Hurricane "spaghetti" scheme: I said it was blue!

[Ed Russell]

The colors of the trees, the sky and the grass all look pretty natural ..

Red, yellow, blue and white on fuselage roundel all look within normal limits of what you see on real aircraft - perhaps the blue is a touch light. Wing roundel looks odd but fading, distance and perspective must be considered. I have seen far worse colour photos than this one.

Edit - The black and white on the vehicle plate look like black and white and the grey would pass for 'Panzergrau' (approx RAL 7021).

Edited July 22, 2012 by Ed Russell

[penfold]

Graham,

Regarding photos, I did not say that mid-stone always appears dark and neither did Richard. I dismissed your comment because there was nothing to back it up. i.e. would you please mind giving a reference to these photos rather than just stating “there are a number”. Here is a colour photo of a Blenheim in Greece, March/April 41. It is clearly Dark Earth/Mid-Stone:

Regards,

Mark

I'm no expert on anything........but as well as the pic being possibly degraded, the presence of other aircraft bits in the background suggests this is some sort of scrapyard and therefore the paints themselves may have been fading under the hot Greek sun for some time....

[occa]

Red, yellow, blue and white on fuselage roundel all look within normal limits of what you see on real aircraft - perhaps the blue is a touch light. Wing roundel looks odd but fading, distance and perspective must be considered. I have seen far worse colour photos than this one.

Edit - The black and white on the vehicle plate look like black and white and the grey would pass for 'Panzergrau' (approx RAL 7021).

Yes to me too, if there was a significant shift of colors it would mean one of those hues would be affected ...

The rear fuselage in the background seems to have light grey demarcation lines between the two colors, the green of them even looks like it has a strong bluish hue.

Now of I only could recall where I read the description of such a camouflage pattern?

Edited July 22, 2012 by occa

[Test Graham]

Sorry to upset you Occa, but I don't think that photo is real either: it looks tinted (look at the shadow under car, which looks unreal), if done by someone who knew what he was doing. I agree that I've seen a lot worse colour effects on real (and fake) colour photos, but suspiciously few quite as clear. However, this isn't said to back up any of my ideas of what it should be. Whether that's right or wrong doesn't affect the argument for Tropical Land in the slightest, as the presence of some aircraft in DE/MS has not been denied. It seems irrelevant for another reason. The area normally Dark Green has been painted the light colour, which appears to be normal in desert Blenheims. So no-one would suggest this as being in "Tropical Land" anyway. The argument would be whether it was Mid Stone or Light Earth, which is largely a matter of timing.

Mark: Thanks for the memo stating that the original posting was in error, which clears that up but says nothing about the thinking behind the scheme or practical examples in the ME before or after. As an aside, Sand is not a British colour term but is a US one, which given the unwanted intrusion of P-40s into this discussion can only be further confusing!

Bowyer's comment is certainly interesting, but it is contradicted by his own statements later in the same chapter. He states that by early 1941 deliveries were still being in Temperate Land, and for deliveries Temperate Land was not being replaced by Desert until August 2nd. On the other hand, he mentions Wellingtons in the Desert Scheme before the Greek campaign, although he isn't clear on seeing them personally (or directly by someone, as he does rely on his wide range of contacts). However, this is all only anecdotal, and you have expressed his clear opinion on the lack of value of any anecdotal evidence that goes against AM rules. This does. For documentary evidence, we have the discussion between the RAE and the AM reported by Lucas in Britain Alone. As late as 22 January 1941 the AM informed the RAE that Mid Stone was a new colour introduced only in the Middle East and would be applied by personnel there. You may apply your own emphasis to these comments. So when did Bowyer see these Blenheims? Or, knowing about DE/MS, has he at some later stage assumed that the light colour was MS, even though in 1940 it was unknown to the RAE (Britain's camouflage experts) and on no list of authorised paints ?

Richard used the argument that MS appears dark to try to explain why so many Malta-based Spitfires appeared dark, to argue against accounts of them being a single dark colour, specifically blue-grey. Photos from the desert war fail to show the same kind of single-tone effect, despite the much wider use of Middle Stone. As for quoting examples: I can't because on my own argument they don't exist! Do you know of any? Perhaps one day I will go through every Hurricane photo in supposed Desert/Tropical schemes and come up with some kind of analysis, but as no-one appears willing to pay me for this research, is there any possibility of getting this discussion back to its original theme?

