More Malayan Buffalo (& blenheim) colour thoughts

[JohnMacG]

This month's (April 2017) 'Scale Aircraft Modelling'  has a 4-page article by Paul Lucas entitled 'RAF Brewster Buffalos in the Far East 1941'. In it Mr. Lucas posits the theory that the Buffalos were painted in darker RAAF dark green & Brown shades rather than the standard RAF dark green/dark earth Temperate Land Scheme.  In his 3rd para in the article, Mr Lucas states - ' ....photographs appear to show two relatively dark colours of comparatively low tonal contrast, which do not look like the usual Temperate Land Scheme colours of Dark Green & Dark Earth..'

Hmmmm. I don't think I can agree with this. I have several photos of Buffs which show a contrast similar to that of aircraft in TLS. Mr Lucas also suggests that the colour photos of 27Sqn Blenheim Ifs (NOT 62 Sqn as is specified throughout the article)  also show the lower-contrast RAAF green/brown colours. Again, I don't see this.

As usual, Mr Lucas has done some ferocious research, discovering an entry in Seletar's.ORB on the possibility  of acquiring dopes from Australian sources. there doesn't seem to any proof they did, and even IF they did, there's always the possibility that RAF colours were specified, not RAAF ones.

there's also a comment that the Belgian Buffs had the same darker colours; photos taken of these aircraft in the US before delivery, do seem to show  darker colours, but photos of these a/c in RAF/RN service in the UK and the ME appear to match the contrast of the TLS.

 

Another thing about the Blenheim Ifs in Malaya; Mr Lucas seems to suggest (to me, at least) that these 'fighter' a/c had their undersides painted overall light blue. Now I was under the impression that these a/c had half blue-half black unders, a la the Buffalos The Time photos DO seem to show, at Least to me. Any thoughts?

One last whine; SAM always gives colour references Only in Vallejo paints (do Vallejo pay large sums for this?) For the 95% of modellers who don't use Vallejo, the FS#s of the paints suggested in the artice are:- RAAF dark green #2 - FS34064; RAAF brown #3 - FS30097; RAAF #4 - FS35352 & RAAF sky blue FS35550.

 

All-in-all,I can only sum up the article with that classis Scottish verdict - 'Not Proven'.

 

[Nick Millman]

Why would Buffalos delivered from the factory in Temperate Land scheme be re-painted in, er, Temperate Land scheme, albeit using RAAF paints? The original factory paints were probably of slightly darker/deeper saturation than the British paints anyway. In Burma at least Bingham-Wallis' recollection suggests factory colours with the only re-painting being the fuselage bands and black wing. 

 

A lot of Mr Lucas' revisionist theories seem to depend on apparent tonal contrasts in photos but identical paints can vary in tone from photo to photo so drawing conclusions from that is inherently unreliable. 

 

Nick

[Bpasenelli]

I am not an expert on this topic but am interested. It seems that a claim that aircraft would be repainted in the same scheme but with different paint would require extraordinary evidence. I do not doubt the sincerity of anyone's belief but the evidence is all based on low contrast between tones in black and white photos that doesn't seem to fit the definition of extraordinary evidence, so I must agree with the two previous postings.

[jimmaas]

The Lucas article on Buffalo colors contains material that is solid but not new, and some new material that is not solid.  There are several 'buried leads' in the article, like the concept that the British Buffalos had "A" and "B" schemes (the ex-Belgian ones were different), and that the undersurface roundels were initially applied with incorrect 1-2-3 dimensions.  But these had been known for some time.  The idea that Foliage Green and Earth Brown were involved seems to arise from Rudy Arnold color photos of Belgian Brewsters (before delivery, and almost certainly before Foliage Green and Earth Brown were mooted half a globe away).  There is no reason to believe that the British Brewsters were anything other than American paint equivalents for MAP Dark Earth, Dark Green and Sky.  They certainly look the part in the factory and coming out of their shipping crates in Singapore.  Anything after that is up in the air - the tropical sun did some strange things to paints - witness the incredible fading of some of the upper wing roundels.

