36 Sqn Vildebeests - Serial/Code Letter Tie-ups

[mhaselden]

Oh frabjous day!  Calloo!!! Callay!!!! 

 

Having taken the plunge and procured the old Contrail 1/48 Vildebeest kit, I decided to make one last push to see if I could find any positive serial number/code letter tie-ups for the airframes based at Seletar, Singapore at the time of the Japanese attacks.  Fortunately, the ORBs for both 36 and 100 Sqns have been digitized by the UK National Archives and so, though it cost me a few quid, I decided to procure the F540 and associated appendices for both units covering the period from the outbreak of WW2 until the records expire in late 1941.

 

The 100 Sqn records were pretty useless.  The ORB for 1941 focuses more on postings and promotions than on actual aircraft operations, although it does mention a few accidents involving specific airframes (serial number only).  The appendices (which list actual aviating events) all carry a truncated serial number "K.63." for every airframe, so no positive identifications at all.  Hardly helpful!

 

The 36 Sqn ORB is no better than the 100 Sqn one....but the appendices.  Ahhh, the APPENDICES!!!!  I've managed to gather a list of airframes from the appendices covering the period January 1940 thru October 1941.  Even better, some of the records also tie the individual airframe code letter to the serial number.  Based on the info from the 36 Sqn records, I've compiled the following list of airframes operated by the Sqn:

 

K4156/T             Photos from Ron Reid (RNZAF Proboards) show this airframe in the high-contrast scheme pre-May 1940 (not listed in the 36 Sqn Appendices, although some serials are hidden by the binding) 

K4161/G            Still on strength 23 Aug 41.  Bloody Shambles Vol 1 says destroyed on 10 Dec 41 but has 2 possible alternatives (in collision with Vildebeest K6402 or ditched due to running out of fuel).

K4166/S

K4167/M            Still on strength 14 Aug 41

K4168/F             Still on strength 14 Aug 41

K4169/A             Still on strength 16 Sep 41

K4170/U             Taxied into storm drain 22 July 1941.  Still on strength 15 Aug 41

K4173/W            Still on strength 14 Aug 41.  According to account of Ivor Jones (see Post #41), K4173 was the aircraft in which his friend, Phil Hay, was killed.

K4175

K4176/L              Still on strength, 17 Oct 41

K4179/H             Still on strength 16 Sep 41

K4180/C              Overturned during FL on beach in vicinity of Rompin River, Pahang, 6 Aug 1941

K4181/O

K4185/E              Stalled on landing 28 May 1941

K4186                  Overshot ldg Seletar, taxied into ditch.  Dmg wings, lower centre section and engine bay, 6 Nov 1941.

K4188/R              Still on strength 17 Oct 41

K4599/D

K5186

K6387                 Still on strength 17 Oct 41

K6392                 Still on strength 16 Sep 41

K6394/B              Crashed at Jemerang near Mersing, Johore, 23 Jun 1941

K6402/J               Still on strength 15 Aug 41.  According to Bloody Shambles Vol 1, destroyed in collision with Vildebeest K4161, 10 Dec 41.

 

RED SERIALS indicate airframes listed in Bloody Shambles Vol 2 as participating in Endua Raid.

 

Given that most of the above serials make repeat appearances in the Appendices throughout 1940, it seems logical to assume that 36 Sqn's airframe holdings remained virtually static (ie there wasn't much exchange of airframes between 36 and 100 Sqns).  I'm therefore reasonably confident that individual airframes wore the same code letter throughout the period in question.  The serial/code tie-up for K6402 OE-J is also confirmed from photographic evidence in Bloody Shambles Vol 2 p.18.

 

Bottom line is that, for the first time, I've been able to pretty much confirm a serial/code tie-up for at least 6 airframes that participated in the Endau Raid.  I know this isn't of great interest to many...but it's a massive step forward for my research (and please thank me for NOT sharing with you the Snoopy happy-dance I did when I realized the Appendices provided serial/code tie-ups!).

 

Like I said....Oh frabjous day!  Calloo!!! Callay!!!! 

