RLM81/RLM82

[Clinton78]

http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?p=166413#post166413

[Brad]

All I see is someone who has found an interesting document and has engaged in speculation with no real evidence to back it up; "pretty sure that an undiscovered order exists". Perhaps I'm just getting old and cynical, but what I generally see in revisionist history are people trying to rewrite things with fantastic new discoveries to make a name for themselves and ultimately, sell stuff....and that is speaking as someone who has a degree with honours and did revisionist history as his honours year.

[Clinton78]

But these discoveries make you re-think what you actually think you are seeing in Black and white photos. I/IV./JG1 devil emblem anyone.... For years the background was interpreted as sky blue from black and white photos until low and behold someone discovered colour period evidence that it was actually yellow. Lot's of model kits and profiles had to be repainted... Even the father of Luftwaffe emblem research Karl Ries got it wrong. Michael Ullmann is kindly putting forward his newly found period document evidence for free, on the web for everyone to scrutinise. I don't see him selling anything. Evidence is a bit thin on the ground when it comes to period Luftwaffe documentation. Seeing as 90+% of it was destroyed. We are only left with snippets and scraps from which to piece the facts together. You have to speculate to a certain degree. I think Mr Ullmann has already made a name for himself in the world of Luftwaffe camouflage. Theres a large format 360 page book about Luftwaffe camouflage with his name on it.

[Caerbannog]

So maybe there will be a revised edition of Michael Ullmans book soon? I would not mind as this time I will get my hands on it before the price skyrockets :-) So to share new information could be a clever marketing idea - anyway I would not bother if this is so as long as the result will be satisfactory :-)

However I think there are some odd points which are also pointed out in that topic on 12'o clock high which must be explained first.

[rwoolven76]

While I understand the interest and enjoyment of the discussion and historical research, since colour perception is unique to the individual anyway, does the whole discussion not seem slightly circular?

It surprises me that people would bother to repaint their models because of new found evidence (although the discovery that blue was, in fact, yellow is quite an extreme example) that a shade was slightly lighter or darker than at first thought.

Since the colour of a paint changes depending on so many factors (the eyes viewing it, the age of the paintwork, the light source shining on it at the time), surely it's impossible to ever be 100% right.

Not knocking anyone, I'm just interested in the philosophical idea of accuracy.

[Learstang]

While I understand the interest and enjoyment of the discussion and historical research, since colour perception is unique to the individual anyway, does the whole discussion not seem slightly circular?

It surprises me that people would bother to repaint their models because of new found evidence (although the discovery that blue was, in fact, yellow is quite an extreme example) that a shade was slightly lighter or darker than at first thought.

Since the colour of a paint changes depending on so many factors (the eyes viewing it, the age of the paintwork, the light source shining on it at the time), surely it's impossible to ever be 100% right.

Not knocking anyone, I'm just interested in the philosophical idea of accuracy.

I tend to agree with this. Although I think as a serious modeller one should strive for accuracy, absolute accuracy is probably unobtainable. I'm more interested in getting the hue (basic colour) correct than the tone or shade (lightness or darkness). The latter depends on too many factors - fresh paint versus faded, exposure to different weather conditions, which batch/factory the paint came from, etc. As a personal example, I painted the interiors of many of my Soviet models with a grey that although the correct hue (a neutral grey), I now realise to be too light, but I'm not going to repaint them, even if I could (it's difficult to repaint interiors!).

Regards,

Jason

Edited May 13, 2013 by Learstang

[Clinton78]

I mentioned the repainted model kits and profiles as a kind of figure of speech. I perhaps wrongly presumed that viewers would not take what I said literally but you can almost guarantee some profiles, model kits, and emblem books were revised because of this new finding. The latter of which I personally know for a fact. You say it's an extreme example but it ties in really well with this discussion. There were really nice clear black and white photos of the emblem that had been around for decades and just because the first few researchers looked at the photos and saw how the devil was positioned on the emblem and what looked like clouds were at the bottom they concluded that the background was a sky and therefore that the colour was obviously sky blue. So for decades since everyone has painted the emblem with a sky blue background. They accepted it as fact. Then a couple of years ago someone discovers a period ww2 chest that was decorated by it's owner in painted colour examples of the emblems of the units he served in during WW2. It turns out that the devil was actually in hell. This particular hell had yellow skies and the clouds were in fact puffs of smoke from the hell fires burning below him. So it just goes to show that your perception of colour in black and white photos can be hindered by what you think is generally accepted as fact. I think this is another example of that happening. All these years we've been told that German bombers operating in the Med were certain colours, so we accepted that what we are seeing in black and white photos were in fact those colours and we had no reason to question it. These documents are going to cause people to perhaps look again at what they think they have been seeing all these years.

