Spitfire Undercart, Wheel Wells And Inside Of Doors Colour

[Brad-M]

Gents,

I continue to build Tamiya's Mk IXc in 1/32 scale and I am wondering about the colour of the U/C, inside of doors and the wells. I am building EN398, while it was in service with 402 RCAF squadron. This aircraft was not very old when it was received at 402, so can one assume that the U/C legs and wheel hubs were aluminum, and the inside of the wells and doors were RAF interior gray-green, would this be correct?

TIA

Brad

Edited February 3, 2010 by Brad-M

[spitfire]

Gents,

I continue to build Tamiya's Mk IXc in 1/32 scale and I am wondering about the colour of the U/C, inside of doors and the wells. I am building EN398, while it was in service with 402 RCAF squadron. This aircraft was not very old when it was received at 402, so can one assume that the U/C legs and wheel hubs were aluminum, and the inside of the wells and doors were RAF interior gray-green, would this be correct?

TIA

Brad

Hi Brad, I'm pretty sure that if you do a search you will find the answers as this tends to be discussed every week !

Cheers

Den

[Test Graham]

I have been assuming Medium Sea Grey, for many years, but am willing to change if presented with evidence.

[TheModeller]

Gents,

I continue to build Tamiya's Mk IXc in 1/32 scale and I am wondering about the colour of the U/C, inside of doors and the wells. I am building EN398, while it was in service with 402 RCAF squadron. This aircraft was not very old when it was received at 402, so can one assume that the U/C legs and wheel hubs were aluminum, and the inside of the wells and doors were RAF interior gray-green, would this be correct?

TIA

Brad

I doubt it, I won't say that your colours are definitely wrong because someone will always turn around and provide a photo of an exception. In general Spitfires of this period were being delivered to front line squadrons with the u/c bays, doors, legs and wheels in the same colour as the underside camo finish.

This can be seen in a large number of period images of the Mk.IX, as always Google is your friend! A search of images of the Spitfire Mk.IX at Google returned dozens of period pictures. These are the first couple I came across.

I won't speculate about wether or not it applies to all Spits, early (pre-war) Mk.Is are well documented as having thier gear and wells finished in painted aluminium, no matter what scheme the were finished in. I've seen period colour images of a Mk.IX in USAAF service in Italy with gear painted the same blue as the underside and the wheel hubs in the uppersurface sand colour...

[Brad-M]

Thanks all.

Cheers

Brad

[Edgar]

You'll have to excuse me, for coming late, to this one, but I had already booked a session, in the RAF Museum's library, and didn't want to say anything, until afterwards. They have a copy of the drawing which specifies the internal, and external. finishes for the whole airframe, and it's fairly easy to date it as 1943. The advocated "Standard paint treatment," unless specified otherwise, was one coat of undercoat grey, followed by a finishing coat pigmented with aluminium to D.T.D.63A. The only items excluded were the fuselage interior (grey-green to D.T.D.63A over the priming coat,) exterior (obviously,) and the exterior of the main planes, ailerons, flaps and tail plane, all of which received the standard camouflage colours.

From this, it appears that the laid-down finish was aluminium paint for all interior metal surfaces, which would include u/c covers; flaps and cowling interiors are specifically mentioned as being painted aluminium. Interestingly, it states that "bullet-proof steel plating" should be painted aluminium, as well, so did that include the pilot's seat armour?

Steel, magnesium, and all "component parts" were also painted aluminium, which I take to include the u/c legs. Having seen some wheel wells still in green, it's possible that some places interpreted them as interior parts, but the drawing gives the impression that they should have been aluminium. What happened when the aircraft needed repainting in M.U.s, and the like, is a whole different ball game, of course. As an aside, the elevators and rudder were to receive three coats of red dope, followed by the camouflage colours; this indicates that they did not receive the "normal" intervening coat of silver dope. Waters now, well and truly, muddied.

Edgar

[andym]

You'll have to excuse me, for coming late, to this one, but I had already booked a session, in the RAF Museum's library, and didn't want to say anything, until afterwards. They have a copy of the drawing which specifies the internal, and external. finishes for the whole airframe, and it's fairly easy to date it as 1943. The advocated "Standard paint treatment," unless specified otherwise, was one coat of undercoat grey, followed by a finishing coat pigmented with aluminium to D.T.D.63A. The only items excluded were the fuselage interior (grey-green to D.T.D.63A over the priming coat,) exterior (obviously,) and the exterior of the main planes, ailerons, flaps and tail plane, all of which received the standard camouflage colours.

From this, it appears that the laid-down finish was aluminium paint for all interior metal surfaces, which would include u/c covers; flaps and cowling interiors are specifically mentioned as being painted aluminium. Interestingly, it states that "bullet-proof steel plating" should be painted aluminium, as well, so did that include the pilot's seat armour?

Steel, magnesium, and all "component parts" were also painted aluminium, which I take to include the u/c legs. Having seen some wheel wells still in green, it's possible that some places interpreted them as interior parts, but the drawing gives the impression that they should have been aluminium. What happened when the aircraft needed repainting in M.U.s, and the like, is a whole different ball game, of course. As an aside, the elevators and rudder were to receive three coats of red dope, followed by the camouflage colours; this indicates that they did not receive the "normal" intervening coat of silver dope. Waters now, well and truly, muddied.

Edgar

Thanks for that Edgar, most useful information. Is this just Spitfire specific or does it also apply to Typhoon, Tempest etc?

Andy

[Edgar]

Spitfire only, drawing no. 30000 sht 28.

Edgar

Edited February 4, 2010 by Edgar

[Test Graham]

It'd be a brave man who claimed to tell the difference between dull aluminium and MSG on the inside of the wheel door from a black and white photo like the ones above. Not me.

[Brad-M]

Or green even

Brad

It'd be a brave man who claimed to tell the difference between dull aluminium and MSG on the inside of the wheel door from a black and white photo like the ones above. Not me.

[Test Graham]

No, the green would appear darker than the underside, so I might be rash enough to make a stab at that for the doors and legs (if that was a choice on offer). No bets on the well, however.

[TheModeller]

Oh what the hell, I've looked at lots of pics in the stack of Spit references I have, I've looked at loads of pics online, there are plenty of images and anecdotes around for gear and wells looking or being finished in MSG. OK so plenty look like Dull Aluminium too...

Sooner or later, when you actually get around to painting your model, you have to go with what you can find out, I think MSG was just as common as D/A, certainly on aircraft that had been in service a while, back to the MU for repainting and major servicing.

Edgars info is new to me, I'll revise my notes and my understanding of these finishes now I know what the official line was. But was the official line always adhered to at the squadron level? Thats anybodys guess.

[Brad-M]

Well, thanks for all the inputs. I seem to have a couple of options for my current project. I know it won't be painted salmon or pink, unless it's a pink FR version

Cheers

Brad