Early Hurricane roundels - bright or dull red/blue roundels ?

[Basilisk]

Were the roundels on pre-war Hurricanes in bright or dull read and blue?

According to an article in Model Aircraft Monthly November 2005 covering early Hurricanes, it says "An RAE Note on Camouflage Painting of Aircraft dated 19 March 1936 gives the revised form of roundels as being Yellow, Dull Blue, White and Dull red..."

Is it known if Hawker used the new dull colours or kept using the bright colours?

I am asking because the roundels on the Xtradecal X72193 covering Fabric Wing Hurricanes has all roundels in the bright colours. Is this correct?

Interestingly, the new Xtradecal sheet on the Blenheim has all roundels in the dull colours.

Any insights are much appreciated.

Cheers, Peter

[Dave Fleming]

It should be the dull shades, but IIRC Paul Lucas found evidence on some relics that some manufacturers (Gloster for example) continued to use the 'bright' colours into 1940

[Troy Smith]

An interesting question Peter.

Hard to give a definitive answer.

This may help? rare pre war colour shot. This is done at squadron level, post munich crisis i presume, to paint out the A1 types.

Colour balance maybe off, as seen in other pics from same session

There was a also this clip, http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/60896-601-sqdn-hurricanes-markings/

HTH

T

[Basilisk]

It should be the dull shades, but IIRC Paul Lucas found evidence on some relics that some manufacturers (Gloster for example) continued to use the 'bright' colours into 1940

I remember reading this too. In the same article as mentioned in my first post, it also noted: "It is interesting to note that although the new dull colours were supposed to be used, some manufacturers continued to use bright red and blue colours for some considerable time with DTD Technical Circulars being issued on this subject as late as 1941!"

Troy, great pictures. The roundel in the first picture looks dull colours to me, but the last two could be bright colours (maybe Gloster built aircraft).

I guess everything could be possible during a time the roundels had been changed so frequently (prior the BOB).

Cheers, Peter

[Edgar]

According to Bruce Robertson (who knew a bit about these things) dull red and blue were for night bombers, with day bombers and fighters remaining in bright colours.

With roundels being a recognition feature, and therefore meant to be seen (in daylight) it seems a mite strange to try to hide them.

Again, according to Mr. Robertson (and a previous head of research at Hendon,) colours were bright or matt until 1942, and dull colours began from that date, lasting until 1947.

In July 1942 4 Group, B.C., signalled that they wanted to use dull red and blue in place of the present colours, in fact they had already started; for this they got a rocket, but, in August, the Ministry proposed to follow suit, which seems a mite strange if their roundels were already dull.

[Black Knight]

The Hurris in the first three photos are Hawker built. I think the ones in the next two are Gloster built - it looks like the fin striping takes up the whole of the fin, the red going to the leading edge rather than being a stripe - this being common on Gloster built Hurricanes.

[JasonC]

With roundels being a recognition feature, and therefore meant to be seen (in daylight) it seems a mite strange to try to hide them.

Presumably for the same reason that the 'B' roundel contains no white, and the same reason for the introduction of the 'C' roundel. Namely that there is such a thing as being too visible.

J.

[Nick Millman]

The wartime MAP swatch book and paint stores lists contain only 'Blue' and 'Red'. The 1976 RAF Museum book chip chart shows Blue and Red which are exactly similar to the colours that have been termed 'Dull Blue' and 'Dull Red', but also shows 'Matt Blue' and 'Matt Red' which are exactly similar to the pre and post war 'bright' colours.

In Camo & Markings # 2 on the BoB Paul Lucas listed partial stores numbers for Blue and Red which gave the impression of more than one colour under that category but in fact the numbers just refer to whether the paint is cellulose or synthetic and the size of the container. In the text he describes 'Blue', 'Red', 'Bright Blue' and 'Bright Red'.

In Appendix 1 to AMO A.664 of 2.7.42 the terms Red and Blue are used for roundels and the only use of 'Dull Red' is in regard to code letters. I'm struggling to find the terms 'Dull' or 'Bright' in any other markings standards.

Nick

[Max Headroom]

Off topic strictly speaking but here are a couple of photos off the net - copyright unknown but if infringed I will remove them.

They appear to be 'somewhere in Canada?' . One appears to show dull colours and the other glossy.

I have no idea what this proves other than apparently both were in use

Trevor

[RJP]

The two Battles are in service with the RCAF, possibly at 1 BGS Jarvis Ontario. The first carries RCAF serial 1604. The second is from the Warner Bros. film "Captains of the Clouds"; that's James Cagney on the wing. The movie was shot in Technicolor using service aircraft, just taken as they were found . I don't believe there was any makeup applied for the camera.