 

Cheers,
Mark

 

 

Edited October 24, 2017 by mhaselden

[stevehnz]

I think thats brilliant mark. I've got the Azur kit with the OE-J markings but I'd like to change them to one of the ones on the Endau operation, now, thanks to you, I can do that. Wonder if they changes the roundels between mid 1941 & the attack at Endau.

Steve.

[Seahawk]

What a discovery!  A thank you emoji just doesn't do it justice.  Well done and thank you.

[ClaudioN]

15 hours ago, mhaselden said:

I know this isn't of great interest to many...

 

I'm among "the few"...

Thank you for sharing, great find.

 

Claudio

[Ed Russell]

I'm among the few as well, so thanks very much.

Those who are new to it may wish to read the originating thread

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/66426-tropical-sea-scheme-on-the-beest/&

which has been somewhat ruined (Botophucketed) by the losers from Denver but still contains much valuable info.

[mhaselden]

On ‎10‎/‎18‎/‎2017 at 12:08 AM, stevehnz said:

I think thats brilliant mark. I've got the Azur kit with the OE-J markings but I'd like to change them to one of the ones on the Endau operation, now, thanks to you, I can do that. Wonder if they changes the roundels between mid 1941 & the attack at Endau.

Steve.

 

Thanks Steve.  I knew SOMEONE would find it helpful!

 

The Azur kit seems to represent K6402 in its pre-May 1940 markings with Type A fuselage roundel (no yellow outer ring) and the Squadron crest on the fin with no fin flash.  The Azur kit includes Type A upper wing roundels which is a possibility (there are no photos to confirm one way or the other) but Type B upper wing roundels were worn later.  I presume Singapore followed the Air Ministry directive to add fin flashes and yellow surrounds to the fuselage roundel shortly after May 1940.  The fin flashes occupied the entire area of the fin on airframes of both 36 Sqn and 100 Sqn.  The Blenheims of 27 Sqn had similar large fin flashes in April 1941 but by December had reverted to the standardized rectangular fin flash.  However, the Vildebeests seem to have retained their large fin flashes.  Photos of airframes captured by the Japanese show what appear to be large fin flash, Type B upper wing roundels and Type A1 fuselage roundel, so it's fair to assume that national markings on the Vildebeests' upper areas were consistent throughout 1941.

 

The underwing roundels require a little more thought/guesswork/interpretation...and not just relative to the markings, but also the colour scheme.  A pre-May 1940 photo of K4167 shows Type A underwing roundels and black underwing but there are a couple of photos of captured Vildebeests which show light-toned undersides and no roundels.  Ed Russell has already provided the link to the long-running thread about Vildebeest colours and markings but I'll summarize my thinking on the topic (see below)...and people can take it or leave it as necessary because, after all, it's just my interpretation of the available evidence.

 

Firstly, I'm going to state up front that, notwithstanding the fact that it's very attractive, I'm hugely skeptical of the Dark Mediterranean Blue/Extra Dark Sea Green scheme promoted by Paul Lucas.  This is based on a number of factors but mainly:

• It doesn't account for the different degrees of contrast visible on Vildebeests at different times of their later service.
• It would be very strange for a type slated for urgent replacement to wear its own unique camouflage scheme.
• Elements of what we can confirm about the Vildebeest camouflage align with the camouflage worn by other aircraft types in Malaya/Singapore or elsewhere (see additional points below).

I did check the ORBs for both 36 Sqn and 100 Sqn in hopes that some over-zealous admin officer had included a statement that "all aircraft to be camouflaged with X and Y colours on such-and-such a date" but, alas, the records revealed nothing, nor is there a discernable break in training activities from the time of the Munich Crisis until the outbreak of hostilities in Dec 41.  So, we're left to our own guesswork about what the actual colours were and when they were applied.