Edited July 22, 2012 by Graham Boak

[Steven Eisenman]

So why did the Luftwaffe adopt it. And on the minimal front cowl of the 190 no less! Not so unique, there must have been a common understanding of purpose that is lost to time..or not.

A partial...

[tango98]

Steven,

These 190s are all from the 5.(F)/123 and were taken at St.Pol in mid-1943 except the first one which was taken at Monchy-Breton at the end of July 1943.

An entry in the Staffel war diary for June 1943 records that the recent application of random paint patches along the leading edges of some (but not all) of the Staffel's 190s had been adopted to break up the light blue of the underside colour when they were dispersed in camouflaged areas around the airfield and thus make them harder for the increasing numbers of marauding Allied aircraft to spot, thus predating the same application frequently seen on Lw fighters (again primarily 190s) in western Europe in 1944/45.

A subsequent entry from the same diary for some three weeks later goes on to record that this newly applied 'additional colouring' (the diarist's words, not mine and no, he did not record the colours) also served a second, unintended purpose under certain conditions, by helping to break up the head-on outline of the aircraft at lower altitudes. It is not recorded how long the 190s of the 5.Staffel retained these colours.

At the time when I first published these photos in part 2 of Aufklärer' by Classic Colors in 2007 I did not have access to the war diary otherwise I would have included the information in the accompanying captions.

Cheers

Dave

[Steven Eisenman]

Thanks Dave.

Your response address two theories about the Hurricanes. Ground camouflage (under nets?) and head on camou at low level. Two birds with one stone?

As for the pictures, off ebay. Just looked at your monograph and the quality is better.

[Mark Mackenzie]

n/m

Edited January 5, 2020 by Mark Mackenzie

[Nick Millman]

In anticipation of a reply from Nick, who may argue that the term “amendment” doesn't mean correction, here is the on-line definition of amendment, less there be any confusion. Please note 2):

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/amendment

Also, Nick I know it doesn't explicitly state AMO 513 in the title, but clearly given the closeness of the dates it can only refer to this document or derivatives of it.

Regards,

Mark

Why would I argue that? If anything the issue of a correction (or amendment) suggests that aircraft were perhaps being painted "incorrectly". One of the aspects that might have caused additional confusion was that on the camouflage scheme diagrams the unshaded (lighter) areas were supposed to represent the Dark Green, whilst the shaded (darker) areas represented the Dark Earth which is a bit counter-intuitive.

The connection between the correction and AMO 513 is not explicit but certainly implied, as is the connection between the "Tropical land scheme" and Dark Green/Midstone. Which you will hopefully understand if you read my post # 37 carefully. You can't have it both ways - to argue an implication from one piece of inexplicit evidence but not another. The equivalent of your statement:-

"No where does it state that tropical land scheme = mid stone + dark green."

could be matched by:-

"No where does it state that this correction applies to AMO 513 Para 3 ii (a) or Appendix I"

I'm not arguing that, btw, but using it only to illustrate that your own argument applies a double standard of evidence. It is quite clear that the Tropical land scheme referred to in the Appendix to AMO 513 refers to Dark Green and Midstone because both are designated as being for "Operational aircraft for service abroad". It is absolutely clear that the Temperate land scheme was Dark Green and Dark Earth and that "Operational aircraft for service abroad" could be painted in the Temperate land scheme or in Dark Green and Midstone "according to the nature of the country in which they operate". When the author put Tropical land scheme in the Appendix he might have had something else in mind but I doubt it. The rest of the Appendix summarises the main content of AMO 513's paragraphs in tabular form. Tropical land scheme was shorthand for the description at para 3 ii (a) and it undoubtedly caused confusion because it encompassed three, perhaps four, possibilities:-

1. Leaving aircraft in the Temperate land scheme

2. Re-painting the Dark Earth areas with Midstone (according to the wording of the AMO)

3. Re-painting the Dark Green areas with Midstone (according to the AMO's supposed intent)

The fourth possibility was "What the Hell is Tropical land scheme?" and the digging up of pre-war camouflage schemes/paints and the painting of some aircraft in anomalous and non-standard colours.