 

Tossing Sky Blue into the equation may not be as far fetched.  Not as an underside color for the Buffalos, but for the fuselage band and spinners (and maybe the codes for 488 Squadron).  There is an estimable thread here on Britmodeller regarding the repainting of Bleheims with this color, so we know it was around.  But outside the partial use of the 'port wing black' ident system, there is no indication (such as changes in the paint demarcation lines) that the undersurface as a whole was redone.

Edited April 22, 2017 by jimmaas
spelling

[mhaselden]

I have to agree with Nick and Jim on this one.  I see no reason for the RAF Buffalos to be painted in RAAF colours.  There was a need for 151 MU at Seletar to obtain RAAF dope colours for the Wirraways operated initially by 21 Sqn and later by W Flt.  The Wirraways arrived in Singapore wearing RAAF camouflage, most likely Earth Brown and Foliage Green with painted aluminium undersides.  These were the ONLY airframes in Far East Command to carry RAAF paint patterns, indeed the F540 entry "discovered" by Mr Lucas is for dope, which would most definitely be needed after major servicing of Wirraways due to the extensive areas of fabric covering on those airframes.

 

The only other RAAF airframes in theatre were the two Hudson squadrons based, initially, at Sembawang.  According to David Vincent's excellent 2-volume work on the type in RAAF service, these airframes were tagged onto an RAF order and so were painted in US equivalent colours per the standard MAP camouflage direction.  This is borne out by the fact that these early Hudson airframes show both A and B scheme patterns. 

 

As Nick pointed out, what would be the point of repainting whole fleets of aircraft in the same pattern but with slightly different paint shades?  That just doesn't make logical sense since the visible difference from several hundred feet away would be negligible.  Variance in paint batches, coupled with the fact that the Buffalos and Hudsons were painted in US equivalent shades, probably from different manufacturers, is more than sufficient explanation for the variations we see in monochrome photos. 

 

If we look only at the monochrome LIFE photos, all taken by Carl Mydans in April 1941, we see that the Buffalo, Hudson and Blenheim images all appear to show relatively high contrast whereas the Wirraways show much lower contrast.  This would seem to confirm my comments above that the only airframes in the Command that wore different camouflage were the Wirraways.

 

Now...it is entirely possible that Far East Command suffered a shortage of Dark Earth.  Some of the colour Blenheim photos show retouching of some airframes in a paint that is lighter than Dark Earth.  This could be Light Earth or it could just be a different paint batch.  However, further evidence of Dark Earth shortages may come from the Vildebeest squadrons.  The scant photographic record of the Vildebeests suggests that the early camouflage pattern was very high contrast, with the lighter of the camouflage colours actually showing as a lighter tone than the MSG fuselage codes.  Later images show a contrast more consistent with Dark Earth and Dark Green (although, as noted, the photographic record is extremely limited).  I see no evidence for Mr Lucas' very attractive, but equally speculative, scheme applied solely to Vildebeests.  Since the Vildebeests carried out very similar missions to the Hudsons, it would be sensible for them to wear the same scheme...so, sadly, we're probably looking at boring old DE/DG for the Vildebeests. 

 

Regarding the Blenheim MkIfs of 27 Sqn, one of the LIFE photos (sadly now virtually undiscoverable) showed a single Blenheim which had its entire undersides painted in a light shade.  There is another photo showing at least one Blenheim of the Sqn still with all black undersides.  However, these seem to be exceptions and that most 27 Sqn Blenheims wore the fighter identification markings specified by Far East Command (ie black port underwing and (probably!) Sky Blue fuselage band.  There are photographs of a captured 27 Sqn Blenheim which still retained the these markings long after the Sqn deployed to northern Malaya. 