 

It's clear that the Vildebeests were first camouflaged some time before May 1940.  This initial camouflage application comprised a 2-colour high-contrast upper-surface camouflage with black undersides and Type A roundels on the fuselage and under the wings.  This high-contrast scheme is interesting because the fuselage code letters appear darker in tone than the lighter of the 2 camouflage colours.  Sometime after May 1940, the VIldebeests appear in a much lower contrast scheme with shadow compensation colours applied to the upper surface of the lower wing.  I've not seen any photos of high-contrast scheme airframes with fin flashes, nor have I seen any photos of low-contrast scheme airframes without them...so the May 1940 date, although not directly correlated to the change in camouflage, provides at least a definable divide between the 2 schemes.

 

We need to consider why there were 2 different schemes applied to the Vildebeest and make a value judgement about the most likely cause.  Possible reasons include:

1. The initial high-contrast scheme didn't work as well as planned and so a change was made.
2. Singapore lacked sufficient dope of the right colours to do the job first time round.
3. AHQFE changed its camouflage requirements sometime in late 1940/early 1941.

For any of the above, we must bear in mind that, in 1940, the only operational aircraft in Far East Command comprised 2 squadrons of Blenheims (34 and 62), 2 squadrons of Vildebeests (36 and 100) and 205 Sqn with a few decrepit Singapores.  Within the context of Far East Command's other camouflage actions, the Vildebeests could have been camouflaged in Dark Earth/Dark Green (as per the Blenheims), Extra Dark Sea Grey/Dark Slate Grey (as per the Singapores) or in some unique colour scheme (per Paul Lucas).  Let's ignore the "unique scheme" option for a moment because there are too many variables.

 

EDSG/DSG is an attractive option because it has some alignment with the Vildebeest's primary role of torpedo bomber.  Available photos suggest that 205 Sqn's flying boats wore that camouflage which would mean the colours were available in Singapore.  It's possible Singapore lacked sufficient of the colours to do the Singapores and the Vildebeests (per #2 above) but, if that were the case, what colours might be applied to the Vildebeests to create the high-contrast scheme?  Perhaps one of the shadow compensation shades of (probably Slate Grey)?  I haven't seen many (any?) photos of Slate Grey next to EDSG so I don't know their relative tonal values but I suspect the contrast won't be as high as is visible on the Vildebeests.  I also doubt that either Slate Grey would show up as lighter than the MSG code letters.  Once repainted in the correct EDSG/DSG scheme, one would expect the contrast to be extremely low...noticeably lower than DE/DG.

 

Applying the same thought process to the DE/DG scenario, a lack of DE in Singapore might have led the Vildebeest squadrons to apply initial camouflage of Light Earth which, combined with Dark Green on the fuselage, would present the high-contrast appearance of the early camouflage scheme.  Photos of Gladiators wearing the 4-colour shadow compensation scheme on the lower fuselage also show that Light Earth can appear lighter than MSG.  Later overpainting of Light Earth with the correct Dark Earth tone on the upper surface of the upper wing and the fuselage sides and uppers would match the known appearance of the later scheme.  The downside to the DE/DG scenario is that it's not the best camouflage for operations over the sea....although the RAAF Hudsons which deployed to Singapore in July/August 1940 retained DE/DG uppers (or, more accurately, US equivalents thereof) and their primary role was maritime reconnaissance.

 

Then we have the "unique scheme" option.  Frankly, I can't imagine what colours might be used for the high contrast scheme because even shadow compensation variants (Mediterranean Blue or Dark Sea Green) are unlikely to show up lighter than MSG.  I also question why AHQFE would waste time procuring unique colours for an airframe that was slated for replacement (by Beauforts).  Given that 36 and 100 Sqns didn't take the time to replace the large fin flash with the regulation marking, I find it hard to believe that they'd waste time holding stocks of unique paint/dope just for those 2 squadrons.  I'm afraid that just doesn't pass the giggle test (IMHO).

 

Now to the undersides.  As noted, a photo of K4167 in the high contrast scheme shows black undersides with roundels in place whereas photos of at least 2 captured Vildebeests appear to show light-toned undersides with no roundels.  The black undersides make a lot of sense and would align with the markings applied to Blenheims in the theatre.  Also, most Vildebeest wartime missions took place at night, and so black is the logical colour for the early stages of the Malayan Campaign.  The Endau Raid, however, was conducted in daylight.  It had been planned for night time but the crews were exhausted from a long mission the previous night and so launch was delayed until the daylight hours.  It's possible that, given the delay, the squadrons rapidly applied a light underside colour in the vain hope it might delay detection of the Vildebeests.  Overpainting the roundels would align with this idea - speed being preferred over precision of painting.  Equally, I see no reason for a light-toned underside when most previous operations took place at night.