I suppose it all boils down to what kind of standard you set for your work. How accurate you want to get it. Or more importantly how accurate your viewers, buyers, or bosses want you to be. "Colour perception is unique to the individual" although to a certain degree I appreciate that to be the case but when we have a situation like this one: Blue or Green, Sky Blue or Yellow, perception is nothing to do with it. It's either one or the other. One is right and one is wrong, very wrong.... You are never going to get the colour 100% spot on but theres a whole lot of difference between an aircraft painted blue and one painted green. Perhaps I'm getting too excited or something but I take Luftwaffe camouflage and markings research very seriously and I appreciate the gravity and significance of the discovery of these documents. First there were rumours and vague eye witness accounts of blue camouflage as being used in this theatre, now we have period documentary evidence. All of which is a great basis for further research into these possible Mediterranean schemes.

"fresh paint versus faded, exposure to different weather conditions, which batch/factory the paint came from"

I appreciate the comments but the above is old news and we all know these factors will affect paint and it's colour but we are talking about the possibility of a whole new colour here.

[Caerbannog]

The attached document on the linked page is very interesting but I am not too sure if it really tells us that there actually were blue and green camouflaged aircrafts in the Mediteranian. After all the conclusion in the report is a bit vague. It says that the tested #83 "dark blue" should be used with #72 "black-green" for sea- and with #70 dark green for land- airplanes but this is only a suggestion! It is unclear if the sugestion is to introduce the two combinations (83&72/83&70) or to introduce 83 in the first place and the combination with either 70 or 72 is just another suggestion. Either way: How likely is it that such a suggestion end of 1943 made it to the Mediteranian front?

[Clinton78]

Update from Michael Ullmann:

Hola Folks,
just return from a business trip and read all the comments regarding my postings Hornets Nest and RLM 81/82. Sitting in Front of my computer and I am amazed about that what I read. Maybe now I am again and usual the typical "ugly" German, but my statement to the discussion is:
I am amazed that this discussion absolutely lacked basic knowledge from well published original paper work about RLM-paints and lacquers!
Yes, we haven’t the whole picture, but we have enough for a rough picture. With my discovered facts the history of RLM 81/82 and 83 must be rewritten!


Facts (My quotations are for my second edition Hikoki book)
RLM 81/82 introduced for replacement of RLM 70/71. Yes, enough evidences.
“Nachdunkeln” is the original statement in the text. I also have no better explanation for this, but consider that all RLM-paints, - lacquers and so on are artificial resin lacquers. A technology just invented. Today no one is in the position to make any statement about the behavior of the paint during longer use!!
RLM 81/82 as replacement for RLM 74/75.
Document not discovered yet!
Maybe in Sammelmitteilung 2 under camouflage (page 346) we have more than a hint. Maybe this camouflage guide was the source? But I am pretty sure that this short statement was the source for the mystery of Darkgreen (former RLM 83)/75 camouflage, because the statement was, that RLM 74 discontinued. Today, with my discovered documents the sentence has a different sense: RLM 74/75 was replaced with RLM 81/82, therefore 74 was discontinued, but RLM 75 was used for Nightfighters! Understand everyone this different sense? The discovered documents contain a lot of this missing links.
The variation of RLM 81/82. Sammelmitteilung 1 (page 343) RLM QA received no color charts, therefor no acceptance inspection of the paint’s shade. This is a fact that RLM had published!!
The discovery of the paints in Czech Republic mentioned on the JaPo home page support this. I read the label as RLM 81 and it contain a “Darkgreen Paint”.
This Green/green camouflages (sometimes mentioned as 81/81 camouflage) is nothing more nothing less than a 70/81, 81/70 combination for using up old paint stocks with a, maybe Darkgreen shade of RLM 81 (Page 344, application of color shades 81 and 82, and Do 335 documents, page 268)
I don’ want to be rude or so, when I wrote that the discussion lacked knowledge, but without these basics understanding every discussion is senseless! And the basics are published since years! First you have to read, then to understand and then to discuss!

