - in this case Temperate Land, rather than the slightly fanciful Day Fighter Scheme sometimes illustrated!

[mhaselden]

The 2 pics in the OP demonstrate the challenges of interpreting colour. Note that the 2 images are very different in tone. The upper is brighter and appears more "saturated" (if that's the right word). In both, the red of the roundels has a pink-ish hue, the lower image showing this more than the upper (I suspect the upper has been adjusted prior to posting on the web).

Appreciate the comments - clearly my proposition that they should be wearing US civilian codes was incorrect. Then again, by the time of this photo (note the C1 fuselage roundel so clearly well into 1942) such niceties were probably dispensed with in favour of just getting the job done.

I'd be interested to learn if there's any extant documentation on what paint Brewster applied to these airframes. Info on the Buffalo is non-existent but these pics indicate we may have at least something to learn if Brewster documentation survived for RAF Bermudas.

[Nick Millman]

Hi Nick,

Of course they're not proof of what the color was, but color photos can often prove what something wasn't. Even a glance at the original shows that this was not the standard you would expect for the Temperate Land Scheme.

BTW, everyone, the apparent overspray of the insignia with the underside color is an artifact of the scanning process - the original and high resolution scans just show shadows where the insignia and camouflage intersect in the normal hard edge.

Cheers,

Dana

In the absence of any other evidence this photograph neither proves what paint colours were applied nor what paint colours were not. You can find colour images of British built RAF aircraft in TLS that look quite similar with odd light, greyish or yellowish brown appearing Dark Earth - many in Etienne's own photostream - and which are puzzles that have also been argued over. Check out the close-up Hotspur glider image for graphic evidence of the variegating effects of paint surface chalking and note the many Lancaster and other photos with the appearance of a lighter than expected Dark Earth, sometimes approaching a sand hue.

FWIW I measured the colours in the top image and the wing roundel centres are not far off FS 32276. Are you suggesting that means they were not originally painted to match Dull Red - or even Bright Red? Did the legendary US confusion over RAF colour requirements extent to what was meant by Dark Earth or "brown"?

Nick

[tonyot]

I`ve always thought that the RAF Buffaloes had light blue undersides just like the early Martlet Mk.I`s and that is what the underside of the Bermuda looks like to me too. The upper surfaces look very much like the TLS applied to other US built RAF aircraft such as the Hudson, with the Dark Earth lighter than `normal' and the Dark Green slightly darker than normal,...... but that is just my two penneth.

Best to copy the colour pics into grey scale and see how much they resemble the b&w photos of other Bermuda`s and Buffaloes etc,

Cheers

Tony

[Graham Boak]

The Bermudas were delivered in TLS (the precise colours don't change the name) but were intended to equip dive-bomber squadrons for D-Day. This role was taken over by fighter-bombers, in the Day Fighter Scheme. If you think of them as Army Co-operation units then they also carried Day Fighter. So there is a case for What-If D-Day Bermudas in DFS, but my bias is towards them retaining TLS.

[occa]

I`ve always thought that the RAF Buffaloes had light blue undersides just like the early Martlet Mk.I`s and that is what the underside of the Bermuda looks like to me too. The upper surfaces look very much like the TLS applied to other US built RAF aircraft such as the Hudson, with the Dark Earth lighter than `normal' and the Dark Green slightly darker than normal,...... but that is just my two penneth.

Best to copy the colour pics into grey scale and see how much they resemble the b&w photos of other Bermuda`s and Buffaloes etc,

Cheers

Tony

Sounds like a good summary to me ...

[LDSModeller]

As for the colors, it has been mentioned before that there was a good bit of confusion in the US about the proper application of RAF colors - this is just more proof.

Cheers,

Dana

I would bring your attention to this outlined part of a section on US aircraft in the RAF, from a book in my collection printed in 1943, "Britains Wonderful RAF".

Dowding's visit would have been in the period, in which many British orders were being filled, and the US was not at war so, there was no panic to fill US military requirements. With that statement in mind, how is it that the US manufacturer's would have been confused with British technical wisdom/know how there on site to provide guidance?

Personally I think this whole "confusion" is from modern day thinking trying to rewrite history and has now reached "Mythical" proportions. To which end when "real" evidence is presented, its pooh whooed by those who are sycophants to this myth.

I was told on ARC just recently that "Heavy Weights" from another well known modelling forum (names left out) were of the opinion that US certain P40E-1 built aircraft, in RAF service had grey undersides/Sand/Green uppers. "Heavy Weights" Really???

Regards

Alan