Jump to content

SBD-5 Dauntless colour scheme


ajaycad

Recommended Posts

My next project is a 1/32 Trumpeter SBD-5 Dauntless. I'm looking at an aircraft from the kit decal options, bombing squadron 16 (VB 16). There seems to be a little confusion over the colour scheme. As far as I'm aware the upper fuselage and wings are in sea blue, the mid fuselage in intermediate blue and the undersides in white. Some references give the 3 colour scheme but I've also seen a four colour ( the upper fuselage is a different blue to the upper wings. There is also confusion as to the demarcation lines between the fuselage colours. Any suggestions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The upper fuselage forward of the cockit was a matt version of Sea Blue to act as an anti-dazzle panel on many USN aircraft in the tri-colour scheme. This makes interpreting black and white photos 'interesting' to say the least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The matt anti-glare panel was common on aircraft in overall Sea Blue Gloss, and is usually clearly visible. For the earlier scheme the relevant instructions are SR2c and SR2d.

SR2C Jan 5th 1943 called for a four colour scheme. The upper ssurface of all aerofoils were semigloss Sea Blue. Nonspecular Sea Blue was applied to the upper fuselage and the leading edge of the aerofoils to reduce glare. Undersides were non-specular Insignia White, with Intermediate Blue on the fin and rudder. The fuselage sides were to be in graduated tones - this very rapidly became just Intermediate Blue. Although not specified, presumably the Intermediate Blue was non-specular (matt) too.

SR2d Amendment 1 March 13 1943 called for all these colours to be overall gloss in the interests of better performance. Fighters were to be in Sea Blue Gloss overall. Presumably the anti-glare panel on the bombers was often nonspecular Sea Blue too, but I don't recall seeing any specific reference to this.

I believe there is a noticeable difference in colour between nonspecular Sea Blue and Sea Blue Gloss, but can't say more than that. The colour chips in Monogram's USN & USMC Aircraft Colour Guide show a difference between the NS colour and the semigloss, but only shows the Gloss Sea Blue as ANA623, ANA623 is lighter than NSSB, but the opposite effect appears in b+w or colour photos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sorry tom hijack the thread, but does the -5 kit have the earlier windsreeen included in the kit ( the one with the hole)?

if so, would you be able to spare it? I have just finshed the - 4 version but have ruined the canopy

apologies again for the thread hijack

Rogerd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Confirm Intermediate Blue was non-specular but in the formal application procedure for smaller airplanes the NSSB and NS White were to be blended together so that the vertical surfaces had the approximate tone of Intermediate Blue. Actual Intermediate Blue paint was recommended to be applied in the procedure for larger aircraft but which procedure was to be used was optional rather than mandatory.

The blending procedure was covered by rather detailed instructions and diagrams. If you want copies of the originals please drop me a pm.

Base pigments for NSSB and ANA 623 were identical but whereas NSSB was matched to swatch rather than by formula ANA 623 specified the ratio of black, white and blue as 9/26/11 by weight of pigment.

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not aware of there being any official four-color camo on an SBD. Fading of an in-service machine might make it look like that, but AFAIK they were all Dark and Intermediate Sea Blue with white.

ANA 606 Semi-Gloss Sea Blue: Wings Upper and Horizontal stab's

ANA 607 Non-Specular Sea Blue: Upper Fuselage

ANA 608 Intermediate Blue: Fuselage sides and vertical Stab. (lower surface of outer wings on F4U Corsairs)

ANA 601 Insignia White: Lower of fuselage/Wings/horizontal Stab's

That make 4 colours by my count, RNZAF flew SBD-5's in Pacific, drawn from USN/MAG reserves, painted

in afore mentioned colours - only things painted on them by RNZAF were the RNZAF Pacific Roundles and Bars

and crew's own adornments

Good references here (scroll down to lower page)

http://rnzaf.hobbyvista.com/sbdcol2.html

Regards

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The difference between ANA 606 and ANA 607 was not one of colour but of reflectivity. And as mentioned above on small fighters the intermediate blue could be achieved by blending the Sea Blue and White together. This is described in SR-2C of 5 Jan 1943 effective 1 Feb 43 under and also shown on the diagram for SR-2C of 1 Feb 43. The effect would be to create an inconsistency in the appearance of the "intermediate blue".

The blending was required on leading edges of wings and NSSB was to extend back from the leading edge across the top surface of the wings to approximately 5% of the wing chord.

In practice the rapid degradation of the paint surfaces in service made these details somewhat academic.

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what blue was specified in the mix for ANA 623 ?

Me?

The blue pigment was Ultramarine (Pigment Blue 29 CI 77007). This was a change from the previous USN colours which had used Prussian Blue - aka Iron Blue (PB 27 & 27:1 CI 77510 and 77510:1). For modelling purposes the close enough FS 595b equivalents to the colours are as follows:-

SGSB ANA 606 - FS 25042

NSSB ANA 607 - FS 35042

NSIB ANA 608 - FS 35164

NSW ANA 601 - FS 37875

But in practice Ultramarine varies according to the way it is made and refined which would have caused production tolerance variations between manufacturers and possibly even batches. To summarise this variance rather crudely the blues would shift very slightly between brighter blues and duller, greyer blues.