Again for me now a lot more makes sense. I hope I will discover more documents in the future to bring more light into this darkness.
Looking forward to read your replies.
Best Regards from Germany

[stevehnz]

For Michael, maybe it is wrong to assume that everyone has advanced knowledge of RLM colours & their applications. I am one of many on this & similar forums who have returned to modelling after many years away from it & the research & knowledge that has been accomplished in the last 20-30 years is a mystery to us. We try to get our heads around what is a very complex & confusing topic, not helped by new discoveries which come along to contradict what was previously held as correct. I only know of you by reputation, not having read your book, for the simple fact that since I became as fascinated by this topic as I have, I've been unable to purchase one. Maybe it is time for a third edition. In it I would hope for an introduction for numpties, with a potted history as simple as possible of the colours & their introduction in general terms before plunging into detailed discussion of types, units, theatres etc. I'm sorry if your book already has this, as I said, I've not read it & much of what I have read in other books is so detailed as to confuse the heck out of me. I am though entranced by the research & findings you've produced & would exhort you to continue with this & to share the results with us, unworthy though we may be.

Steve.

[Giorgio N]

All this information coming on the subject is fascinating ! It's interesting to see how the knowledge of late war luftwaffe colour expands continuously. Thanks for posting this information !

[GrahamB]

Hi,

Michael is doing a great job and a lot of the problems stem from misreading of his comments, influenced by preconceptions.

As for the proposition that RLM81 and 82 were introduced because of lack of stability in RLM 70 and 71, this should be taken to be a valid technological advance. Some of the discussion on 12 O'Clock High site surrounds the use of ''darkening' of the latter pair, since this seems wrong in the apparent evidence of photos of weathered aircraft in this scheme. I asked my wife (who speaks very good German/PhD in literature) and this was her response to my question as to whether 'Nachdunkeln' really meant 'darken' (with time) , or perhaps more appropriately, 'dulling [=de-saturation]' (with time) - which is my inference:

It literally means a darkening after the event – so either could do. But since ‘darken’ can be transitive, and this is something being done by the paints themselves, then ‘dulling’ sounds a lot better.

Hope this helps - more grist to the mill, anyway.

Cheers,

GrahamB

[Clinton78]

Graham, thank you for your interesting comments. So perhaps dulling' could also be interpreted as meaning that the paint fades over a period of time?

I think posting something along those lines into the TOCH discussion could help to resolve certain issues Michael is having with the interpretations of the language used in the documents?

Edited May 16, 2013 by Clinton78

[John]

Graham, thank you for your interesting comments. So perhaps dulling' could also be interpreted as meaning that the paint fades over a period of time?

I think posting something along those lines into the TOCH discussion could help to resolve certain issues Michael is having with the interpretations of the language used in the documents?

Or "mattes" over a period of time?

J

[Clinton78]

I added a post to the TOCH discussion Graham and John along the lines of your last posts. I've left you both out of it but let me know and I'll happily add yourselfs as the source and link back to this topic.

[Super Aereo]

Just my five cents: although my German is not as fluent as my French or Italian, Nachdunkeln has Dunkel as a root and Dunkel best translates as "dark" with no particular connotations of fading or matting (even if matting would probably occur anyway with exposure).

[GrahamB]

Hi,

I'm only implying that a paint could become 'duller' or de-saturated with time - without necessarily 'darkening', 'fading' or or 'matting'. We have the same confusion in English when we talk about a 'bright' colour when we might be referring to the intensity of the colour not its light tone. Similarly 'dull' can imply dark, drab - the opposite of bright.