 

None of the options aligns comprehensively with all known data but, taken all together, I believe that the early high-contrast scheme was Light Earth and Dark Green over black with roundels in 6 positions and no fin flash.  Once sufficient stocks of Dark Earth became available, the upper surfaces (except the upper surface of the lower wing) were repainted with Dark Earth.  The aircraft retained black undersides with standard roundel positions (Type B on upper wings, Type A under wing and Type A1 on fuselage) until the day of the Endau raid when the undersides were quickly overpainted with a light tone, perhaps the same pale blue shade applied to 27 Sqn's Blenheims. 

 

As noted, the above is just semi-educated guesswork.  It's entirely possible that there are other options out there...I just find them less plausible that the scenario I've described.  It's a shame because, frankly, DE/DG is a bit boring.  However, I think its' the most likely option.

 

Kind regards,
Mark

 

P.S.  Apols for another of my lengthy "War and Peace" posts.  Hope any readers are still awake!

 

 

 

Edited October 19, 2017 by mhaselden

[Old Man]

This is great stuff, Sir!

 

[mhaselden]

44 minutes ago, Old Man said:

This is great stuff, Sir!

 

 

And, yes, I also bore for NATO!  (As if that was ever in doubt!) 

Edited October 19, 2017 by mhaselden

[stevehnz]

Thanks Mark,  I can't fault your reasoning because I don't have anything to refute it with & I'm guessing other than an alternative conjecture neither can anyone else prove an alternative though there may well be discussion to the contrary, this is Britmodeller after all, so unless a more convincing theory emerges, I think I can see which way I'll head come the day my Vildbeest sees the light of day. Certainly Type B, type A1 & large fin flash seem set in solidish stone to my mind.

Steve.

Edited October 19, 2017 by stevehnz

[mhaselden]

There may be other equally plausible answers out there...but I'm struggling to come up with any.  As you can probably tell, I've spent a bit of time pondering this one, and have accessed as many photos as I can of 'Beests from either of the Singapore-based Squadrons.  Ironically, there are rather more (and better) photos of 36 Sqn machines than of those belonging to "The Tatty Ton".  To date I've only come across a single photo of camouflaged 100 Sqn 'Beests, the well known one with 'NK-K' in the foreground but no serial number visible.

Edited October 19, 2017 by mhaselden

[ClaudioN]

15 hours ago, mhaselden said:

Now to the undersides.  As noted, a photo of K4167 in the high contrast scheme shows black undersides with roundels in place whereas photos of at least 2 captured Vildebeests appear to show light-toned undersides with no roundels.  The black undersides make a lot of sense and would align with the markings applied to Blenheims in the theatre.  Also, most Vildebeest wartime missions took place at night, and so black is the logical colour for the early stages of the Malayan Campaign.  The Endau Raid, however, was conducted in daylight.  It had been planned for night time but the crews were exhausted from a long mission the previous night and so launch was delayed until the daylight hours.  It's possible that, given the delay, the squadrons rapidly applied a light underside colour in the vain hope it might delay detection of the Vildebeests.  Overpainting the roundels would align with this idea - speed being preferred over precision of painting.  Equally, I see no reason for a light-toned underside when most previous operations took place at night.

 

None of the options aligns comprehensively with all known data but, taken all together, I believe that the early high-contrast scheme was Light Earth and Dark Green over black with roundels in 6 positions and no fin flash.  Once sufficient stocks of Dark Earth became available, the upper surfaces (except the upper surface of the lower wing) were repainted with Dark Earth.  The aircraft retained black undersides with standard roundel positions (Type B on upper wings, Type A under wing and Type A1 on fuselage) until the day of the Endau raid when the undersides were quickly overpainted with a light tone, perhaps the same pale blue shade applied to 27 Sqn's Blenheims. 

