F4U-1A Corsair info

[JimmyZ]

Good day all.

 

I'm planning on doing a Corsair diorama depicting a relatively weathered Corsair on an island.

 

I have this Revell kit:

 

 

After about a day of research on general info, I still have unanswered questions.

 

1. The kit has the following two options: a) Pappy Boyington's VMF-214 Corsair at Vella Lavella, Solomon Islands. As far as I could find out, Major Gregory Boyington didn't actually fly this plane, ever, as the photos with him in it were for publicity only. And b), a VF-17 Navy Corsair. My objective being to depict a weathered Corsair on an island, which one of the two would be the most appropriate?

Seeing as "Boyington's Corsair" wasn't flown by him, was the publicity additions (kill markings, lulubelle/lucybelle) removed after the op, or did someone (other that Boyington) actually fly the Corsair like this?

 

As for the Navy option, there's a photo of a Navy VF-17 Corsair on Bougainville at this link http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=ForumsPro&file=viewtopic&t=14428&start=436&finish=15&printertopic=1

It's about 3/4 down the web page.

Why would a Navy Corsair land on an island? Or were they based there? I thought all Navy planes were based on aircraft carriers (please excuse my lack of knowledge on the subject). And would that then be realistic to depict a Navy Corsair on an island diorama?

 

2. The kit includes the US insignia with red outlinings. For some reason I doubt it it's correct. According to the image below, both these subjects post date the red barred insignia.

Also, I see a lot of Corsair model pictures with the "normal" blue barred US insignia. Did Revell get this wrong?

 

3. Cockpit colours (and general primer colours). Seems like this is a tricky one. According to http://www.ipmsstockholm.org/magazine/2004/05/stuff_eng_interior_colours_us_part3.htm :

 

"Vought F4U Corsair

Sorting out the interior colours of the Corsair is particularly tricky. For the F4U-1 Birdcage Corsairs, photos taken at the time show the cockpits being a very dark colour, most probably black. Analysis of some crashed examples of F4U-1s indicates black, while the factory Erection & Maintenance Instructions called for Dull Dark Green.

As mentioned before, early production Corsairs had their interior surfaces in areas other than the cockpit covered with Salmon primer. This colour mixture was used relatively long into Corsair production. It would seem that all F4U-1s and a number of early  F4U-1As were finished this way.

Somewhere during the production of F4U-1A model Vought discontinued the use of Salmon primers and switched to Zinc Chromate Yellow with cockpits in Interior Green."

 

Did anyone get more concrete info on this? Seems like the model I want to depict could be either Salmon or Zinc Chromate Yellow primed. 

 

Although I have more questions, these are the ones that prevent me from starting this build. Any opinions would be appreciated.

 

Cheers

Jimmy

 

 

Edited December 22, 2017 by JimmyZ
fixed hotlinks

[LDSModeller]

29 minutes ago, JimmyZ said:

As for the Navy option, there's a photo of a Navy VF-17 Corsair on Bougainville at this link http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=ForumsPro&file=viewtopic&t=14428&start=436&finish=15&printertopic=1

It's about 3/4 down the web page.

Why would a Navy Corsair land on an island? Or were they based there? I thought all Navy planes were based on aircraft carriers (please excuse my lack of knowledge on the subject). And would that then be realistic to depict a Navy Corsair on an island diorama?

WWII USN units like VF 17 certainly were based  on island Strips in the South West Pacific, and flew regular missions

from these strips, sharing them with USMC (MAG) Units along with Commonwealth units like RNZAF/RAAF Squadrons.

 

Yes. it would be realistic to depict a USN F4U-1 in a Island diorama as shown with VF 17 in the link you posted above.

 

As far as Cockpit colours go, if early F4U-1 then could be Dull Dark Green to Apple Green. Later F4U-1D's had Black above the side consoles,

with US Interior Green below that.

 

I doubt very much on even early F4U-1(A)'s you would see Salmon on main wheel wells, as these would be the underside colour.

Check out this bent RNZAF F4U-1a (very early, note lower fuselage window) - Note Stock USN Aircraft type , as in same supplied to USN/USMC

 

Bent Corsair wheel wells

 

If Salmon was used, it would be totally internally where it would be unlikely to be seen  from the outside.

Note though Salmon colored ammunition boxes for the wings were issued for use, RNZAF Museum has some I've seen.