Nick

Edited by Nick Millman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

sorry tom hijack the thread, but does the -5 kit have the earlier windsreeen included in the kit ( the one with the hole)?

if so, would you be able to spare it? I have just finshed the - 4 version but have ruined the canopy

apologies again for the thread hijack

Rogerd

Roger,

Sent you a PM - its not good news I'm afraid :weep:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me?

The blue pigment was Ultramarine (Pigment Blue 29 CI 77007). This was a change from the previous USN colours which had used Prussian Blue - aka Iron Blue (PB 27 & 27:1 CI 77510 and 77510:1). For modelling purposes the close enough FS 595b equivalents to the colours are as follows:-

SGSB ANA 606 - FS 25042

NSSB ANA 607 - FS 35042

NSIB ANA 608 - FS 35164

NSW ANA 601 - FS 37875

But in practice Ultramarine varies according to the way it is made and refined which would have caused production tolerance variations between manufacturers and possibly even batches. To summarise this variance rather crudely the blues would shift very slightly between brighter blues and duller, greyer blues.

Nick

Nick,

I think I've got it so far.

Here are the colours I have selected thus far for the blue shades::

ANA 607 - NSSB - Gunze Mr Hobby Aqueous Hobby Color H54 (Navy Blue)

ANA 608 - Intermediate Blue - Gunze Mr Hobby Aqueous Hobby Color H56 (Intermediate Blue)

The ANA 606 is proving hard to find - If its a case of a difference in actual sheen rather that a difference in colour, between the 606 and 607, then will it be accurate and acceptable to use H54, and darken the tone very slightly or even gloss it up a bit. I think in reality, on a weathered aircraft, the difference is negligible. The B/W photos I can find, the difference is un-noticeable.

Andy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a significant visual difference between 25042 and 35042 but it is caused by the difference in reflectivity. I double checked and confirmed that 25042 and 34052 do have exactly the same pigments. As I understand it H54 is semi-gloss in finish out of the bottle (so should be more suitable for 606) but a lot will come down to how weathered you want to represent the airframe on the finished model.

Gunze do offer a flat base which can be used for matting their paints - it used to be H30 but i think their range has been re-numbered recently?

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me?

The blue pigment was Ultramarine (Pigment Blue 29 CI 77007). This was a change from the previous USN colours which had used Prussian Blue - aka Iron Blue (PB 27 & 27:1 CI 77510 and 77510:1). For modelling purposes the close enough FS 595b equivalents to the colours are as follows:-

SGSB ANA 606 - FS 25042

NSSB ANA 607 - FS 35042

NSIB ANA 608 - FS 35164

NSW ANA 601 - FS 37875

But in practice Ultramarine varies according to the way it is made and refined which would have caused production tolerance variations between manufacturers and possibly even batches. To summarise this variance rather crudely the blues would shift very slightly between brighter blues and duller, greyer blues.

Nick

Thank You , Nick.

(although that actually doesn't help with a mix for sea blue...I might be able to find Ultramarine in acrylic)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank You , Nick.

(although that actually doesn't help with a mix for sea blue...I might be able to find Ultramarine in acrylic)

Sorry, I misread your question - but it is still Ultramarine for wartime USN!

ANA 623 Gloss Sea Blue - FS 15042

Again colour "differences" relate mainly to reflectivity. Both Whistler (1969) and Smith (1972) observed slight differences between the ANA swatch plates and the FS colours, describing the ANA as slightly "cleaner" blues. This probably stems from the use of the Ultramarine pigment in the ANA paints and alternative pigments - phthalo blue - in the FS chips. However, Palmieri (1981) who examined more than one set of swatch plates comments in respect of Whistler's observations as follows (his emphasis):-

"The average colour of the various extant samples suggests to me that the intent was to exactly incorporate the ANAs into FS 595, and that observed differences will be only production tolerance variations in the chips. The matches given here for 595 equivalents are more than adequately close for modelling purposes..."

The Palmieri equivalents are given above and have been confirmed by measuring and comparing. Bear in mind that the paint technology was developing and evolving post-war which often changed the pigments being used in the applied paints whilst the colour standards were maintained. This also applies to hobby paints, for example Tamiya Sea Blue XF-17 uses phthalo blue (phthalocyanine blue - PB 15) as its main colour pigment.

The difficulty in painting the sea blues is lightening them sufficiently for scale whilst not distorting the very dark blue to an overly "bright" blue which is seen on some finished models. A suggestion is to go with a 'full size' blue like Xtracolor X121 FS 15042 Sea Blue and then introduce "scaling" (and also the effects of weathering/fading/chalking) with an overspray of clear varnish tinted with a very little light grey. The amount of light grey and intensity of spraying can be varied according to the effect required.

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank You , Nick.