 

Your reasoning is very convincing and I also feel DG/DE, although boring, is most likely. That is, assuming a camouflaged biplane torpedo bomber at the end of 1941 can be boring at all!

The "quick overpaint" of the undersides sounds odd to me, though. Do you think there might be some chance that the repaint took place sometime in 1941?

 

Regards

 

Claudio

 

[Kari Lumppio]

Hello!

 

Always intterested in odd camouflages and I have to admit not even seeing the photos of Vildebeest "early camo" discussed here.

 

But I would present an analogy from Finland. Finnish Ju W34 floatplanes were painted silver pre war years (and Winter War). When the time came to camouflage them (in 1941, it seems) they got only the green part blotches of the FinnAF standard olive green / black camo. Could the Vildebeest have been treated the same? Easier and quicker to apply and less paint needed and  only one colour.

 

You can picture google Finnish Ju W34 and see the mentioned two appearances (and couple more) if they fit the bill.

 

Just an ignorant idea.

 

Cheers,

Kari

Edited October 19, 2017 by Kari Lumppio

[Graham Boak]

I believe that the high contrast scheme is simply weathered Dark Earth appearing light and the Dark Green still appearing dark.

 

Apparently the more exotic Tropical Sea Scheme was tried prewar (on a single example), alongside other exotic ideas, but planned further trials were abandoned  on the outbreak of war.  Then only the Temperate Land Scheme was retained for all theatres: perhaps cynically, I suggest because the Air Ministry were only thinking of Europe and forgot about anywhere else.

[Dave Fleming]

Weathered or just a photographic effect

[Graham Boak]

Weathered, as on many similar views from the Middle East on Wellesleys etc.  Ortho film, which was most common in British use at this time, would have the effect of making fresher Dark Earth look very dark.  I'm not a photographic expert, but don't know of any combination of film and filter that would bring out such a high contrast.

[mhaselden]

Here's an image of the high contrast scheme K4156.  I have a similar, even better, image showing the same scheme on K4167 (you can view the K4167 pic by Googling Vickers Vildebeest Dave Homewood - it's a shot of the starboard side in direct sunlight and it appears in the Google search results even though the image posted on RNZAF Proboards is in Photobucket Hell (I have a better quality image on my hard drive and it's very clear!) :

 

 

 

9 hours ago, Kari Lumppio said:

But I would present an analogy from Finland. Finnish Ju W34 floatplanes were painted silver pre war years (and Winter War). When the time came to camouflage them (in 1941, it seems) they got only the green part blotches of the FinnAF standard olive green / black camo. Could the Vildebeest have been treated the same? Easier and quicker to apply and less paint needed and  only one colour.

 

Hi Kari,

Given the above photo, I'm pretty convinced it's not simply overpainting of dark green straight ontop of silver dope.  Photos of Vildebeests in Singapore prior to the application of camouflage show a definite sheen to the fabric areas that's not present on this image or any other high contrast image that I've seen.

 

 

7 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

I believe that the high contrast scheme is simply weathered Dark Earth appearing light and the Dark Green still appearing dark.

 

Hi Graham,

'Fraid I have to disagree on this one.  The airframe in the above pic and the other one of K4167 both appear to be very clean and well cared-for that show hardly any weathering (at least to my eye).  Look at the wheel spat on K4156 - there isn't even any mud on it, which is no mean feat operating in tropical conditions off grass runways.  The light camo shade is far too regular and consistent (IMHO) to be weathered Dark Earth. 

 

 

5 hours ago, Dave Fleming said:

Weathered or just a photographic effect

 

Hi Dave,

I'd be really interested to learn what photographic effect would result in the above image.  It's not ortho film because the roundel colour tones are correct for pan film.  Also note the reticles at the left and right edges which are also present on the pic of K4167.  These suggest the photographs were taken in an official capacity to evaluate torpedo drop performance by the crews.  I hardly think there would need to be any messing with filters or other techniques given the probable purpose of the images...and I still don't see how any technique would make the code letters appear darker than the light camouflage tone.

