SafetyDad
-
Posts
1,205 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by SafetyDad
-
-
5 hours ago, Graham Boak said:
76 was used on some of the AS and perhaps early D-engined aircraft, generally seen with large black numbers such as 43 and 44, and sometimes referred to (likely inaccurately) as "Mosquito hunters". On the other hand, I haven't seen the night fighters.
White 43 and 44 found at Fassberg in 1945 were night fighters. Note the non-standard canopy window on the port side of the main hood, small bulge above the hood for a rear-view mirror and the exhaust shields
HTH
SD
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Graham Boak said:
I have yet to see it described how it is possible to distinguish between true (1943, say) 76, the washed out variety that seems to have been common in 1945, and this supposed use of 77. The last seems to be a complete invention from someone looking around for any similar paint and seizing on this. Is there a single recorded contemporary record of the fairly widespread use of 77 for camouflage purposes? And if there is, how is it possible to tell this from either of the 76s in the available photographs?
If you're sceptical (as you are quite entitled to be) about the use of RLM77, can I suggest that you download David E Brown's ePublication
'Camouflage Commentary 1 'Unit Identity of Fw 190 A-8 WNr. 175 140 and Use of Colour RLM 77'
there's a public domain synopsis here:
https://halifaxmilitarymodelersgroup.wordpress.com/2010/11/16/camouflage-commentary-1/
To be fair @Mark Proulx mentioned this article the last time this issue of RLM77 as an uppersurface colour on FW 190D-9s was raised here - the article is well worth a read, and provides intriguing and clear photographic evidence offered in favour of this colour.
The original publication is of higher quality, with higher-resolution photographs.
Graham, you and I have disagreed about this issue in the past (that's fair enough, I have my views and you have yours). However RLM77 as an uppersurface colour is far from 'a complete invention' as you describe above. Ken Merrick, @David E. Brown, and Mark Proulx amongst other Luftwaffe authors also consider that the use of RLM77 was either likely or indeed existed. The use of 77 might be viewed as contentious for some, but it has reasonably widespread acceptance amongst other authors and enthusiasts. As such, it seems only fair to consider the use of this colour as at least a possibility in any discussion, rather than dismiss it outright.
SD
-
I'm with @fastterry here - you could drive yourself mad trying to look for definitive evidence that quite likely isn't there.
- I've perused both JaPo and Crandall looking at evidence for the Mimetall machines with 500*** Wk Numerren. I can't see any definitive evidence that this batch all had light grey upper surface camouflage - be that grey primer or RLM77.
- I'm not convinced from the pictures that Wk Nr 500570 'Blue 12' has it for example. This machine was extensively photographed (I have more that a dozen images in various publications) and this highlights another, significant issue
- Very few Fw 190D-9 photographs clearly show the wing uppersurfaces. Cockpits, fuselages, pilots, markings, props and spinners, not wing uppersurfaces. The shots that are extant are often over-exposed and not helpful. Let's be honest here, a lot of late war photos are of below-average quality and in Black and White - it's hard to make a definitive case based on this evidence
- I found one Mimetall built machine - 'Black 10' Wk Nr. 500518 of JG26 that might have uppersurface colours including a light grey
but others in the 500*** blocks, such as 500408 'White 12' of 5./JG301, seem not to
(Source: Crandall J. (2007) 'The Focke-Wulf 190 Dora' 1 Hamilton, Montana, Eagle Editions
- pictures intentionally cropped and distorted to discourage further replication. Posted for the purpose of discussion only in accordance with UK Copyright Law)
Interestingly, Crandall appears to have limited belief in the use of 77 or Light Grey as an uppersurface 190D-9 colour. He describes 'Black 10' above as having two greens on the wing uppersurfaces...
In short, while the painting of the fuselages and wing undersurfaces seem to have common patterns assignable to batches of aircraft, there seems less evidence for this when we review wing uppersurfaces. Hard to explain, but that's how things appear. Remember that subcontractors may well have supplied parts painted (or not).