 

All the above is a long way of writing that most airframes in Far East Command almost certainly wore Dark Earth and Dark Green upper surfaces.  Undersides for Hudsons and Wirraways remained painted aluminium.  Undersides for bomber Blenheims were black and the official marking for the undersides of fighters was black port wing and Sky/Sky Blue starboard wing (plus a (probably) Sky Blue fuselage band).  There were exceptions, not least the 488 Sqn Buffalo that had a wing replaced so the fuselage underside was split 50/50 Sky/Black but the wing was entirely Sky.  However, the prior rules were "typical" IMHO. 

Edited April 23, 2017 by mhaselden

[Mitch K]

On 4/22/2017 at 4:18 PM, Nick Millman said:

Identical paints can vary in tone from photo to photo so drawing conclusions from that is inherently unreliable. 

 

Nick

This. If you take nothing else away from the discussion, keep what Nick says here very firmly in your mind.

[tonyot]

Don`t the colour Life magazine Blenheim photos also show the presence of pre war serials retained on some rudders, indicating that they were painted in the UK,.... and a mixture of dark wartime coloured roundels from the factory with fin flashes added in pre war brighter colours using paints from the stores in the far east? A right old hotch potch and the Sky Blue undersides could even have been hand mixed,...... the Fleet Air Arm units aboard carriers in the Med hand mixed a light blue colour when told to paint the undersides of their fighters (Skuas and Fulmars) Sky,.... without a description of what Sky actually was and no paint of that name to hand,...so they looked up into the sky and concluded,......light blue!

 

Cheers

            Tony 

[Biggles81]

The discussion of aircraft paint manufactured for RAAF being sought or acquired for use in Singapore appears to have focussed on the use of Foliage Green and Earth Brown. This seems to have forgotten that RAF Dark Green and Dark Earth (amongst other colours) were also being manufactured in Australia both as potential colours for RAAF camouflage and also for application to the Beaufort being manufactured in Melbourne for an RAF order. Is it not possible that the MU was requesting Australian manufactured RAF colours for maintenance and repaints of RAF aircraft in Singapore and Malaya? Food for thought.

[mhaselden]

12 hours ago, tonyot said:

Don`t the colour Life magazine Blenheim photos also show the presence of pre war serials retained on some rudders, indicating that they were painted in the UK,.... and a mixture of dark wartime coloured roundels from the factory with fin flashes added in pre war brighter colours using paints from the stores in the far east? A right old hotch potch and the Sky Blue undersides could even have been hand mixed,...... the Fleet Air Arm units aboard carriers in the Med hand mixed a light blue colour when told to paint the undersides of their fighters (Skuas and Fulmars) Sky,.... without a description of what Sky actually was and no paint of that name to hand,...so they looked up into the sky and concluded,......light blue!

 

Cheers

            Tony 

 

Hi Tony,

 

Yes, several Far East Blenheims show serial numbers repeated on the rudder.  The pic below shows a 27 Sqn machine, L8618 'PT-F', captured by the Japanese and still showing the fuselage fighter band and serial number on the rudder (photos of the starboard side of this airframe make it clear it was painted to match Far East fighter camouflage and marking standards.  The continued existence of factory-applied serial numbers militates against any kind of overpainting of the standard DE/DG camouflage (IMHO):

 

 

The actual shade of the actual colour of the starboard underside and fuselage band is clearly open to conjecture because we don't have any positive documentation describing what colour was applied.  It could be standard MAP Sky Blue or it could be a locally mixed shade.  From a modelling perspective, Sky Blue is probably "close enough" for most of us to represent this interesting scheme. 

 

Cheers,

Mark

[mhaselden]

12 hours ago, Biggles81 said:

The discussion of aircraft paint manufactured for RAAF being sought or acquired for use in Singapore appears to have focussed on the use of Foliage Green and Earth Brown. This seems to have forgotten that RAF Dark Green and Dark Earth (amongst other colours) were also being manufactured in Australia both as potential colours for RAAF camouflage and also for application to the Beaufort being manufactured in Melbourne for an RAF order. Is it not possible that the MU was requesting Australian manufactured RAF colours for maintenance and repaints of RAF aircraft in Singapore and Malaya? Food for thought.