 

Obviously, we can't discount any of the above ideas...I just think they're less likely than the theory I put forward.  I need to dig it out but I seem to recall a photo of a Blenheim in the relevant Profile Pubs booklet taken in India as the unit re-equipped from Wapitis.  The Blenheim originally had Type A1 roundels on the upper wings but the yellow ring had been overpainted but the areas that should be Dark Earth were noticeably lighter than the surrounding area of the wing.  This might provide further indication of a shortage of Dark Earth in theatres east of the Persian Gulf in the 1939-1940 period. 

UPDATE:  The photo was on p.540 of Warner's "Bristol Blenheim" (2nd Edition) and shows a 60 Sqn machine with the white section of the roundels overpainted so they look like Type B roundels....and the yellow outer ring overpainted as described above.

 

I'm also not offended if any of you continue to disagree with me...after all, it's just a theory.

 

Cheers,

Mark

Edited October 20, 2017 by mhaselden

[mhaselden]

8 hours ago, ClaudioN said:

The "quick overpaint" of the undersides sounds odd to me, though. Do you think there might be some chance that the repaint took place sometime in 1941?

 

 

Hi Claudio,

 

There's certainly a chance of such an occurrence but that would mean the original black undersides would have to be overpainted prior to hostilities, and during combat ops most Vildebeests were night missions.  That all seems a bit illogical to me.  I must be honest that my repaint scenario is something of a stretch but it's the most logical explanation I can come up with for why airframes that originally wore black undersides with roundels in 1940 and which undertook night bombing missions would appear with light-toned undersides and no roundels after being captured by the Japanese.

 

Cheers,
Mark 

[Graham Boak]

Colours will fade regardless of the quality of the maintenance.

 

Approaching from another angle: why should a maritime unit in a densely forested theatre choose a light colour for camouflage?  It makes no sense.

 

For modelling purposes, you can use Light Earth to represent either itself or faded Dark Earth.

[Dave Fleming]

8 hours ago, mhaselden said:

Here's an image of the high contrast scheme K4156.  I have a similar, even better, image showing the same scheme on K4167 (you can view the K4167 pic by Googling Vickers Vildebeest Dave Homewood - it's a shot of the starboard side in direct sunlight and it appears in the Google search results even though the image posted on RNZAF Proboards is in Photobucket Hell (I have a better quality image on my hard drive and it's very clear!) :

 

 

 

 

Hi Dave,

I'd be really interested to learn what photographic effect would result in the above image.  It's not ortho film because the roundel colour tones are correct for pan film.  Also note the reticles at the left and right edges which are also present on the pic of K4167.  These suggest the photographs were taken in an official capacity to evaluate torpedo drop performance by the crews.  I hardly think there would need to be any messing with filters or other techniques given the probable purpose of the images...and I still don't see how any technique would make the code letters appear darker than the light camouflage tone.

 

 

I missed a question mark from my original post, funny how that turns a query into a definitive statement! :-)

 

I'm actually in your camp, I think it's a lighter colour. The overall effect is too consistent for it to be weathering or fading, and as you say, if it was a filter (say a yellow filter) you would expect the reds of the roundel to appear lighter as well.

 

As to what colour, I'm open minded - Light earth would seem natural, but I wouldn't exclude a grey (Sky grey?) or a light blue

 

Edited October 20, 2017 by Dave Fleming

[Nick Millman]

Aircraft Design Memorandum No. 338 (Issue 8) - Cancelling A.D.M. 332 - External Colour Schemes of Aircraft, Enclosure 1A, File B.8200/39 dated 7/7/39 and re-issued by R.D.M on 2/9/39, inter alia:-

 

"Overseas

 

Land Planes, Operational types

 

10. The temperate land scheme camouflage, C.3A, is to be adopted universally (for world wide use) . (Encos. 107A in 503041)"

 

The 1938 C3A diagram illustrates Dark Green and Dark Earth in the shadow shading scheme with Light Green and Light Earth extending to the top fuselage decking. Therefore in the photo above the Dark Green and Dark Earth segments would be hardly seen and in any case are under a different angle of illumination.  The darker segments appear too light for Dark Green and are probably Light Green, conforming closely to the C3A scheme (even in pattern) which shows "Night colour" under surfaces. 