The correction came three months later and if the original AMO did not imply that the Tropical land scheme was Dark Green and Midstone there should have been no need to issue it. But what is missing is what actually motivated it. What the correction does not do is rule out the possibility that some aircraft were being painted Dark Green and Midstone (whether you have seen them or not) and that that scheme was referred to as the Tropical land scheme, even over a finite period.

But getting back to the main point. You made two statements in this thread that have been shown to be wrong, first that the Dark Green/Midstone scheme was never officially stated and secondly that Graham had invented the term 'Tropical land scheme'. In fact both are officially stated in AMO 513. What I think you meant was that scheme was never officially intended and was a clerical mistake which is moot, albeit implied.

Edited July 29, 2012 by Nick Millman

[Spitfires Forever]

And

AMO 926/40, (12.12.40) paragraph 5 (i) "Temperate land scheme camouflage........Aircraft of the Middle East Command are coloured MIDSTONE and DARK GREEN"

The Appendix for A.513 appears to indicate this is the Tropical Land scheme (as aside, but still my choice for a certain torpedo bomber in Singapore)

I have read from several sources that some Spitfire Mk V's were delivered to Malta in "sand and spinach" color schemes. that subject has been disputed off and on but I saw one pictur in general that would suggest that scheme very strongly.

Cheers

[Edgar]

First, gentlemen, can I, please, suggest that, when referring to an A.M.O., you always add the (year) suffix? A.M.O. A.513 was, in fact A.513/41. As anyone, who has flogged through Kew's books (not for the faint-hearted) will tell you, the Air Ministry started every year afresh with A.1/**, and went from there.

Second, the reference to "Tropical land scheme" doesn't have to be an error, since, up to the end of 1938, there were possibly five schemes with the suffix "L.T." plus a numeral. I've found only three, so far, all for biplanes (therefore with shadow shading,) and L.T.4a used Dark Earth, Dark Sand, Dark Red Sand, Red Sand, Dark Sea Green, and Light Sea Green. On the illustration is a hand-written note, in pencil, "for Middle East."

I can't put them up, since Photobucket resolutely refuses to let me on to it.

Edgar

[Mark Mackenzie]

Edgar said:

First, gentlemen, can I, please, suggest that, when referring to an A.M.O., you always add the (year) suffix? A.M.O. A.513 was, in fact A.513/41. As anyone, who has flogged through Kew's books (not for the faint-hearted) will tell you, the Air Ministry started every year afresh with A.1/**, and went from there.

Second, the reference to "Tropical land scheme" doesn't have to be an error, since, up to the end of 1938, there were possibly five schemes with the suffix "L.T." plus a numeral. I've found only three, so far, all for biplanes (therefore with shadow shading,) and L.T.4a used Dark Earth, Dark Sand, Dark Red Sand, Red Sand, Dark Sea Green, and Light Sea Green. On the illustration is a hand-written note, in pencil, "for Middle East."

I can't put them up, since Photobucket resolutely refuses to let me on to it.

Edgar

n/m

Edited January 5, 2020 by Mark Mackenzie

[Mark Mackenzie]

 

n/m

Edited January 5, 2020 by Mark Mackenzie

[Test Graham]

The delivery of Spitfires to Malta was not until 1942, almost a year after any confusion over "Tropical Land". Early deliveries saw a mix of painting over a short serial run, some with a much lighter colour where the Dark Green should have been and others the Dark Earth. I suggest this is like to be from the confusion Nick mentions, where the darker shade on the instruction is meant to represent the lighter colour, and we are seeing Desert Scheme aircraft with exchanged colours. Whatever may have happened in early 1941, there's no likely reason why it should have continued into the period of standardisation on DE/MS.

What happened to the Spitfires after they reached Malta is another (and very long-winded, much mistreated) matter, but "sand and spinach" was generally used to describe Temperate Land, and this could well have been seen on Malta in 1943, when it appears to have been used in the Italian campaign.