That said, we are adding another layer of confusion as the RCAF sourced paints locally. Might that explain the high gloss blue in the roundel on 1604 and the brighter yellow used in the trainer markings on wing and rear fuselage compared to the (presumably, production) roundel?

[Edgar]

In a 1939 list of colours, there are the following (and remember that low numbers were oldest):-

Materials used on fabric components:-

33B-69/70 Dull Blue;

33B-73/74 Dull Red

Colour Identification Cellulose matt:-

33B-166/167 Red;

33B-164/165 Blue

Materials to DTD314

Colour Identification Oil Varnish matt:-

33B-174/175 Red;

33B-172/173 Blue.

So, in 1939, there were three different types of "identification" colours, not just one.

[Max Headroom]

RJP

Interesting info. I hadn't considered a repaint and thought that they got them 'as is' from the UK?

Trevor

[Nick Millman]

In a 1939 list of colours, there are the following (and remember that low numbers were oldest):-

Materials used on fabric components:-

33B-69/70 Dull Blue;

33B-73/74 Dull Red

Colour Identification Cellulose matt:-

33B-166/167 Red;

33B-164/165 Blue

Materials to DTD314

Colour Identification Oil Varnish matt:-

33B-174/175 Red;

33B-172/173 Blue.

So, in 1939, there were three different types of "identification" colours, not just one.

The numbers after 33B refer only to the size of container. Thus 73 is half-gallon cellulose to DTD 83A or 308 whilst 74 is 1 gallon. 174 is half-gallon synthetic to DTD 314 or 517and 175 one gallon synthetic to DTD 314 or 517. Etc. In later lists containers 69/70 and 73/74 are listed simply as Blue and Red.

Containers 164-167 were subsequently dropped from the stores listing which might or might not be significant.

Nick

[Graham Boak]

The lower numbers and their names could be consistent with the colours used on the Nivo finish for night bombers (and if not, then what are?). RAF staff officers would be familiar with these colours which may help to explain the continued use of the "Dull" terms.

[RJP]

Trevor,

I think you are right. By and large, I believe RAF machines sent to Canada were not repainted unless necessary. New paint would likely have been from RCAF stores. I think that's what the roundels on 1604 might be. It also has some previous marking showing under the white fuselage band. A unit code or part of an old roundel?

The Australian War Memorial website has a shot of Battle 1934 at 5BGS Dafoe Saskatchewan. It shows an interesting mix of old and new paint, and maybe different shades of standard colours. Its new RCAF serial is painted on a yellow patch over the original British one. The fuselage has an oblique white band with a big number 57 painted right over what looks like the MSG squadron codes of a previous owner. Two letters are showing clearly, never removed. I imagine it was an ex-squadron machine? The yellow wing, fuselage and tail patches and brand new Type A upper wing roundels are quite fresh but the underlying camouflage is stained and generally ugly.

Edited July 18, 2014 by RJP

[Nick Millman]

The lower numbers and their names could be consistent with the colours used on the Nivo finish for night bombers (and if not, then what are?). RAF staff officers would be familiar with these colours which may help to explain the continued use of the "Dull" terms.

As already stated (!) the numbers refer to container sizes and type of finish but are unique to each colour. The numbers run horizontally on the table below against a single colour designation. You will see 69/70 and 73/74 listed simply as Blue and Red.

Nick

[Edgar]

Technical Circular 360 was issued in 1943, by which time, according to Robertson, dull colours were (back?) in.

[Graham Boak]

Yes Nick, it was noted, but in itself did not solve the problem. Although 69 etc. were cellulose and thus for use on fabric, the existence of 164 etc. showed that in 1939 two different paints were available for use on fabric, for each roundel colour. The more recent of which was deleted by 1943. You suggest this might be significant, and I am sure you are right. This is entirely consistent with an original dull set of colours being supplemented by a bright set for peacetime, and the bright set then being withdrawn in wartime. With some confusion as noted. The problem then is reduced to a matter of inadequate (from our point of view) naming of the colours.

[Nick Millman]

Yes Nick, it was noted, but in itself did not solve the problem. Although 69 etc. were cellulose and thus for use on fabric, the existence of 164 etc. showed that in 1939 two different paints were available for use on fabric, for each roundel colour. The more recent of which was deleted by 1943. You suggest this might be significant, and I am sure you are right. This is entirely consistent with an original dull set of colours being supplemented by a bright set for peacetime, and the bright set then being withdrawn in wartime. With some confusion as noted. The problem then is reduced to a matter of inadequate (from our point of view) naming of the colours.

I suspect that 164-167 referenced a matt cellulose based paint intended for application to metal and wood rather than fabric, probably to DTD 308. IIRC the DTD spec was differentiated on the containers. This might be the Matt Blue and Matt Red shown in the RAF Museum book chart which are 'bright'.