 

One of the peculiarities which I've mentioned here before is the high reflectivity of Light Earth (30%) which produced a greater contrast with Light Green (11%) than the contrast between Dark Green (7%) and Dark Earth (13%).  Therefore and FWIW my conclusion is that the Vildebeests were probably in the biplane shadow shaded scheme on the upper surfaces. 

 

In August 1940 an Appendix to Air Ministry S.5506 specified either "matt black or duck-egg blue" under surfaces at the discretion of Commands to meet operational requirements but stated that torpedo bombers would be produced with duck-egg blue under surfaces. There was clearly an issue with the availability of Sky paint in the Far East because an Air Ministry to Air HQ India telegram of 21/6/40 referred to a delay in supply and approval for the use of "old markings" if and when 27 Squadron became a fighter squadron.   

 

Nick

[mhaselden]

1 hour ago, Dave Fleming said:

 

I missed a question mark from my original post, funny how that turns a query into a definitive statement! :-)

 

I'm actually in your camp, I think it's a lighter colour. The overall effect is too consistent for it to be weathering or fading, and as you say, if it was a filter (say a yellow filter) you would expect the reds of the roundel to appear lighter as well.

 

As to what colour, I'm open minded - Light earth would seem natural, but I wouldn't exclude a grey (Sky grey?) or a light blue

 

 

  Isn't communication fun?  One of my eldest son's friends writes like everything is a text message with zero capitalization or punctuation.  Trying to work out what he's saying is....challenging!

 

We certainly could be looking at some colour other than Light Earth.  I truly don't know and am just offering a plausible theory.  As modellers we love unusual schemes (eg the Tropical Sea Scheme)....but often reality is far more mundane.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

Colours will fade regardless of the quality of the maintenance.

 

Approaching from another angle: why should a maritime unit in a densely forested theatre choose a light colour for camouflage?  It makes no sense.

 

For modelling purposes, you can use Light Earth to represent either itself or faded Dark Earth.

 

Colours will certainly fade but they typically don't fade uniformly across all components of an airframe.  I'd expect there to be some gradation visible in areas where the paint is shielded from the elements, and that gradation will depend on the degree of shielding.  These photos all show a degree of uniformity that doesn't really match a fading theory.  I made the point about the general condition of the airframe because for fading to occur, a colour must have been exposed for some time and we'd expect there to be other evidence of usage (ie other forms of weathering).  I'm not seeing any such evidence which suggests to me that this airframe was relatively recently painted.

 

To your second point, they may not have had a choice if the correct paints weren't available.  As an operational backwater, Far East Command had to make do with the resources they had available.  As to the use of land-based colours for a maritime unit, the only suggestion I can offer is that camouflage while on the ground was deemed more important that over sea camo (the fact that Hudsons, which also had a maritime role, would align with this thinking).

 

 

1 hour ago, Nick Millman said:

Aircraft Design Memorandum No. 338 (Issue 8) - Cancelling A.D.M. 332 - External Colour Schemes of Aircraft, Enclosure 1A, File B.8200/39 dated 7/7/39 and re-issued by R.D.M on 2/9/39, inter alia:-

 

"Overseas

 

Land Planes, Operational types

 

10. The temperate land scheme camouflage, C.3A, is to be adopted universally (for world wide use) . (Encos. 107A in 503041)"

 

The 1938 C3A diagram illustrates Dark Green and Dark Earth in the shadow shading scheme with Light Green and Light Earth extending to the top fuselage decking. Therefore in the photo above the Dark Green and Dark Earth segments would be hardly seen and in any case are under a different angle of illumination.  The darker segments appear too light for Dark Green and are probably Light Green, conforming closely to the C3A scheme (even in pattern) which shows "Night colour" under surfaces. 

 

One of the peculiarities which I've mentioned here before is the high reflectivity of Light Earth (30%) which produced a greater contrast with Light Green (11%) than the contrast between Dark Green (7%) and Dark Earth (13%).  Therefore and FWIW my conclusion is that the Vildebeests were probably in the biplane shadow shaded scheme on the upper surfaces. 

