robvulcan Posted July 29, 2014 Author Share Posted July 29, 2014 What a wonderful yet also sad photo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElectroSoldier Posted July 29, 2014 Share Posted July 29, 2014 (edited) I think the problem here is semantics. The SEA scheme is 3 greens over black were the green covers the upper surfaces.SIOP is 3 greens over white (the same greens each time) were the green covers the sides and upper surfaces. People seem to think because its the same 3 greens on SEA as on SIOP then SEA is SIOP blah blah blah.It isnt!This is SIOP, if you have a photo of a real B-52D wearing this i would really like to see it! http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a385/Unix_the_Devil/6515_bz-b52-16.jpg Edited July 29, 2014 by ElectroSoldier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panoz Posted July 29, 2014 Share Posted July 29, 2014 (edited) These are the top surface colours for both SIOP & SEA camos as per T.O.1-1-4 illustrated using the FS colour server: http://www.colorserver.net/showcolor.asp?fs=34201+34159+34079 And a screen grab for convenience: Compare with the B-52 scrapyard photo (now reposted in a more manageable size): I think that the uppersurfaces colours are the same. It's just that we get the impression that they are different due to the black fin & undersides on the D models ie it's an optical illusion. Just food for thought. Edited July 29, 2014 by Panoz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElectroSoldier Posted July 29, 2014 Share Posted July 29, 2014 I dont think they are the same, I know they are the same!!! What I do know is that is NOT the same SEA camo scheme as worn by tactical jets like the F-111 and F-4. The problem is F-111A = SEA scheme B-52D = SEA scheme The name is the same, the colours are different! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robvulcan Posted July 29, 2014 Author Share Posted July 29, 2014 Well this is interesting and I won't forget what colours they are now. It's got one big plus that's its giving me huge inspiration to build more USAF stuff. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giorgio N Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 Yes, it's a matter of semantics mainly... And yes, the SIOP scheme is only the one with white undersurfaces (although there was a single G with wraparound greens for testing) Yes, the SEA scheme for the bombers is 3 greens on top and black undersides and fin. As per TO 1-1-4 The confusion comes from the fact that there are claims that the SEA scheme used the colours seen on non SAC aircrafts, something that I'm not convinced of. IMHO the picture above shows that the 3 top colours are the same, only in different weathering conditions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robvulcan Posted July 30, 2014 Author Share Posted July 30, 2014 It could be weathering and for a while they looked the same but this morning looking at the smaller photo it looks like the tans are different also the older black bottomed ones seem to have more vivid pigmentation despite thier fading of the colours. The tan on them looks brown but on the white bottomed ones the tans look greeny to my eyes. Not saying that's a fact its just what I see in that photo. I wonder if this kind of debate is now why everything gets painted grey hahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 This doesn't help! Yes it is painted in SEA Tan. It was a faulty batch of paint that faded in UV light. See the Tan along the top of the intake? That was the original colour. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haydn Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 I still find that dodgy tan paint story very hard to beleive !!!! Rob - if you go here and down load or open the pdf you can see 3 B-52D models painted in the two ways discussed here so you can get an idea of what you would like your model to look like !..... http://usaf-sig.org/index.php/component/content/article/86-sig-stuff/478-usaf-sig-display-at-the-ipms-nationals-telford-2002 Cheers, Haydn. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robvulcan Posted July 30, 2014 Author Share Posted July 30, 2014 Cheers guys and nice phantom shots, that's another I have long wanted to build ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 Here it is again after repaint with better quality paint. Here's a Lakenheath bird after repaint and fade. Note the Tan on the fin to save masking out the tailcodes. And again. Lets muddy the waters a little more. Bentwaters bird when first painted out of Grey/white. Note the lack of fin codes. Is it Green/Green/Grey? 3 Greens? You decide. Note the early model 'Winder. Going by the Leading Edge, I would suggest this was repainted in the faulty paint, and it has worn off, showing the Tan underneath. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robvulcan Posted July 30, 2014 Author Share Posted July 30, 2014 Lets muddy the waters a little more. Bentwaters bird when first painted out of Grey/white. Note the lack of fin codes. Irony that Muddy waters are also in the SEA scheme it seems.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElectroSoldier Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 I dont think it muddys the waters at all.The Phantom paint is easy to explain and understand.We are talking about applying a TAC paint scheme to a SAC bomber Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f4h1phantom Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 (edited) Lets muddy the waters a little more. Bentwaters bird when first painted out of Grey/white. Note the lack of fin codes. Is it Green/Green/Grey? 3 Greens? You decide. Note the early model 'Winder. Going by the Leading Edge, I would suggest this was repainted in the faulty paint, and it has worn off, showing the Tan underneath. The last two pictures you post have nothing to do with the "pea green" colour used in the "three greens" scheme. BTW, after studying as many pictures as I have come across, it seems obvious to me that the "pea green" was applied intentionally over perfectly sound tan paint. That was around 1976/1977 Your pictures show the GREY color that was applied over tan areas on many F-4s in many theaters (USA, Europe, Vietnam) around 1967, a good ten years before the three greens appeared. The first picture is a F-4D and it appears, because of the missile loadout, that the second is a F-4E. Both