Finally, remember those 2 (non-Mimetall) 190Ds on the dump in Furth?
Read the caption below carefully - these two aircraft are from the same production batch only five airframes apart. I know, wings could have been replaced (possible, but perhaps unlikely, given how short the life of a 109D-9 was). Out of interest, the aircraft on the right, Wk Nr 211934, has Braunviolett and Dark Green on the port wing, and RLM 75 and Dark Green on the starboard wing!
Source: Brown D. E. and Wadman D. (1995) History, Camouflage and Markings of JV44, JG6 and JG1 Focke-Wulf 190D-9s 3 Experten Decals Calgary
Posted as above
More of Dave's thoughts here - directly relevant to the original question
SD
-
1
-
As a postscript to GRM’s comprehensive post above, Vol 1 of Lorant and Goyat’s history of JG 300 has one photo on p. 202 captioned as showing Piltz’s ‘White 1’. The picture gives little away regarding the camouflage details as the reproduction is a little fuzzy, added to which the perspective of the shot is from an acute angle towards the rear of the plane. Definitely not a definitive guide for colours- I would hazard these as the standard greys of 74, 75 and possibly 76. It doesn’t seem to have been over sprayed in grey to tone down the markings as the number and Balkenkreuz are clearly visible. JG 300 were known to paint the undersurfaces of their Bf 109s black during this timeframe but this picture gives no clue to that. Your guess I suppose. @FalkeEins is the chap who might know more as he collaborated in the preparation of this Unit’s history
SD
-
This thread
from earlier in the week indicates the Spitfire and Hurricane had common wheels and tyres (at least in 1945) - scroll down to the post from @Geoffrey Sinclair - he's your man here!
HTH
SD
-
14 hours ago, Phoenix44 said:
How do you know? Green grass and blue sky have all sorts of shades and all sorts of variation. A colour reproduction can show colours that seem reasonable whilst throwing others significant off - scans of slides have various issues that can leave grass and sky plausible greens and blues but introduce casts that alter other colours greatly. And developing colour film badly can leave some colours fine but others way off. Similarly, the dyes in negatives, prints and slides fade at different rates, so that some colours may remain accurate whilst others change significantly. Colour film is not an homogenous medium.
That's exactly why I posted two versions of the picture of the wrecked Doras at Furth. The reproduction of colours is slightly different in each shot.
SD
-
1
-
-
-
11 hours ago, Mark Proulx said:
As RLM 77 is being discussed in this thread, I bring this to everyone's attention...
David E. Brown wrote Camouflage Commentary 1: Unit Identity of Fw 190 A-8 WNr 175 140 and use of colour RLM 77. This download article available from Air War Publications. Quoting from page 14:
"There is no doubt that RLM 77 was created as a camouflage colour, as identified by its high numeric designation. It was "officially" introduced as a markings and code colour alongside camouflage colours 74, 75 and 76 in the 8 November 1941 edition of Luftwaffen Dienstvorschriften 521/1. However, photographic evidence suggests that RLM 77 was used for that purpose and as an upper surface camouflage colour."
Mark Proulx
Thanks Mark - I should have included reference to David’s work in my post above. I downloaded the article you refer to some time ago and would strongly recommend that contributors to and readers of this thread do likewise. David presents a very convincing and well argued case, supported by excellent photographic evidence, of RLM 77 in use as an upper surface camouflage colour.
SD
-
1
-
-
Here we go
On the left, Black 4, Wk Nr 211939 6./JG6 on the boneyard dump at Furth, 1945
Source: Monogram Close-Up Fw 190D-9
and again
Source: Crandall Fw 190D-9 Part 1
Not a Mimetall Dora, so arguably this is peripheral or contextual evidence. However, I feel the picture has merit here because it shows the uppersurfaces of a D-9 with this high-contrast upperwing colour. Merrick describes this as RLM77; others, such as Hitchcock (the author of the Close-Up) as light grey primer. I think its 77 for two reasons - RLM paint formulation changed with the introduction of the late war colours to specifically allow the application of camouflage colours directly to metal without primer (Merrick - so arguably no primer would be used), and the colour code for 77 is within the range for camouflage colours (i.e. 70 to 82), rather than in the range for colours simply used for marking - Merrick also.