 

Cowlings interiors would be either light grey or Intermediate Blue to the Piston heads and light grey from there to the forward firewall/bulkhead

(Information taken from M&E manuals supplied to RNZAF with our F4U-1(a)'s)

 

As I understand it the red surrounds on the Star/bar were very short lived (only a few months) but you could have

aircraft with the red section painted over, for some time after that.

 

Hope that helps you some? - Hopefully some of our WWII USN Experts will chime in with further info

Regards

 

Alan

[mike romeo]

And watch the details of that Revell kit; it has some details of the -1D.  The one that bugged me was the provision of 2 inner underwing pylons, instead of the single underbelly pylon of which the -1A was fitted.  No big deal?  Fair enough, but recessed holes for the underwing pylons need to be filled, and they'll need some very delicate sanding.

 

Other niggles?  The horizontal tailplane doesn't look quite right in planform and the rear fuselage plan view doesn't match the Tamiya kit; no idea which, if either, is correct.

 

The kit also appeared a bit over-engineered to me.  Especially the cowling, front fuselage and wings.  Oh and I found the main gear legs very tricky to fit.

 

If the above appears overly negative, I apologise.  I was hoping for an affordable, accurate, easy to build  F4U on which to base a themed build of Corsairs.  Imho, this kit ain't it.  It builds into a nice kit but not without some effort.

 

Regards

 

Martin

 

PS I forgot to mention: the decals are excellent!

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

Go with VF-17 though I am actually not happy to say that. Its the more accurate of the two markings for an active corsair. Navy Squadrons operated the corsair off land because the navy couldnt solve the bouncing issue on landing. It was the british that first operated the corsair off carriers.

[JimmyZ]

9 hours ago, LDSModeller said:

WWII USN units like VF 17 certainly were based  on island Strips in the South West Pacific, and flew regular missions

from these strips, sharing them with USMC (MAG) Units along with Commonwealth units like RNZAF/RAAF Squadrons.

 

Yes. it would be realistic to depict a USN F4U-1 in a Island diorama as shown with VF 17 in the link you posted above.

 

As far as Cockpit colours go, if early F4U-1 then could be Dull Dark Green to Apple Green. Later F4U-1D's had Black above the side consoles,

with US Interior Green below that.

 

I doubt very much on even early F4U-1(A)'s you would see Salmon on main wheel wells, as these would be the underside colour.

Check out this bent RNZAF F4U-1a (very early, note lower fuselage window) - Note Stock USN Aircraft type , as in same supplied to USN/USMC

 

Bent Corsair wheel wells

 

If Salmon was used, it would be totally internally where it would be unlikely to be seen  from the outside.

Note though Salmon colored ammunition boxes for the wings were issued for use, RNZAF Museum has some I've seen.

 

Cowlings interiors would be either light grey or Intermediate Blue to the Piston heads and light grey from there to the forward firewall/bulkhead

(Information taken from M&E manuals supplied to RNZAF with our F4U-1(a)'s)

 

As I understand it the red surrounds on the Star/bar were very short lived (only a few months) but you could have

aircraft with the red section painted over, for some time after that.

 

Hope that helps you some? - Hopefully some of our WWII USN Experts will chime in with further info

Regards

 

Alan

Hi Alan. Yes actually it does help, thank you!

 

7 hours ago, mike romeo said:

And watch the details of that Revell kit; it has some details of the -1D.  The one that bugged me was the provision of 2 inner underwing pylons, instead of the single underbelly pylon of which the -1A was fitted.  No big deal?  Fair enough, but recessed holes for the underwing pylons need to be filled, and they'll need some very delicate sanding.

 

Other niggles?  The horizontal tailplane doesn't look quite right in planform and the rear fuselage plan view doesn't match the Tamiya kit; no idea which, if either, is correct.

 

The kit also appeared a bit over-engineered to me.  Especially the cowling, front fuselage and wings.  Oh and I found the main gear legs very tricky to fit.

 

If the above appears overly negative, I apologise.  I was hoping for an affordable, accurate, easy to build  F4U on which to base a themed build of Corsairs.  Imho, this kit ain't it.  It builds into a nice kit but not without some effort.

 

Regards

 

Martin

 

PS I forgot to mention: the decals are excellent!

Hi Martin. Not negative at all, only fact, which I do appreciate. I would most likely have missed it completely. The more I know about the kit's deficiencies, the better, since I like to think I should be able to do something about it.