Mark: I have no comment on the prewar use of the term, other than to thank you for posting it and to ask whether this information differs from the description of these schemes given by Paul Lucas?

Edited July 30, 2012 by Graham Boak

[Mark Mackenzie]

Graham Boak said:

Mark: I have no comment on the prewar use of the term, other than to thank you for posting it and to ask whether this information differs from the description of these schemes given by Paul Lucas?

 

n/m

Edited January 5, 2020 by Mark Mackenzie

[Nick Millman]

Sorry Mark but that is all a red (sand) herring to the import of AMO A.513/41 especially without the context being clearly stated. And ignoring the points made in my posts does not invalidate them.

The paragraph on "tropical colours" in the RAE document does not even mention Midstone and does not convey the "correct" Desert colours as officially stated in the amendment dated October 1941. Following your own use of evidence, therefore, are you going to deny that Midstone existed? The RAE document might not refer to Dark Green/Midstone but AMO A.513/41 certainly does.

"In January 1941, the Tropical Land Schemes were pairs of the colours Light Earth, Dark Earth, Dark Sand, Dark Red Sand as shown below."

No, those are the Tropical Land schemes according to that RAE document only. Where is the evidence of continuity from that to Air Ministry orders and to actual practice and why, if these were the Tropical land scheme combination colours in early 1941, do they not feature in AMO A.513/41 (of July) or any other AMO?

The experimental painting of 45 Sqn Blenheims might have some bearing on this but even those colours have not been identified definitively. A photograph showing a line-up dated September 1939 is described by Wg Cdr C J Jefford as follows:-

"As before a coat of tan paint was applied over the Dark Green areas of the temperate scheme in which the aircraft had been delivered, producing something like the desert colour scheme which was to be introduced two years later; the undersides remained in the original black."

and:-

"This experiment in desert camouflage was not persevered with and by early 1940 the aircraft were back in their original colours with the code letters applied more neatly in pale grey. From the summer of 1940, however, Blenheim Is operating in the Middle East began to appear with Sky (or perhaps a locally concocted shade of pale blue) undersides and some of 45 Sqn's machines were certainly sporting this style by the end of that year."

"After several months of interim colour schemes and experiments the situation had stabilised by early 1940 with the Blenheims reverting to their original Dark Green and Dark Earth with black undersides and codes neatly applied in pale grey. OB-X seen here at Fuka is a typical example."

The codes were applied in opposite colours for the experimental desert scheme - tan on Dark Earth and Dark Earth on tan - but it was not pursued and another photo of L1534 OB-K at Qotafiyah in December 1940 has single colour codes and what looks like a Dark Green and Midstone/Light Earth finish. The characteristics of the paint, where Dark Earth chalks and fades to an appearance approaching Light Earth and Light Earth to a pale sand perhaps also had a bearing on these experiments. The footnote to these colour discussions in Wg Cdr Jefford's chronicle is illuminating and together with AMO A.513/41 puts the final nail in your RAE document:-

"These early flirtations with desert camouflage were not confined to 45 Sqn. The previous silver Gauntlets and Gladiators of the RAFME's resident fighter squadrons had been hastily repainted in a variety of ad hoc schemes during 1939 and 113 Sqn began a series of trials with a new colour scheme as late as March 1940. That a range of specific desert colours was required had been recognised since at least 1933 but those that had been developed to meet this need by the RAE were deleted in 1939 in favour of the prevailing temperate scheme. Despite the obvious need for a system of desert camouflage, and apparently quite extensive experimentation in the field in the months preceding Italy's declaration of war, by the middle of 1940 most combat aircraft were in UK-style green and brown and it was not until August 1941 that a desert scheme of 'Sand and Stone' (sic) with Azure undersurfaces was authorised."

The RAE document appears well out of date from what was actually happening since the colours mentioned are not reflected at all in AMO A.513/41 which post-dated it. But there are other examples of RAE recommendations and stances not conforming to actual Air Ministry practice, e.g. iro Sky Blue.

So, sorry, but you have not made your case and are unlikely to do so when you cherry pick the evidence and apply double standards to it. I'm ambivalent about it and not trying to make the evidence fit a pre-determined conclusion. Just to make it clear I am not arguing for Dark Green/Midstone but for don't know for certain from the evidence available.