 

In August 1940 an Appendix to Air Ministry S.5506 specified either "matt black or duck-egg blue" under surfaces at the discretion of Commands to meet operational requirements but stated that torpedo bombers would be produced with duck-egg blue under surfaces. There was clearly an issue with the availability of Sky paint in the Far East because an Air Ministry to Air HQ India telegram of 21/6/40 referred to a delay in supply and approval for the use of "old markings" if and when 27 Squadron became a fighter squadron.   

 

Nick

 

Hi Nick,

I was hoping you'd chip in.  I like the idea that we're simply seeing the shadow compensation scheme being applied to the fuselage sides.  Not sure I agree with the idea that the dark tone is Light Green - it seems very dark to my eyes (and the consistent tonal appearance across all 3 airframes that illustrate this scheme suggests that it's not a fluke of lighting or camera settings.  The info about undersides for torpedo aircraft is very interesting and suggests that maybe the light-toned undersides were applied before the outbreak of hostilities.

 

Cheers,
Mark

[Nick Millman]

It's all relative. At 11% Light Green is not really that "light" (Dark Earth is lighter and even Dark Slate Grey at 12%). And the greater tonal contrast with Light Earth, as mentioned, would make the green appear darker to the eye anyway. In C3A the fin and rudder are to be painted in the lighter colours.

 

Regarding the under surface colours, again mentioned here previously, Air Ministry's postagram B.59966/II/F.O.6 of 30/10/41 required the under surfaces of all operational aircraft abroad to be camouflaged Azure Blue. 

 

FWIW if I were making a Vildebeest model to depict an aircraft during the Endau operation I'd probably apply a fairly weathered and perhaps patched up shadow shading scheme over Azure Blue. 

 

Nick

 

 

[mhaselden]

Hi Nick,

 

Clearly, Far East Command ignored B.59966/II/F.O.6 of 30/10/41 because the Blenheims mostly retained black undersides, the Buffalos and fighter Blenheims kept their fighter ID markings while the RAAF airframes (admittedly not subject to the Air Min instruction) wore aluminium.  Also, by late Oct 41, the planned replacement of the Vildebeests was well advanced so it's probable that AHQFE simply wouldn't bother implementing a new directive on a type that was leaving service (as evidenced by the retention of the whole-fin flashes on Vildebeests).

 

Going back to your idea of the shadow compensation being applied to the fuselage sides, would that also be the case for the fin/rudder?  'Fraid I don't know my shadow scheme diagrams well enough to know where the demarkation lay between the lighter and darker colours.  Per the image below of a Vildebeest at Hong Kong after its surrender, perhaps this is showing a Light Earth/Light Green overall scheme?

 

 

[mhaselden]

Folks,

We're running the risk here of thrashing over the same ground as the previous (LOOOOONNNGGGGG) thread about Vildebeest colours and markings.  My intent in Post #6 was simply to answer Steve's question about roundels which, of necessity, must touch on the camouflage.  Sadly, the lack of documentation or even a decent photographic record means we're still left to much guesswork...so folks can make up their own minds and, if inspired to model a 'Beest in the earlier scheme, do so in whatever colours they wish, secure in the knowledge that, apart from the black undersides, pretty much everything else is open to conjecture.

 

Bottom line is that, by the time of the Endau Raid, the Vildebeests appear to have worn a low-contrast scheme as per this example (which we can now identify as K4188 per Post #1):

 

 

I'm just glad we now have some positive serial/code tie-ups so modellers can strive for a closer representation of the aircraft as one way to remember the incredible bravery of these men.

 

Cheers,

Mark

[Chuck1945]

I had immediately saved your initial post with the serial/code connections, but am now saving the entire topic. Lots of good info and food for thought once my Azur kit hits the assembly stage. Saved as a PDF so as not become a victim of any future web shenanigans.

 

Thanks for posting this and also thanks to all the contributors

Edited October 20, 2017 by Chuck1945