I tried Tamiya XF-17 it was way,way too dark-nearly black

the other question I had was Ultramirine and/or Phthalo and you answered it.

my apologies on not making that more clear earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Confirm Intermediate Blue was non-specular but in the formal application procedure for smaller airplanes the NSSB and NS White were to be blended together so that the vertical surfaces had the approximate tone of Intermediate Blue. Actual Intermediate Blue paint was recommended to be applied in the procedure for larger aircraft but which procedure was to be used was optional rather than mandatory.

The blending procedure was covered by rather detailed instructions and diagrams. If you want copies of the originals please drop me a pm.

Does this "blending" have any relationship to the multi-stepping version seen on a Boeing Clipper and also a PBY? I am thinking (speculating) that maybe they were thinking rather than the stepping down from dark to light in bands of paint called for (?) on the big aircraft, an approximation of the same could be achieved by painting (spraying) technique on the smaller aircraft? Both seem to have been disposed of as either unnecessary sophistication, or simply too complicated for the real world of high production volume.

Apologies if this question displays my ignorance (which it does)- the finer points of Navy camo evolution is definitely NOT one of my stronger areas!

bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree Bob: this was my understanding of what was intended (i.e. how it was described all those years ago when I first encountered it). This makes more sense than specifying a single colour as some kind of blend rather than the simpler final step of calling for a specific single colour.

Edited by Graham Boak
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob and Graham - I'm not sure I understand your understanding on this! There were two methods specified for hull or fuselage only, one of which - blending upper and lower surface colours - was recommended for small aircraft and one of which was applying Intermediate Blue between upper and lower surface colours which was recommended for large aircraft.

The blending was supposed to approximate the Intermediate Blue in appearance. The instructions are not very clear as to exactly what was meant by blending but the actual wording is as follows:-

"A. By blending the two colors over the intervening area in such a manner that there is a gradual transition in tone without noticeable demarcation between the two colors. In any case, the tone of these curved surfaces, where they approach the vertical, should be approximately that of NON SPECULAR INTERMEDIATE BLUE." (emphasis per original)

"B. By the use of NON SPECULAR INTERMEDIATE BLUE over the intervening area, blending into the two adjacent colors in such a manner that there is a gradual transition without noticeable demarcation between the colors."

And as noted for the key on the accompanying diagram:-

"Areas of graded tone: in general these areas grade smoothly from Sea Blue (non-specular) at the top into White at the bottom. Where these surfaces are vertical the tone obtained should be about that of Intermediate Blue. These areas may be painted in either of two ways:- 1. By use of Sea Blue shading directly into white (primarily for use on smaller airplanes). 2. By use of Sea Blue shading into Intermediate Blue shading into White (for use on larger planes)."

This seems to leave a lot to the interpretation of the paint sprayers and/or inspectors which is perhaps borne out by the variety seen in photographs.

The application of Intermediate Blue paint was specified for the vertical fin and rudder, for the under surface of the folding part of wings that were visible from above - again to be blended with the white - for float struts and for propeller spinners. The Vought F4U-1 drawing specified a 4-inch blending line on the folding wings.

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is a matter of finding your phrasing unintentionally ambiguous. "The blending was supposed to approximate the Intermediate Blue in appearance" The colour blending is clear in the text "there is a gradual transition in tone". I read that as calling for a continual change as it goes down the side of the fuselage. This is not the same as describing the sides as approximating to Intermediate Blue.

I can only agree entirely about the practical implications of applying the original order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, that more or less follows the PBY diagram in SR-2C-174/43 for counter shaded areas where the hull or fuselage is beneath the wing - "under high wing", noted as follows:-

"The tone lines of details below represent ideal counter-shading. Approximate results are all that are required in practice." (original emphasis).

In essence the colour grading on the hull or fuselage is swept up from the horizontal to the wing leading and trailing edges but it looks as if the painter followed the diagram literally and has graded the colours rather than use Intermediate Blue as suggested for large aircraft or perhaps a bit of both. Although the lower surface of the hull was supposed to be white the forward part of the bow where it is visible above the waterline is shown on the diagram to be graded exactly as the painter has tried to do.

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah! So the drawing (which I know I've seen somewhere along the way) was meant to represent "a schedule of transition", but taken by some as literal lines of demarcation? It sounds from your response that we ARE thinking about the same instruction. I had been under the impression that the Clipper style, or something along those lines (pun, if not intended, approved of!) (and I'm pretty sure I've got a color shot of a PBY painted in similar manner) was the intended scheme, at least theoretically, and that this was rationalized in practice, if not also by subsequent instruction.

Are we both saying the same thing from cross directions?

bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah! So the drawing (which I know I've seen somewhere along the way) was meant to represent "a schedule of transition", but taken by some as literal lines of demarcation? It sounds from your response that we ARE thinking about the same instruction. I had been under the impression that the Clipper style, or something along those lines (pun, if not intended, approved of!) (and I'm pretty sure I've got a color shot of a PBY painted in similar manner) was the intended scheme, at least theoretically, and that this was rationalized in practice, if not also by subsequent instruction.

Are we both saying the same thing from cross directions?

bob

I would love to see that photo of that PBY ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...