I don't think this is RLM76
Your opinion may/will differ
SD
-
2
-
-
Very plausible indeed.
I would agree that both 'c' and 'f' seems to be filler caps for the two tanks.
I like the 'dry sump' oil-float idea - that's simple and proven technology of the time and wouldn't need significant engine re-plumbing. You've convinced me that 'h' is a fuel changeover switch, whether manual or electric, that seems logical.
Great stuff there Mark!
SD
-
1
-
-
Well, that definitely seems to be a 'plumbed in' arrangement at least for the smaller tank (oil rather than fuel?)
New information for me - thanks for the link!
SD
-
1
-
-
I'm no BoB or Hurricane expert, but that is a well presented and organised case for an orange fuselage band.
SD
-
3 hours ago, 2996 Victor said:
Maybe I wasn't so far from the truth after all when I mentioned (tongue firmly in cheek) a blokey in the back with a stirrup pump and some rubber tube! 😆
Many thanks once again!
Mark
It does make for an amusing mental picture - a chap frantically working a stirrup pump whilst the pilot shouts loudly for extra fuel!
More seriously, if they were to be plumbed in, it would need two complete pumping and capacity monitoring systems for both fuel and oil.
Also there might well be considerations or problems around the altered CoG that a large tank full of fuel might cause?
SD
2 minutes ago, 2996 Victor said:Incidentally, Eduard would have you paint both tanks yellow. If one is fuel and one is oil, would they not be differently coloured?
Just a thought.....
The tanks might both be bare metal, but there would be coloured tabs or tags indicating their contents I'm sure.
SD
-
The Monogram Close-Up on the Bf108 gives a little information
https://boxartden.com/reference/gallery/index.php/Monogram-Close-up/Taifun/05-Taifun_Page_28-960
The two tanks are apparently one fuel, plus one oil. However that's where the information ends - no details about how the fuel (or oil) reached the engine. Is it possible that they weren't connected at all, and this was simply a means of transporting extra fuel and oil within the aircraft?
SD
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Shorty84 said:
As shown above, part of the instrument panel was indeed standardized. From 1943 they introduced the "Einheits-Blindfluggerätetafel" (standardized blind flying panel) on most aircraft types which grouped the most important instruments consistently: https://www.deutscheluftwaffe.de/cockpitprofil-einheitsblindflugtafel
Cheers
Markus
Nice link Markus - thanks!
SD
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, GiampieroSilvestri said:
It is astonishing how aerodynamic the Henschel Hs 126 version for ground recconnaissance in the fourth picture was.😉
Saluti
Giampiero
Not only aerodynamic but extremely stable. So no movement when taking pictures 😉
-
Very impressive introduction with equally high quality modelling skills!
SD
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, dov said:
Now I can see fuel stencils on both of these aircraft, but these photos demonstrate how poor quality photographic reproduction can make stencils very difficult to see.
SD
-
1
-
-
It's always hazardous to offer any generalisations about Luftwaffe aircraft and camouflage, but I would gently amend your idea above about overpainting.
Type plates (which are riveted to the airframe) plus fuel, oil, electrical and essential maintenance stencils (lifting instructions, don't walk, etc) were almost always preserved or re-applied during the service of the airframe.
As here:
Fw 190A-9 Source: Internet
and here
Last pic from here - also a nice example of a repainted airframe with clear electrical connection stencil reapplied between the 5 and the 'F'.
I would accept that some late-war aircraft seem to have lost many of their stencils when overpainted. However, the quality of photos that we have does not always allow stencils to be seen clearly.
HTH
SD
Edit: That’s an oxygen connection, not electrical. I typed too quickly and should have checked!
-
1
-
-
You be the judge...
