Vanroon

Blue Bone grouper? It was most likely based on BS 2660, because that's a reference in an old spec. I have for a hospital. On Australian Standard. AS2700,my margin notes, I've inked in BS218c &BS5252, but neither of them have G65 Ti-tree. used on the ADF Hercs. Oh, AS2700 R14 Warratah (BS539) and R15 Crimson (BS538) are close to the print out if you squint. The fin flash looks like R12 Scarlet (BS593) though. This has been fun. G edit: erk! BS281c. I have 218c in ink but that's wrong. Who has the ashes!

and you suggested I was colour-blind! edit: http://mfpilot.com/gloss-crimson-14ml-humbrol-tin.html

Look at my profile photo. Taken in the hangars of Pay Aviation, Scone NSW. That spinner was painted in PO Red, but late '90s Australia Post Red. The painter made an error when he chose a current rather than historic colour. The pilot of the aircraft which originally bore those markings remarked he liked the red. As far as the big book of colour chips in the architects office, my belief is; it was British Standards as issued by (Rawlinsons?), in the mid '60s it was about 12 years old, but had updates and corrections mailed periodically for inclusion. Opened out it was the size of an Imperial sheet and folded closed, about 125mm thick. Very heavy. Became superseded in the early seventies by the new Australian Standard. So, back to modelling. Which off the shelf model paint would any of my critics suggest to the original poster as correct? G

When I was a trainee drafter, one joke played on young staff was to get them to search out P.O. Red from a very large book of actual colour chips. P.O. Red was in the purple range, so failure was nearly always inevitable. However, a colour photo made from a 70 year old film is a far better guide (for those not colour-blind) that all the chiding and quotation of regulation in this thread. I mix maroon and roundel red 1:1 for my red spinners. G

I'm suggesting a colour not that Post Office stocks were used. The recipe for various reds were well known among the finishing trades. IIRC, the pigments would be available to make most colours in a country like Egypt where the Aboukir facility dealt with such matters. I'm sure the spinners would have been chemically stripped and redecorated under full control. I understand the bumpf you mentioned was the intent. As no-one had really noted the obvious hue differences nor was there to hand an official colour, just observations, I added my own. I just printed a colour chart from here, http://www.e-paint.co.uk Upon comparison with the image both printed and on screen, my guess doesn't look far from the mark for a modeller wanting a stock colour for a model. G http://www.e-paint.co.uk

Pillar Box or Post Office Red are in the purple range of the British Standards of the era. As the spinner of that aircraft in the photo is clearly different to the insignia colour, I believe we have an answer. No-one really knows or cares to note the difference. G

My graphics card shows a progression of reds from a bright fin flash segment, to medium rounded centre and dark spinner. The spinner is a very different colour to the fin flash, has areas quite alike, but not as deep on the roundel (high light over a curve). No portion of the upper side of the spinner is as light or bright as the national markings. Perhaps were seeing the red used for I.D. letters? Or a red that was made in Cairo. G

With those lovely Bristols (Hercules) in the Lancaster Mk.ii kit, I certainly hope so. G

As you wish. Notwithstanding new I information, the matter of colours I leave to others. The float anomaly. A floatplane of that era would have had more than one float, especially the big one which carries the weight and dynamic loads on a variable surface, sort of metallic version of tarmac tyres. Let's imagine the subject plane has just had deep maintenance. Figure painting techniques would be brilliant on this subject. G

I tend to go for an enamel full gloss finish and cut it back with very fine wet-n-dry and/or a polishing paste. 1200 to 2400 to 3000 papers and Tamiya Compound are the materials of choice. Use the compound with a piece of wool suiting for best results. G

I do not recommend the Academy kits. Jimmy Durante noses and suspect propellers to too shallow fuselages to compensate for too thick transparencies. Walk around the beggar. G

Firing on twelve Sir. G

MkVC Trop perhaps. Loads of work at the price. Perhaps backdating a Pacific Coast Models Mk.IX would achieve your goal? G

Very wise advice. Theory is just belief in an idea. G

Appendix IX, p622 is the part of "the History" which deals with painting, markings, smoothing surfaces and overcoating etc. As mentioned, the only masking to be seen, is that required for the geometric shapes of the national markings. G

You're being silly. G

No shortage? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariel_W/NG_350 Why the canvas hand-grips then! G