[Test Graham]

It is certainly true that different people interpret the same item differently: in that respect I would point out that the 1941 memo that you refer to is not from the Air Ministry but from RAE Farnborough, in its position as advisor on such matters. It is not an instruction to lower echelons, but advice to higher authorities who then may or may not take any action RAE considers as ideal/appropriate.

Outside of the generalities in the first paragraph it specifically refers to the prewar studies, and does not reference actual operational experience for uppersurface colours. There is, after all, no known application of the Tropical Sea Scheme, apart perhaps from pre-delivery Martlets. (I fear we cannot identify the scheme on published Vildebeeste photos, sadly.) It is certainly worth noting that it does not refer to the colour Mid Stone or Middle Stone at all, although we do know from other sources (including the Air Ministry) that it was being used at this time. See the postings above for references to the communication between RAE and the Air Ministry regarding Mid Stone in late 1940: before this Note. Indeed, you have argued that it was in use from 1939, where others quote Light Earth. The pairing of Light Earth and Dark Earth is specifically mentioned in this memo.

I do wonder a little at the choice of terminology: there are after all many tropical areas which are predominantly green, so only including browns is somewhat shortsighted. However, I suspect this is a case of blinkered Imperial vision of where the wars were likely to be fought rather than a truly geographical naming system. Local commanders are likely to be much more savvy, as they clearly proved to be elsewhere.

Edit: Nick beat me to it with much the same key arguments. I hope I say enough different/extra to justify retaining this posting.

Edited July 30, 2012 by Graham Boak

[Edgar]

In February, 1943, D.T.D. Circular 360 was issued, which decreed that fighters, for desert areas, should be in DE/MS over Azure Blue; all other day fighters, for service abroad, were to be painted in the standard Day Fighter Scheme, except for those bound for Malta, which were to have undersides painted in Light Mediterranean Blue (for the invasion of Sicily, perhaps?)

In November 1943, a second issue of the Circular was sent out, and, in this, the desert scheme, for day fighters, disappeared, as did the "special" Malta underside provision; henceforth all day fighters were to be in D.F.S.

Edgar

[Mark Mackenzie]

n/m

Edited January 5, 2020 by Mark Mackenzie

[Nick Millman]

Nick,

The point I was making was that the Air Ministry (A.M.) terms were still in use in January 1941 as clearly given in the R.A.E document (they are A.M. terms - refer to August 1938 letter) . In this case the R.A.E have used the A.M. terms to describe the colours they considered most suitable for M.E. and not the colours that were actually used by A.M. Clearly A.M. have adopted a rationalisation and the Tropical Land Scheme LT2 (Dark Sand/Lt Earth) became Dark Earth/Mid Stone in December 1940 (AMO 926/40). Then in 1941, because some of the fighting was taking place in more fertile areas, such as the Sudan and Syria, the A.M. have amended the order to allow the Temperate Land Scheme to be used depending on the terrain. Again note the rationalisation that has taken place i.e. the scheme devised pre-war for fertile areas of Middle-East, LT4 with the Dark Sea Green and two Dark Browns, has been replaced with the very similar Temperate Land Scheme. The A.M. were heading in this direction in August 1938 when they requested further trials by R.A.E. of the Temperate Land Scheme in Aden.

I have looked at the 45 Sqd history. In September 1940 they were in Sudan for three months and then in June 1941 they were in Syria. So it is no wonder they switched from Desert to the Temperate scheme at the end of 1940. Regarding the camouflage trials, the AVIA files indicated that dopes for LT schemes were sent to the Middle-East in 1939/40 I believe. I will track them down in the files and post them. Also I would point out that the September 1938 letter required a modified Temperate Land Scheme, with light colour to be used in place of Dark Earth, to be trialled in Middle-East. This may be on the Blenheim that you mention. I have the Jefford book on order from library so will look at the photo you mention. Some of what quotes looks suspiciously like that given by Michael Bowyer, which is the difficulty with this type of anecdotal records i.e. they are unrelaible.