41 minutes ago, Corsairfoxfouruncle said:

Go with VF-17 though I am actually not happy to say that. Its the more accurate of the two markings for an active corsair. Navy Squadrons operated the corsair off land because the navy couldnt solve the bouncing issue on landing. It was the british that first operated the corsair off carriers.

Thanks Corsairfoxfouruncle, that's what I needed to know, which of the two would be the most accurate. I had a feeling the VF-17 option would be more accurate, but I wasn't sure of the USN Corsair's operating off of island fields, but I'm convinced now.

 

Also, that's very informative. I surely didn't know that.

 

Cheers

Jimmy

[JimmyZ]

Hi all.

 

So I've "sorted out" the cockpit colour as well as the primer paint. I'm was still at odds over the red barred star insignia, however then I found this photo: https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/F4U_Corsair

Yes it's a Hungarian Wikipedia page. It's the one at the very top right-hand corner. The English Wikipedia page does not have the same photograph.

 

The aircraft 3rd from the front is the VF-17 subject I will be building (click on the photo to enlarge). Look at the insignia. It's almost certainly got a red bar around it.

Does anyone agree that this is photographic evidence of it having the red barred insignia?

The only doubt about the photograph is the date of 1944. On this link the same photograph (only much smaller) is dated 1943. https://www.pacificwrecks.com/aircraft/f4u/17804/1943/vf17.html This is probably nitpicking, but it would have been nice to have the correct date.

 

Another interesting thing about the photo is the aircrafts sudden end of the tri-colour camo just behind the engine cowling.

On 12/22/2017 at 1:06 PM, mike romeo said:

And watch the details of that Revell kit; it has some details of the -1D.  The one that bugged me was the provision of 2 inner underwing pylons, instead of the single underbelly pylon of which the -1A was fitted.  No big deal?  Fair enough, but recessed holes for the underwing pylons need to be filled, and they'll need some very delicate sanding.

 

Other niggles?  The horizontal tailplane doesn't look quite right in planform and the rear fuselage plan view doesn't match the Tamiya kit; no idea which, if either, is correct.

 

The kit also appeared a bit over-engineered to me.  Especially the cowling, front fuselage and wings.  Oh and I found the main gear legs very tricky to fit.

 

If the above appears overly negative, I apologise.  I was hoping for an affordable, accurate, easy to build  F4U on which to base a themed build of Corsairs.  Imho, this kit ain't it.  It builds into a nice kit but not without some effort.

 

Regards

 

Martin

 

PS I forgot to mention: the decals are excellent!

Hi Martin. I've decided to fill the two pylons, it was quite easy. As for the tailplance and rear fuselage, that will be difficult to fix, and I'll try to ignore those.

 

I found another -1D part though, and that is the prop.

 

Linked from this gaming forum, I found this picture:

https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/374078-f4u-1-series-inaccuracies/

 

 

I did further research and seems the info is correct. This kit does indeed have the -1D prop. To me this is a bigger issue than the rest. 

Thus I think I might attempt sanding it down to look more like the correct prop.

 

Cheers

Jimmy

Edited December 27, 2017 by JimmyZ

[e8n2]

Some aircraft kept the red surround to the star and bars long after they were supposed to have been painted over, as evidenced by the photo you found.  Getting the aircraft turned around (armed, fueled, and any major write ups fixed) prior to its next mission was more important than painting over the red surround on the national insignia.

Later,

Dave

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

I agree that is a red surround on the Star & Bar. As for the color change after the cowling. I have come across that a few times over the years. From what I’ve read and my best guess is that at some point the planes had gone through a rear area maintenance overhaul. Probably Marine service squadron 11. I think they were on espiritu santo or at henderson ?

      My thinking is an Anti glare purpose or for camouflage reasons ? My Reason for that thinking is the newer darker paint extends to the upper surface of the wings. I think as the paint faded it got chalky and reflected light either to the pilot or the enemy. 

     The date may be correct for both years. The photo was most likely taken at the end of ‘43, and released to the press in early ‘44. The red surrounds weren't changed until september officially. Id say it was a publicity photo released to the papers for morale purposes. 