This is as far as I want to take this because it is about the language not the process in RLM 70 and 71's exposure to the elements - about which I'm not really confident to talk about. Perhaps, although these factors (fading, matting) also occurred, it was probably loss of the actual colour/hue that was most important to the Luftwaffe (and it is). I think we are all struggling with this because the evidence seems to point to fading and matting being so obvious.

Cheers,

GrahamB

[John]

Not disagreeing, just pointing out that in some idioms "dull" is a synonym for "matt" :

http://www.testors.com/product/0/1160X/_/Dullcote_Lacquer

J

[Caerbannog]

The german sentence is "the original sentence in German is: "Die nachdunkelnden Farbtöne 70 u. 71 der bisherigen Landtarnung werden abgelöst durch die Farben 281 H olivgrün und B 657 hellgrün ...."

"Nachdunkelnden" does mean they became darker (darker shade, or "more black" maybe). It has nothing to do with shiny or matt finish (flat, dull,...) - it is indeed "to darken". But how it got darker is not written there. Maybe it was a fading of the lighter pigments and the darker ones were UV-stable and so it got darker as explained above. Or it attracted dirt for some reason (unlikely I think but maybe not impossible) so it got darker. Or maybe some chemical reaction??? I know a similar effect from modelling paints (probably anybody here): The freshly applied paint changes sometimes slightly the colour in the drying process. And sometimes it still changes after one or two days (slightly!). I noticed this on matt grey colours. Whatever was the reason - what is written there is that the colour became darker (a darker shade).

[GrahamB]

Hi Caerbannog,

I completely agree, and said previously, that 'nachdunkelnden' (should have checked the full sentence) literally means 'became darker'. As you say, the darkening could be achieved several ways - it is the usual interpretation from photos that the colours faded/lightened/de-saturated with exposure that makes this difficult to understand. This may be a red herring though if it relates to effects immediately after application - which is what you are suggesting. Nice one.

Cheers,

Graham

[Nick Millman]

The performance properties of coatings cannot be generalised. For example lead pigmented paints darken with exposure to atmospheric sulfides. Ruths of Hamburg reported their belief that the artificial resins manufactured by W&B used sulphur in the process which was efficacious in improving their adherence to metal alloys. The use of such resins might have been catalytic to darkening paint and as a result revised pigments, intended to offset these effects, introduced. The only way to truly understand what nachdunkelnden implied would be to read the output report of the scientific analysis of the phenomenon by the paint technicians concerned which led to the change - if that has survived. It might be possible to get some clues from an understanding of the constituents of the paints concerned but even that is fraught with difficulties. Some W&B formulae have been published but that for 1942 RLM 70, for example, lists pigments only by generic colour and (presumably) a catalogue or stores number - 'Blue 1152', 'Green 719', 'Black 1297', 'Yellow 420' - with no indication as to their actual chemical composition. RLM 71 contained Chromium Yellow (a lead chromate) which does darken significantly when exposed to hydrogen sulfide in the atmosphere.

Colour is only one attribute of paint coatings and there is a tendency for modellers to discuss that attribute in the one-dimensional visual terms of apparent appearance with such generalisations as 'fading', 'UV', etc., as though these were a constant. This is not surprising as the different types of damage typical of UV, light, and IR result from their different photon energies. The photochemistry that underlies much of the disintegration of materials and the production of yellow by-products typical of UV exposure requires energies greater than about 3 eV, whereas the photochemistry typical of colourant fading, as well as the operation of our retina, occurs in a range between about 2 eV and 3 eV. We are fated to see in the same band as that where sensitive colours fade or degrade, given the related photochemical phenomena. However, the constituents of the paint film, including pigment, may react to environmental or exposure factors in different and divergent ways and not always consistently.

"Coatings fail because of irreversable changes which occur in the film as a result of exposure to a variety of possible stresses. The changes in a coating leading to failure are almost exclusively physical and may include phenomena such as gloss loss, colour change, dirt retention, chalking, cracking, delamination, blistering, fouling and corrosion. The stresses that give rise to failure may be large and short lived (e.g. impact) or small and long lived, often cyclic in nature. Moreover, the changes in physical properties of the coating are often a consequence of underlying chemical processes occurring in the coating."

(The Chemistry and Physics of Coatings by A R Marrion (RSC 2004))

Nick