Regards,

Mark

But the point you are missing is that these terms were not in use in the specific Air Ministry camouflage instructions that post-dated them by six months, in AMO A.513/41. Nothing you have posted explains why.

In your second paragraph you seem to be arguing against your own conclusion. If a "modified Temperate Land Scheme, with light colour to be used in place of Dark Earth" was to be trialled in the Middle-East then the contents of AMO A.513/41 with its Tropical land scheme of Dark Green and Midstone "according to the nature of the country in which they are to operate" are more understandable. What is needed is more linkage and context in the documents you are posting rather than taking them at face value as answers in their own right. They are not. But I doubt we will get much more. Do you understand how official files are "weeded" for preservation? In non-sensitive areas the "weeder" has to decide what is important and what isn't. Tip of the iceberg comes to mind.

I fear you are falling into a common trap of dismissing "anecdotal records" as unreliable only when they disagree with the conclusion you prefer. I suspect that if Wg Cdr Jefford had reported from "anecdotal records" that a Tropical land scheme of Dark Green and Midstone never existed you would be only to ready to quote him in evidence. The reality is that those aircrew being asked to remember were rarely those involved in the technicalities of camouflage painting and those who were were often as confused by the requirements and paint colour terms as we are now (and rarely wrote memoirs or got interviewed). And they were seldom in a position to explain why certain things were done and who instructed it. The distance from the Air Ministry to the Maintenance Unit hangar was great and it was even further to the RAE Chemistry Dept! As the Chinese say "The mountain is high and the king is very far away". When someone describes "sand" do they mean Dark Earth, Light Earth, Midstone, one of the pre-war tropical colours or something mixed up locally? It sounds obvious but it isn't. And the under surfaces? Yikes! We are probably just about safe with Dark Green but with the RAF, once believed to have the most easily tabulated and understood paint colours of all, the exceptions may prove the rule.

[Steven Eisenman]

Of course the Tropical Land Scheme existed, otherwise my model would be inaccurate. And I don't build inaccurate models! :thumbsup:

Edited July 31, 2012 by Steven Eisenman

[Test Graham]

Thank you for the photo, which I find difficult to interpret as other than the Trop LS in use, for the reasons given above. However, something I've just noticed from the photo is the light leading edges, which in the case of the first aircraft is taken up onto the nose. This may be taking us back to the subject of the intended thread, but I'm afraid is missing from your model. Sorry to have to point it out, but it is a most interesting photograph. HMS Furious I believe, but I'm open to correction.

[Nick Millman]

Of course the Tropical Land Scheme existed, otherwise my model would be inaccurate. And I don't build inaccurate models! :thumbsup:

But Sky Grey - on a Trop Hurri? ;-)

[Steven Eisenman]

But Sky Grey - on a Trop Hurri? ;-)

It's actually somebody's Azure Blue. Old bottle of Aeromaster Warbird colors, IIRC. Photographed gray.

The model was done YEARS AGO, as was the picture,, when this same subject (Trop. LS) came up. Did it as quickie just for fun to see what it would look like.

Edited July 31, 2012 by Steven Eisenman

[ClaudioN]

Thank you for the photo, which I find difficult to interpret as other than the Trop LS in use, for the reasons given above. However, something I've just noticed from the photo is the light leading edges, which in the case of the first aircraft is taken up onto the nose. This may be taking us back to the subject of the intended thread, but I'm afraid is missing from your model. Sorry to have to point it out, but it is a most interesting photograph. HMS Furious I believe, but I'm open to correction.

Way back in post #31 I tried to mention a few pictures where light underside camouflage was shown to extend up the nose sides.

Then the thread got caught in the "Tropical" maelstrom... but I'd still like to see the original topic discussed as well.

A couple of questions that come to my mind with regards to the picture posted by Steven:

The underside colour appears rather light: could it be just plain Sky?

These Hurricanes have no tropical filters and most, if not all, are fitted with a de Haviiland propeller. Looks like an early dispatch to Malta, possibly the first?

On most Hurricanes on deck the underside colour demarcation appears to be standard, which raises the point, where did the thing start from?

For instance, take a look at this: VY-K P3408, October 1940

Claudio

Edited July 31, 2012 by ClaudioN