Bf 109G
Fi 156
Ar 234 -
And finally the Do 335. The caption on the left essentially answers the question you posed - the central panel containing the essential blind flying instruments is largely common to all fighters - the He 162 panel above has the instruments mounted, but lacks the central panel layout. Mind you, it was designed, built and flown in less than 6 months. That might be a factor...
He 162
The panels in Luftwaffe bombers seem a little more varied, although they all contain the essential instruments. The definitive guide for all of this is here (and source of the Do 335 pictures above)
HTH
SD
-
3
-
-
Hope this catches you in time Peter.
The intake at the front of the cowling was most likely bare metal, rather than 02 or a 'Flight Colour' such as red. This idea of coloured cowling rings isn't supported by any contemporary photographic evidence that I'm aware of, but has appeared on many, many profiles plus the restored aircraft that was at St Athan and is extensively photographed in Luftwaffe literature.
As here
In reality this intake is an integral part of the engine, and therefore is much more likely to have remained in its natural alloy state, as here
This shot above was taken at the same time as a pic I posted in an earlier thread - it shows a captured He 162 Wk Nr 120076 about to depart Farnborough for Brize Norton, taken in August 1945 with the airframe in its original camouflage paint, but RAF markings applied (as indeed you intend to).
Other airframes had uppersurface camouflage paint applied to the intake ring as here
Photo sources - expired EBay auctions
HTH
SD
-
1
-
-
The radiator is contained within the lower bulge on the cowl. @Julien's picture shows how the Hendon example has had the connecting coolant hoses from radiator to engine disconnected. The NJG5 Bf110 on @dov's link above shows these hoses in situ, allowing coolant flow from engine to radiator and back.
SD
-
1
-
2
-
-
7 hours ago, Julien said:
Im pretty sure it was just swinging from the fasteners
Looks like it. Julien's pictures from Hendon show the cowling detached on the port side to expose the engine.
Here's a partially detached cowl on the starboard side - so it's hard to see how its a hinge here, plus the fasteners are visible.
and another pic seems to confirm it's fasteners, rather than a piano hinge
Source for pics: eBay auctions for No1, and Google for 2. Happy to remove if asked, and uploaded purely for purposes of discussion
HTH
SD
-
2
-
2
-
-
The B-29 is a big aircraft. Might a bit of lateral thinking allow you to explore if props from a 1/48 kit(s) might work?
F4U Corsair? B-17? Even reworked Lancaster needle props? These would need reworking (thinning probably) but might get you there?
Just wondering...
SD
-
1
-
Image/research request JaPo books
in Aircraft WWII
Posted
I don't wish to hijack this thread into a back-and-forth between you and I Graham, and I've stepped away for a couple of hours before posting this, but it's important that other readers here are accurately informed of the issues being debated in this thread, and don't carry away mistaken or inaccurate information about the subject under discussion.
It must be a little while since you read his work, because David Brown does make reference to Primary Sources or 'hard evidence' as you term it. Namely the 8 November 1941 edition of Luftwaffen Dienstvorschriften 521/1, where RLM 77 was explicitly listed as a camouflage colour, having previously been identified as for use for codes and markings. Brown goes on to cite its early use - 'it appears as a camouflage colour (my emphasis) on early nightfighters (for example the Do 217 J-1, as mentioned in the document ‘Oberflächenschutzliste für Do 217 J, August 1942’16) a' (Direct quote from Brown's work).
Brown goes on the state that 'RLM 77’s ‘official’ use as a markings colour was emphasized again in the RLM Sammelmitteilung 2 of 15August 1944.20' (Citation in Brown from Ullmann Luftwaffe Colours).
And if it's primary evidence that's needed for the use of 77 as an upperwing colour, then Brown cites the Bf 109G at Bankstown in Australia, which remains in its original paint after all these years. It's been extensively studied (By Ken Merrick and Brett Green amongst others), and has been established as having the starboard wing originally painted in RLM77, with another grey, RLM66 (!), applied later.
Brown offers additional photographic discussion and evidence for the use of 77, but I'll leave it there. I wanted his work to be fairly represented in this thread.
SD