Seawinder

I'm thinking the Tamiya clears are reasonably hardy and could be safely masked if you're careful.

From what I've found, maroon for the back surfaces of propellers was a USAAC thing -- notably early P-40s -- not USN. I think you're safe going with 2/3 black back sides and polished aluminum front sides. All photos I've found (as well as USN specs) indicate tip colors on both front and back. Generally speaking, the change-over to all black propeller blades coincided with change-over to yellow tips, but yellow tips weren't officially mandated until 1942. Apparently F2A-3s had all black blades with R/Y/B tip stripes. I'd say silver/black prop blades with yellow tips would be unlikely. According to the chart provided by Yellow Wings Decals in its F2A-1/2 sheet, BuAer 1396's code was 3-F-10, and its wing chevron was black. Here's a link to the chart. Maybe you can cobble together markings for a different plane altogether? https://www.super-hobby.com/products/Brewster-F2A-1-2-Buffalo-Wing-Chevrons-and-Fuselage-Bands-in-6-section-colours-and-VF-2-and-VF-3-Squadron-Badges.html#gallery_start None of the chevron decals in the set have black piping, but I'm sure they were present on at least some planes. I did an F2A-2 in 1/48, BuAer 1405, code 3-F-1, with black-edged chevrons. My records indicate the black piping came from a Yellow Wings Decals sheet -- go figure!

Why too green? I'd say J8-B is wearing fresher paint given the amount of contrast on the wing with the Medium Green splotches. Given the many batch variations, climatic effects and photo light conditions, both ODs in the photo are well within the ballpark walls.

I found one photo in the Ventura American Spitfires book that shows the starboard wing of what is captioned as an "early production Mk. IX:" the wing walk line, clearly visible, turns the corner back to the trailing edge (presumably) the same as the port side. The serial number isn't visible, so I can't tell whether or not the plane is a Mk. V conversion/completion; but the fact that the lines are there, plus what I've since read online about new Mk. IXs being sent to the units in Tunisia, makes me think they were probably factory painted in desert camouflage and therefore probably had the wing walk lines.

From what I've read, wing walk lines were frequently painted over on planes repainted in desert camouflage.

Building the Eduard kit with markings for WD-W in USAAF service in the Mediterranean, desert camouflage. She was an early Mk. IX that started life as a Mk. V. I've only been able to find one photo -- port-side view. Eduard's painting instructions show no wing walk lines, which seems correct to me given that she almost certainly started off in standard Day Fighter camouflage. Some profiles and built models, however, have the lines in place. What do people think? Thanks! Pip

Seems as if by the time you get to that stage of the build it'll be pretty easy to make that determination yourself by test-fitting?

A better exposure below of the top photo shows pretty clearly the different color (probably yellow) under the cowl. It also shows the the fuselage cross has had the white areas on the lower portion painted out, presumably with RLM 76. Both of these items are shown in the profile below. The third photograph below was sent to me by George Morrison and shows clearly (to me anyway) that the top camouflage colors on the wings are reversed from the usual pattern.

Not sure how you were Googling, Ben, but I found the 2023 IPMS contest guidelines, link here: https://ipmsusa.org/sites/default/files/2023_ipms-usa_national_contest_rules.pdf There's nothing in it about graffiti, only nudism, explicit sexual stuff, etc.; and these guidelines are for the National contest only, so you'd want to check with the head judge of whatever local or regional contest you might be entering. My guess is there probably wouldn't be any objections.

Nobby, I assume iang won't object to my sharing the photos with you that he shared with me. I apparently can't attach the files to a PM, so email me at pnmoss47 [at] gmail [dot] com and I'll send them to you. Definitely read the rest of the posts in this thread for more useful information. I went with the camouflage diagram for the Blackburn Shark mentioned above. It's fairly easy to find online. I also went with shadow shading (Dark Sea Grey/Light Slate Grey) for the lower wing, and Sky Grey for the under surfaces.

I've been to the only town in the world (according to Wikipedia) with two exclamation marks in its name: Saint-Louis-du Ha! Ha! It's a tiny municipality in Quebec, Canada. A brochure from the municipality states that the Ha! Ha! is an old French slang term for "impasse," referring to a lake located in the town.

Here in Massachusetts we also have a Worcester, which we pronounce Wuster, and a Leicester, which we pronounce Lester (both as in the UK, I believe?) However, we also have a Leominster, which we pronounce Le-min-ster, while apparently it's Lemster in the UK. One of my favorite moments in the old movie "The Russians Are Coming, the Russians Are Coming" is when the Russian sailors are trying to figure out the pronunciation of Cloucester (the fictional name used for the island on which they run aground -- probably Nantucket): "Glou-kes-ter?"

I saw the thread (but didn't open it), so used the punctuation, thinking it would be an acceptable alternative to "bloody," which was my initial intention. Would that have been okay? Not being British, I don't know the present status of that word in the expletive continuum.

Perhaps it's my OCD component, but every time I see a plural noun with an apostrophe it drives me nuts. Photo is a frequent victim: "I've got some photo's to share." It's one photo, two photos. If people want to use the apostrophe (as in possessive of photo), then something like "I was impressed by the photo's composition ..." does make sense. Okay, I feel better now.

Re the wheels, from looking at the Eduard instructions, the Mauve kit apparently supplies diamond tread. I'm pretty sure wheels were freely interchangeable, so any of the three tread patterns would be plausible. If it were I, I'd go with either diamond or block tread. I highly favor Ultracast over True Details: the latter are molded IMHO much too flattened and bulged. The True Details cockpit set does fit the Mauve kit quite well as I recall. The seat can be replaced with one from Ultracast: they do very nice ones with American, British or no seat belts.