Nick

[Troy Smith]

Not a Hurricane, and usual caveats about old colour pics, this one is pretty amazing though as an image, even if not for colour, though to me they look about right.

for those who have not seen it, Etienne Du Plessis has a flickr stream of colour photos of RAF and FAA aircraft here

https://www.flickr.com/photos/8270787@N07/sets/72157605269786717/

well worth a look as lots of great photos. There are a few prewar colour shots too, like the Hurricanes above

[AnonymousAA72]

Not a Hurricane, and usual caveats about old colour pics, this one is pretty amazing though as an image, even if not for colour, though to me they look about right.

for those who have not seen it, Etienne Du Plessis has a flickr stream of colour photos of RAF and FAA aircraft here

https://www.flickr.com/photos/8270787@N07/sets/72157605269786717/

well worth a look as lots of great photos. There are a few prewar colour shots too, like the Hurricanes above

That is one helluva collection there.....wow!

[Basilisk]

Some great information here.

According to Bruce Robertson (who knew a bit about these things) dull red and blue were for night bombers, with day bombers and fighters remaining in bright colours.

The RAE Note I mentioned in my first post also stated that "the dull shades were those already in use on night flying aircraft".

With roundels being a recognition feature, and therefore meant to be seen (in daylight) it seems a mite strange to try to hide them.

Wasn't this the reason the yellow outer ring was added?

Presumably for the same reason that the 'B' roundel contains no white, and the same reason for the introduction of the 'C' roundel. Namely that there is such a thing as being too visible.

My thoughts too. Surely the idea of recognition changed after the Munich crises. But there were still the black and white lower surface colours left for recognition purposes.

Reading between the line, it is nearly impossible to know if dull or bright was used, And adding fading to the equation, a wide range of tones are possible.

By the way, one thing struck me as odd when seeing this picture posted by Troy (this was maybe covered previously).

The brown colour on the Hurricanes is noticeable lighter than the brown on the transport plane in the background. The brown on the transport aircraft looks like Dark Earth, but the brown on the Hurricane looks like Light Earth (compared to the colour chips in British Aviation Colours of WW2). And the same is the case with the green. Could these two Hurricanes been painted in Light Earth and Green normally used for biplanes? Hey, everything could be possible

Cheers, Peter

[Troy Smith]

Some great information here.

The RAE Note I mentioned in my first post also stated that "the dull shades were those already in use on night flying aircraft".

Wasn't this the reason the yellow outer ring was added?

My thoughts too. Surely the idea of recognition changed after the Munich crises. But there were still the black and white lower surface colours left for recognition purposes.

Reading between the line, it is nearly impossible to know if dull or bright was used, And adding fading to the equation, a wide range of tones are possible.

By the way, one thing struck me as odd when seeing this picture posted by Troy (this was maybe covered previously).

The brown colour on the Hurricanes is noticeable lighter than the brown on the transport plane in the background. The brown on the transport aircraft looks like Dark Earth, but the brown on the Hurricane looks like Light Earth (compared to the colour chips in British Aviation Colours of WW2). And the same is the case with the green. Could these two Hurricanes been painted in Light Earth and Green normally used for biplanes? Hey, everything could be possible

Cheers, Peter

Anything is possible, but some things are less likely.

More likely is the transport [a Harrow?] is in non standard colours. Or is it French? Got to go, no time to check the original thread.

[John]

The transport has the somewhat brooding look of the Armstrong Whitworth Ensign.

John

[occa]

Some great information here.

The RAE Note I mentioned in my first post also stated that "the dull shades were those already in use on night flying aircraft".

Wasn't this the reason the yellow outer ring was added?

My thoughts too. Surely the idea of recognition changed after the Munich crises. But there were still the black and white lower surface colours left for recognition purposes.

Reading between the line, it is nearly impossible to know if dull or bright was used, And adding fading to the equation, a wide range of tones are possible.

By the way, one thing struck me as odd when seeing this picture posted by Troy (this was maybe covered previously).

The brown colour on the Hurricanes is noticeable lighter than the brown on the transport plane in the background. The brown on the transport aircraft looks like Dark Earth, but the brown on the Hurricane looks like Light Earth (compared to the colour chips in British Aviation Colours of WW2). And the same is the case with the green. Could these two Hurricanes been painted in Light Earth and Green normally used for biplanes? Hey, everything could be possible

Cheers, Peter

Same result to me if you compare color photos of heavy bombers but I was told it cannot be cause it cannot be ...

There are photos in Freeman's RAF of WW two in color that show Oxfords and Ansons for example had the significantly darker colors too ...

Edited July 19, 2014 by occa