 

Entirely agree that 151 MU could have been requesting RAF colours from Australian sources.  This would make even more sense if (and I stress "if") my theory about shortages of Dark Earth in Singapore is correct. 

 

The reason so much attention was placed on Earth Brown and Foliage Green is because Mr Lucas put forward the theory that RAF Buffalos were painted in these colours at the factory, and that 151 MU's request for paint from Australian sources might be related to the need to match the RAAF colours.  I find that whole thread highly speculative and focused on one or two pieces of information without looking across the broad swath of evidence that is available, much of which contradicts Mr Lucas' theory. 

 

The same problem occurred with his representation of Singapore-based Vildebeests which was based on a pre-war experiment with the Tropical Sea Scheme despite the fact that there's no evidence anywhere that it was actually implemented by operational units as a standard camouflage scheme.

Edited April 25, 2017 by mhaselden

[Graham Boak]

I don't disagree in general, but do find it difficult to accept that RAF fitters can't repaint serial numbers in the same format as previously presented.

[mhaselden]

Entirely agree, Graham but, equally, why bother when no other airframes in Far East Command wore serials on the rudder?  Would seem a lot of fuss for no added benefit.  Then again, it's the military, right?

[Graham Boak]

Just do what the Flight Sergeant says...  It was common practice to have the serials on the rudder of biplanes, so it isn't as outrageous an idea as it might seem.  A quick look (because it is convenient) in Stuart lloyd's book shows Swordfish, Gladiators, Sharks, and Seafox at least as late as 1939.  Mainly, it must be said, on uncamouflaged examples.

Edited April 25, 2017 by Graham Boak

[Nick Millman]

The official requirement for Azure Blue under TLS overseas was issued in Oct 41 as a postagram amendment to AMOs. Azure was often described anecdotally as "sky blue" but FWIW and notwithstanding the Fishermen's Bend documentation from Jul and Aug 41 regarding Beauforts referring to "Sky Blue" I believe that the Blenheims were probably re-painted to conform to the AM requirement for Azure Blue even though the paint colour seen in the colour photos appears somewhat between Azure and Sky Blue in appearance. It is apparent from subsequent Air HQ India documentation that Azure was the officially promulgated under surface colour for operational aircraft in SEAC until Medium Sea Grey was introduced from Apr 44, however it might have looked in practice. 

 

Really the similarity of the light blue under surface colours and inconsistency of terminology for US equivalent deliveries, RAF requirements and the RAAF is a nightmare to deal with now and probably caused a great deal of confusion then. 

 

Nick  

[mhaselden]

Thanks Nick.  Are you suggesting that the Blenheims were repainted to the Oct 41 requirement for Azure Blue?  If so, then the 27 Sqn Blenheim pics predate that order by 6 months. 

 

Agree entirely with your last comment - an absolute nightmare!

[Nick Millman]

16 minutes ago, mhaselden said:

Thanks Nick.  Are you suggesting that the Blenheims were repainted to the Oct 41 requirement for Azure Blue?  If so, then the 27 Sqn Blenheim pics predate that order by 6 months. 

 

Agree entirely with your last comment - an absolute nightmare!

 

Er, yes, I think so!  One thing is fairly certain - the under surfaces and fuselage bands of the Blenheims do not appear to be Sky so the Azure/Sky Blue appearance must have originated somewhere!  I'm presuming - and going out on a limb here, that FE possibly shared the ME objection to Sky and that the reality of an alternative under surface colour pre-dated the official endorsement as Azure had been around since Nov 40. Whether that was influenced by notions of RAAF Sky Blue would require re-acquaintance with the equally confusing minefield of Australian colour chronology. The alternative theory is that FE had devised their own locally procured or mixed colour to conform to their perception of the "duck egg blue" required by AMO 926/40 and it ended up like a cross between Azure and Sky Blue! The challenge to that is that the AMO was queried and the nature of Sky Type S re-emphasised in corrections made in Dec 40.