 

Dennis

[Seawinder]

About the prop blades, a couple of things:

1. In the Squadron In Action book (10220), there's a photo on pg. 24 of a -1A with the wider paddle-bladed prop.

 

2. I found the following statement in a thread at LargeScaleAirplanes (http://forum.largescaleplanes.com/index.php?showtopic=33059):

"As for the prop blades, -1A's started using the wide chord blades late in their production. However, if you are doing a VF-17 subject, they were fit with the wide blades early on as at the time they were expected to be assigned carrier duty and required the same blades as the Hellcats for commonality."

 

So, looks as though you could go either way.

[JimmyZ]

Hi all.

 

22 hours ago, e8n2 said:

Some aircraft kept the red surround to the star and bars long after they were supposed to have been painted over, as evidenced by the photo you found.  Getting the aircraft turned around (armed, fueled, and any major write ups fixed) prior to its next mission was more important than painting over the red surround on the national insignia.

Later,

Dave

 

20 hours ago, Corsairfoxfouruncle said:

I agree that is a red surround on the Star & Bar. As for the color change after the cowling. I have come across that a few times over the years. From what I’ve read and my best guess is that at some point the planes had gone through a rear area maintenance overhaul. Probably Marine service squadron 11. I think they were on espiritu santo or at henderson ?

      My thinking is an Anti glare purpose or for camouflage reasons ? My Reason for that thinking is the newer darker paint extends to the upper surface of the wings. I think as the paint faded it got chalky and reflected light either to the pilot or the enemy. 

     The date may be correct for both years. The photo was most likely taken at the end of ‘43, and released to the press in early ‘44. The red surrounds weren't changed until september officially. Id say it was a publicity photo released to the papers for morale purposes. 

 

Dennis

Thanks for the confirm, red surround it is then!

 

Still unsure about what to do about the camo at the front. I've studied the photo closely since my last post, and although it's hard to tell where the cowling aft end is, it looks like there is a light bit behind it, although it extends up further than the light area on the cowling forward of it. Same for the cowl flaps. I honestly don't know what's going on there, and don't know if I should try to reproduce it.

 

3 hours ago, Seawinder said:

About the prop blades, a couple of things:

1. In the Squadron In Action book (10220), there's a photo on pg. 24 of a -1A with the wider paddle-bladed prop.

 

2. I found the following statement in a thread at LargeScaleAirplanes (http://forum.largescaleplanes.com/index.php?showtopic=33059):

"As for the prop blades, -1A's started using the wide chord blades late in their production. However, if you are doing a VF-17 subject, they were fit with the wide blades early on as at the time they were expected to be assigned carrier duty and required the same blades as the Hellcats for commonality."

 

So, looks as though you could go either way.

 

Thanks for the info. Interesting. I've looked at all the photos of VF-17 Corsair's I've collected, and although some of the photo's quality or angles makes it hard, there are definitely some with the wider paddle bladed prop. As you said, could probably be either, though I might just leave it as it is.

 

Cheers

Jimmy

[sailorboy61]

If I can jump in on this tread myself since those in the know are around,   Im doing Tamiyas 1/48 -1A and am struggling with the 'sea blue' topsides. I have Tamiya's XF17 sea blue, but it  seems very gree. Indeed I did one of Revells 1/72s a while back in the XF17 and really wasn't happy with the colour, way to dark from what I've seen form models finished by others.. Pointers appreciated and apologies to OP for jumping in.

 

Simon

[LDSModeller]

4 hours ago, sailorboy61 said:

If I can jump in on this tread myself since those in the know are around,   Im doing Tamiyas 1/48 -1A and am struggling with the 'sea blue' topsides. I have Tamiya's XF17 sea blue, but it  seems very gree. Indeed I did one of Revells 1/72s a while back in the XF17 and really wasn't happy with the colour, way to dark from what I've seen form models finished by others.. Pointers appreciated and apologies to OP for jumping in.

 

Simon

Hi Simon,

 

Yes, Tamiya Sea Blue is too green.

 

Check out this link below, and see Post #7 for USN Sea Blue mix, have never used them so can't say how good or bad?

 

Tamiya Paint Mixes

 

HTH

 

Regards

 

Alan

Edited January 2, 2018 by LDSModeller
spelling mistake

[Cookenbacher]

4 hours ago, sailorboy61 said:

If I can jump in on this tread myself since those in the know are around,   Im doing Tamiyas 1/48 -1A and am struggling with the 'sea blue' topsides. I have Tamiya's XF17 sea blue, but it  seems very gree. Indeed I did one of Revells 1/72s a while back in the XF17 and really wasn't happy with the colour, way to dark from what I've seen form models finished by others.. Pointers appreciated and apologies to OP for jumping in.