Fair enough. As to my lack of proof due to distance, I say the only proof to come to light in this discussion, was a grainy scan of a P-40 wing being sprayed at the Curtiss works. That photo is also proof that pictures could be made in the volatile painting booths in the aircraft industrial process. Steve, nice photos, they were once part of the basis of my original contention that airframes were masked. Tho' possibly our esteemed researcher has access to all that great data, as good authors well might. Where are mentions in established histories? One more page, another aisle of books. Yet some feel it fit to sneer at my modest efforts. There are an awful lot of Brits who were on the business end of the Blitz et al who chose our country to see out their days, they are ignorable too? Because it was them to whom I was talking. Perhaps there was widespread and punctilious application of said devices, yet apparently nothing of their memory last except sporadic spotting of orders in archives and rock-solid memories. Where was the allocation of the horse-hair sourced? No mention in horsy tales of cropping manes and tails for the war effort? Apparently rubber was in abundance in the British Isles, not here tho. Ed, I made exactly that last point in my post. As to DAP CAC employees being unreliable witnesses, a line-up of Beaufort nose sections on rail cars in one publication exhibited the most near to identical painting in my recollection. Until a decent verifiable account is laid out for public inspection, my doubts shall remain, as no doubt shall Edgars conviction. G

I'm not arguing that there were sharp and soft demarcations. That's very plain to the eye, I seek why aircraft differ so much. My journey which led me to this discussion came about when my (then [1988]) 12 year old asked me how the camouflage was painted. I presumed that some form of pattern marking was used. Like a good student, he set about researching this technique. Together we read everything in the library that pertained to aircraft manufacture. We even asked my clients and Dads airforce mates for their input as to how this may have been accomplished. No-one agreed on the masking, in fact ex-DAP and CAC workers poo-pooed the concept. All agreed on rubber shortages. No tyres for their push-bikes. We scoured period magazines as we found them and discovered nothing to indicate there were painting masks actively employed. One person mentioned the French curves being used in his MU paint shop. Another suggested whip edged sail canvas similar to that they used in the shipyard. Another claims to have seen a light steel frame which may have been used (at Holdens, Port Melbourne, Australia) similar to the painting frames on the pre-war Pontiac line, but never saw it used. Nevertheless, I made masks for our models, first from manila card, then rubber backed curtain material. All the while seeking the truth. Some time later, after reading a book which had photos of pre-painted assemblies at CB and other manufactories (Westlands), say 1991, my son then observed that no matter the airframe, everyone was as different as puppies in a litter, rather than manufactured to a set form. He showed a couple of photos depicting a line up of fuselages, in one they were all in primer and bare sheet, the next, the same airframes (numbers visible) were all painted, but of what we could see, every one differed from the others. That to date no two airframes of any similar production block has identical paintwork has been seem (by me) has me doubting the practice. These planes (sub-assemblies) were being painted by skilled auto-finishers, accustomed to two-tone painting of car bodies, even in Australia. Too old to fight another war, they were building fighting machines for their childrens generation. Manpower was not in abundance at the time, especially skilled operators of any equipment. Passing similarities, such as seen in tortoise-shell cats, dalmatian dogs, Galloway or Holstein cattle make aircraft types all look similar, but not the same. It's like there's some organic reason for their differences, man. G

Gentlemen, my point was/is; here is a presentation aircraft, slated for display, with paint that looks like it was painted by a human being using his/her eye, rather than a pristine example according to regulations. If ever there was a case when those rules should have been applied it is in examples like this. Iain, this aircraft did spend a good deal of its life in maintenance units. Whether on not painting was carried out is a moot point. More likely it was being mechanically/electrically fettled for it's role of testing in the USA. I do know that plywood stencils in the shape of giant French curves were reportedly employed at MUs when matching paint patterns, so sharp edges would be likely from that source as well. The stray spray line in the second pic was never any where near a matt ot stencil, it was the unassisted hand of man which made that. Never to be chastised, certainly not either it seems. G

Yet we have no enduring record or relic from any who were supposed to have been using them. I tender for your study a photograph of a S'marine Spitfire Mk.Vc which was on display in Chicago in May, 1942. It should by all the standing orders have been camouflaged via the use of those masks. Even more imperative as it was earmarked to go to an allied country for testing and exhibition. Yet we see a non-standard demarcation replete with mistakes! Surely some painter lost his skilled position at the works for 'slipping' and the supervisor must have been reduced to, say, sweeper for letting that through? Why I wonder didn't the ticket-writer make the much needed correction? NMJ I suppose. Nevertheless, there it is for all to see. The pro-mask argument is most doubtful in this instance of a famous aircraft. Then there's the restoration community which to a outfit/person don't use masks/mats despite your insistence there were very definite instructions as to their employment. Deepens the mystery doesn't it? G

Have a look at the photo of the relic of a Japanese trainer pulled out of Lake Towada recently. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news.html in the photo panel for 11/09/2012. G

Felt is a material I believe could have been used for 'hard' masking within the sense of wartime rationing. Locally produced, light-weight, non-strategic, cheap and ultimately disposable when used up. Perhaps a casual observer could interpret old, painty felt as another type of floppy material, leading to some of the misunderstandings over the years. G

I real little beautie! http://www.spitfire-ahlberg.se/text2_26.html G

That variant explains the distinctly deeper radiator housings. Thanks for the identification. G