 

Another fairly off the wall possibility is that the Buffalos delivered to the FE were painted by Brewster to conform to a "new" requirement for Azure Blue under surfaces to begin with! Yikes! 

 

Nick

[tonyot]

I don`t think that anybody has actually posted the colour Blenheim pic so here it is;

 

The upper surface colours are standard DE/DG and note how the n flash has been applied using pre war colours as opposed to the roundel which has dull wartime (well post Munich) colours. Note the overspray of blue on the tyre too. My guess,....and it is only a guess,.....is that the underside Blue could have been sent as spare paint with the Buffaloes from the USA,.....it is similar to that applied to Martlet Mk.I`s in the USA. 

 

 

 

 

Earlier pics taken when the Blenheim Mk.I`f`s still had black undersides,...note that the Bufaloes still have to have their bands applied yet.;

A line up of Bufaloes,...as in the above pics they look to be DE/DG to me (well US equivalents!);

If only the above was in colour,..(I would guess at a similar Sky Blue to that applied to Martlet Mk.I`s)...and below, note the Walrus in the background;

and here,...below is an ex Belgian Buffalo in the UK which has presumably been refinished in British colours, most likely DE/DG & Sky;

 

Now compare the above photos to the photos below depicting RAAF Wirraway`s also serving in Malaya/Singapore which were finished in the darker RAAF Earth Brown and Foliage Green colours;

But,....were the Wirraway`s refinished with blue undersides or did they retain their original silver? There is photographic evidence that the underwing serials were removed.

 

And here is an RAAF Hudson;

 

I have seen ex Belgian Bufaloes serving with the RN in Egypt and Crete which appear to have darker colours than normal with a lower demarcation between each colour,..it could just be weathering..but these may also be refinished in the TSS or still have Belgian camouflage?

RN;

Belgium;

 

I hope that these help,

Cheers

          Tony

 

Edit,....most will probably we aware of this pic,.....was it colourised?

 

Edit,..edit;

Martlet Mk.I- colour;

and Black and White;

 

Edit-3,.....It probably doesn`t make any difference, but here is another Brewster in its RAF delivery scheme,...the Bermuda;

 

Edited April 28, 2017 by tonyot

[dogsbody]

Has it ever been determined if the Blenheim photos are original colour photos or colourized B&W images?

 

 

Chris

[mhaselden]

They are original colour images.  Mydans took a fair quantity of colour images during his Singapore visit. 

 

(Why oh why didn't he take pictures of ALL the aircraft types on Singapore, though???  <<SIGH>>)

[dogsbody]

13 hours ago, mhaselden said:

They are original colour images.  Mydans took a fair quantity of colour images during his Singapore visit. 

 

(Why oh why didn't he take pictures of ALL the aircraft types on Singapore, though???  <<SIGH>>)

 

Thanks!

 

 

Chris

[mhaselden]

Hi Tony,

 

A couple of observations:

 

20 hours ago, tonyot said:

Earlier pics taken when the Blenheim Mk.I`f`s still had black undersides,...note that the Bufaloes still have to have their bands applied yet.;

 

The above pics were all taken around the same time as the colour photos of the Blenheims in April 1941.  Carl Mydans was the photographer for all of them.  Note the left-most Blenheim in the last pic has a blue starboard underwing with a roundel applied.  There is another photo in the series showing one Blenheim with all-blue undersides and no underwing roundels.  Bet the FS wasn't chuffed to see that!

 

 

20 hours ago, tonyot said:

...and below, note the Walrus in the background;

 

 

 

Note that the fin flash on the Walrus appears to be reversed.  Dunno why...certainly unusual.

 

 

20 hours ago, tonyot said:

 

This pic was doctored to match the serial to the well-known pics of W8202 being unpacked from its crate.  You'll note that this airframe has the reversed camo pattern compared to that applied to the "real" W8202.  I can't recall the actual serial number for this airframe - possibly W8148.