experimental schemes appear to have used some removable paint of some sort, hence the fading showing the (again, perfectly sound) tan paint underneath. Check Vietnam pictures from that period and you are in for a lot of suprises. Here's just two pics that show the grey to advantage: HTH, Jorge. Edited July 31, 2014 by f4h1phantom 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robvulcan Posted July 31, 2014 Author Share Posted July 31, 2014 Whatever it is the Phantom looks good in it. Pea green grey or tan. Then phantoms would look good in any scheme 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f4h1phantom Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Whatever it is the Phantom looks good in it. Pea green grey or tan. Then phantoms would look good in any scheme Agree 100%! Jorge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robvulcan Posted July 31, 2014 Author Share Posted July 31, 2014 Perhaps we should change the name of the topic to disscussion on USAF 3 colour camo or something similar. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 The 3 Greens on the F-4 question has come up before, and the tale of the dodgy paint was given as the answer. However at the time, Air Pictorial did a feature on the 3 Greens, stating it was an intentional repaint. Sadly I no longer have my copy of the publication. AP had access to Lakeheath at the time, and other USAFE F-4s were painted likewise. I'm not saying the USAF didn't buy some cheap paint, but having commented on the AP article before, I was cried down over it. By illustrating the F-4, my point is that there are always variations to 'Official orders'. When I built my B-52 (Monogram 1/72) The call out was SEA and the FS numbers for Green/Green/SEA Tan over black. That was how I painted it, but looking at it and photographs, I believe SAC Tan to be correct. Either way it will be repainted in NMF over White in the near future. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElectroSoldier Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 (edited) bentwaters81tfw I The 3 Greens on the F-4 question has come up before, and the tale of the dodgy paint was given as the answer. However at the time, Air Pictorial did a feature on the 3 Greens, stating it was an intentional repaint. Sadly I no longer have my copy of the publication. AP had access to Lakeheath at the time, and other USAFE F-4s were painted likewise. I'm not saying the USAF didn't buy some cheap paint, but having commented on the AP article before, I was cried down over it. By illustrating the F-4, my point is that there are always variations to 'Official orders'. When I built my B-52 (Monogram 1/72) The call out was SEA and the FS numbers for Green/Green/SEA Tan over black. That was how I painted it, but looking at it and photographs, I believe SAC Tan to be correct. Either way it will be repainted in NMF over White in the near future. I know what you mean, when I built mine I painted them in the standard TAC sea camo scheme.But having looked I cant find picture that proves the B-52D was painted with the tan paint like the TAC jets were... http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/0/2/5/0703520.jpg I think this is, Ive used a colour picker on it and its tan, but then having said that Ive seen them wrong in the past because the way the colours are made up by single pixels and colour picker tools use single pixels to guage a colour. Show me a jet painted in TAC SEA camo and Im ready to believe it is possible, until then it didnt happen. Edited July 31, 2014 by ElectroSoldier 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Nice one ES. However you may want to replace that image with a link as Airliners.net get a bit funny over copywrite, and the Mods will be on your backside over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElectroSoldier Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Cheers.Didnt realise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giorgio N Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 The pictures of those phantoms are very interesting in any case. I've seen the "faulty" paint explanation given by people who were working on Phantoms at the time, a number of these appeared both in Europe and in the US but all seem to have been repainted pretty quickly with the standard tan. Different story about those in Vietnam: here I believe the matter is that FS 230219 is/was not the best paint in terms of durability. Nick Nillman on another thread somewhere had explained as the pigments used could turn green over time. Considering the harsh environment of Vietnam I'm not surprised that the tan lost it's red component quickly. The Phantom pictures are also interesting because show very well one other difference between the "tactical" SEA scheme (34079, 340102, 30219) and the SAC SEA scheme (34079, 34159, 34201 over black): the lighter green is very different !!!! FS 34102 is an olive green, it may vary with age but remains an olive green unless very heavily faded. FS 34159 is a grey-green with a bluish tinge, and looks nothing like 34102. So much that personally I always look at this green more than at the tan to tell a SEA from a tactical scheme ! While I've seen pictures of B-52Ds with a tan that looked almost as red (or pink) as 34219, I've never seen a picture of a B-52D where the lighter green is clearly an olive green like FS 34102. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plumbum Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Actually this is the closest thing to a 1/144 B-52D. I built this kit around 1969 or 1970 time frame. I think it is the old B-52 that came with the X-15 from very early 60s. I believe it is actually 1/178 because it is an old box scale kit, whatever the box it fits in is it's scale! As I remember it has no landing gear and must be built wheels up. It is shape wise pretty good but not a whole lot of detail. I purchased one last year reboxed by a company named ADVENT. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robvulcan Posted August 7, 2014 Author Share Posted August 7, 2014 Johnv that looks like a great kit looks like a B-52 for sure I love kits like this, the box scale ones are cool and ooze charm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Cringe. Undersize engines and oversize incorrect shaped tanks. Not sure about the fin either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now