 

Simon

 

For USN colors, you can't do better than Colourcoats - they have all of the Sea blues available:

 

Semi-gloss Sea blue - for upper wings surfaces on the 'tri-color' scheme

 

Non-Specular Sea blue - for upper fuselage on 'tri-color' scheme (the 'tri-color' scheme is actually four colors, with this and Semi-gloss Sea blue being very similar, but two distinct colors)

 

WWII Glossy Sea blue - for the overall 'Navy' blue scheme of 1944-45 USN aircraft

 

Post-War Glossy Sea blue - for the overall 'Navy' blue scheme of Korean War era USN aircraft

 

I don't know of any other manufacturer that has all four Sea blues.

 

 

[JimmyZ]

On 1/1/2018 at 11:49 PM, sailorboy61 said:

If I can jump in on this tread myself since those in the know are around,   Im doing Tamiyas 1/48 -1A and am struggling with the 'sea blue' topsides. I have Tamiya's XF17 sea blue, but it  seems very gree. Indeed I did one of Revells 1/72s a while back in the XF17 and really wasn't happy with the colour, way to dark from what I've seen form models finished by others.. Pointers appreciated and apologies to OP for jumping in.

 

Simon

Hi Simon.

 

No problem, I think it is on-topic enough. 

 

Great info posted above. Unfortunately as I don't have an airbrush, and Tamiya paints don't paint so well with a paintbrush, I had to go to with Humbrol. They don't have a color close to the dark blue paint used in the USN (or at least not in the only big Hobbyshop in my town). I thus made my own mix. It's accuracy is debatable, but I went for something that looked "right" to me.

 

This is a very much in-progress photo of my build so far. You can see some of the techniques I'm trying out for the very first time, as well as the result of my own mixed color. This is my mix (excuse my weird representation of my mix):

 

7 parts Hu25 (53.8%)

2 parts Hu32 (15.4%)

1 part Hu85 (7.7%)

3 parts Hu34 (23.1%)

total of 13 parts. This is probably not very accurate as I measured in in ml's with a dropper, but it should get you close.

 

 

I think my blue is a tad dark, however as I am doing a relatively weathered corsair, I plan to blend it in with various lighter shades as a result of the pacific sun. This excellent photo of Ira Kepford's Vf-17 Corsair is what I'm trying to accomplish.

 

 

Cheers

Jimmy

 

[sailorboy61]

thanks Jimmy.  I've opted to try some of Mr Paints in the various blues. Not really a fan of smelly paints, but will see how it goes, trial for the Tamiya 1/32 sat staring at me!

[72modeler]

17 hours ago, JimmyZ said:

Hi Simon.

 

No problem, I think it is on-topic enough. 

 

Great info posted above. Unfortunately as I don't have an airbrush, and Tamiya paints don't paint so well with a paintbrush, I had to go to with Humbrol. They don't have a color close to the dark blue paint used in the USN (or at least not in the only big Hobbyshop in my town). I thus made my own mix. It's accuracy is debatable, but I went for something that looked "right" to me.

 

This is a very much in-progress photo of my build so far. You can see some of the techniques I'm trying out for the very first time, as well as the result of my own mixed color. This is my mix (excuse my weird representation of my mix):

 

7 parts Hu25 (53.8%)

2 parts Hu32 (15.4%)

1 part Hu85 (7.7%)

3 parts Hu34 (23.1%)

total of 13 parts. This is probably not very accurate as I measured in in ml's with a dropper, but it should get you close.

 

 

I think my blue is a tad dark, however as I am doing a relatively weathered corsair, I plan to blend it in with various lighter shades as a result of the pacific sun. This excellent photo of Ira Kepford's Vf-17 Corsair is what I'm trying to accomplish.

 

 

Cheers

Jimmy

 

Wow- you sure enough picked a tough scheme to copy- if you can pull it off, you are 'da man! Looks like the wing insignia has  the red surround, but the one on the fuselage looks to be a freshly painted one with the proper blue surround. An interesting mix, but the Hogs were flown almost continuously and the ground crews probably couldn't afford to take a serviceable airplane out of service long enough to completely repaint all of the markings. I just now noticed that the fabric covering on the wings are pretty faded, too. Can't wait to see the finished product!

Mike