 

 

And now for the ex-Belgian airframes...

 

20 hours ago, tonyot said:

 

te which appear to have darker colours than normal with a lower demarcation between each colour,..it could just be weathering..but these may also be refinished in the TSS or still have Belgian camouflage?

RN;

Belgium;

 

The ex-Belgian airframes transferred for British use had the undersides repainted, most probably in MAP Sky (there's a difference in the demarcation when comparing the Belgian camo with aircraft in the UK.  It's entirely possible that the upper surfaces were also repainted to reflect the standard MAP camo patterns but I haven't done a serious study to identify any patterns (and, frankly, the source imagery is pretty thin on the ground). 

 

The differing contrast is interesting when looking at the Belgian airframes.  Sometimes there's virtually no visible demarcation between the brown and the green while, in other pics (eg the last one taken on Martinique), the contrast is very clear.  I suspect what we're looking at here, and in the case of Buffalos in the Far East, is different camera set-ups and differences in the abilities of the photographers - happy snaps as compared to professional photographers.  Certainly not an easy mess to untangle, though, in terms of what colours were actually applied.  Consensus seems to be that the Buffalos assigned to 805 Sqn in North Africa (and also flown to Crete) had standard DE/DG uppers with MAP Sky undersides...but that is largely speculation and not based on any documentary evidence (at least none that I've seen).

 

Cheers,
Mark

[Graham Boak]

I don't think the Walrus fin flash is reversed: compare it with the same effect on the fuselage roundel.  The film used is one of the orthochromatic ones, where the red appears darker than the blue.  Ortho film does not always make the yellow look black, despite some common examples where it does just that.  I presume that this difference is one of the filter used on the camera lens.

[mhaselden]

You could be right, Graham.  But, then again, it's a little odd that this photo, out of all those taken by Carl Mydans, should use orthochromatic film.  Also, I'm not convinced the fuselage roundel does have the reversed tonal values...I'm away from my image archive (grand name for a hard drive) at present which has a better-quality version of this image.  I'll check when I get home. 

[tonyot]

Hiya Mark,

               Thanks for those comments mate.  As Graham says, the forward section of the fin flash on the Walrus does seem to match the red centre of the roundel and the rear section the blue of the roundel,....maybe they have been applied using peacetime `bright' colours as per the fin flashes on at least one of the Blenheim`s,..which would have arrived from the UK without these applied.

I totally agree with you about the Belgian Buffaloes and indeed finished my own model in DE/DG/Sky as below,....but in some pics I`ve seen they do look rather dark, making me wonder whether some had been repainted? I brought up the Belgian pics because they had been mentioned earlier and agree that in some the colours merge together well while in others they are very stark,....as you say all part of the dark art of b&w photography with its different films and filterst;

 

And my Burma Campaign 67 Sqn Buffalo looks like this,..I left the undersides fully in light blue without adding a black left wing.......although I`m really not sure about the Sky band and spinner cap;

 

All the best

                 Tony

[mhaselden]

On ‎4‎/‎28‎/‎2017 at 5:19 PM, tonyot said:

               Thanks for those comments mate.  As Graham says, the forward section of the fin flash on the Walrus does seem to match the red centre of the roundel and the rear section the blue of the roundel,....maybe they have been applied using peacetime `bright' colours as per the fin flashes on at least one of the Blenheim`s,..which would have arrived from the UK without these applied.

 

HI Tony,

 

Yeah...I wondered about the use of peacetime 'bright' colours on the Walrus.  Certainly a possibility.

 

Love both your Buffalo models.  I can confirm that W8245 'RD-D' did have the black port underwing marking...but you probably didn't want to know that!   The Sky fuselage band was a fair assumption until we saw the colour LIFE images of the 27 Sqn Blenheims.  I'm guessing your model pre-dates that discovery?

 

I dug into my books regarding Wirraways and posted some info on your 1/72 WIP thread.

 

ATB,

Mark