Jump to content

Tomahawk colour question


stevej60

Recommended Posts

Hi folks could someone confirm the colours of RAF tomahawks of 26 Sqn based at Gatwick.I would like to build RM-D AH893

for the P40 GB.One further question on looking at a clear photo of a trio of them they are camera equipped which complicates

things, were they carried on the one side or both?

Edited by stevej60
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I reckon it'd be DE & DG over sky. The Hannants Tomahawk decals sheet has RM-E in that scheme.

Of course, I could be wrong... it could've been in US equivalent paints.

Many thanks photographs seem to show that scheme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm no expert on this, but I really like Martin T's example here:

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234948421-airfix-172nd-tomahawk-iia/

He definitely put a lot of thought and skill into it, and I'd have a hard time arguing with the result.

Thanks for the link looks great, I am happy to do the camera mod but hope a bit more info is forthcoming regards the under surface markings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From my blog: http://greenshirt-modeler.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/shark-tank.html

The colors of Dark Green, Dark Earth and Sky as used on Tomahawks is the subject of debate. I am quite happy with the colors described by Nick Millman on his blog; generally there is agreement that Curtiss used Dupont paints 71-013 for Dark Green, 71-065 (or possibly 71-009!) for Dark Earth and 71-021 for Sky. Ultimately I chose paints that appear very close to these colors as depicted on Nick's blog. I will not enter into any debates on what color Dupont 71-021 is, some believe it to be a bluish gray, others a greenish gray. It's your model, paint it they way you want it.

The hobby paints I used were:

Dark Green -- Dupont 71-013, Model Master 1764

Dark Earth -- Dupont 71-065, Tamiya XF-52

Sky -- Dupont 71-021, Humbrol 23

Nick will probably come along with better info.

Tim

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been planning on building one of these early RAF Tomahawks myself. But one factor bothered me. If the undersurfaces were Dupont 'Sky', why is the tone on the photographs the same as the Medium Sea Grey codes? As I have understood matters, the U.S. colour was slightly more grey and lighter than the British colour whereas the 'Sky' spinner and band are obviously lighter than the underside tone. My suspicion is that the delivery undersurface colour was the same as or similar to the Light Grey then being applied to the U.S. Navy's aircraft. Ian Baker put forward the likely idea that since these early machines were on the cash-and-carry contracts of 1940 at a time when the USAAC hadn't yet decided on a what type of permanent camouflage finish for their own aircraft, Curtiss may have used colours based on the then current U.S. pre-war series. These may have been No.30 Dark Green,and No.34 Rust Brown as being the nearest to the British colours as was immediately available. No.30 & 34 are quite dark and photographs that I have seen do appear to show somewhat darker tones and lower contrast than I noticed on British painted aircraft in 1941.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding is that Curtiss documentation survives stating that the Dupont colours were those used, or perhaps to be used. My understanding of Dupont 71-021 is that it is indeed greyer but not lighter than Sky. Hopefully NIck will clarify, if anything more than his blog needs to be said.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

". . . at Duxford I found AH863 still on trials and firing her guns at the butts on April 5, 1941. AH861 was there, too, and the markings on these two typified those of Tomahawks. Both were camouflaged Dark Green and Dark Earth, and had duck egg green under surfaces. Sky spinners and rear fuselage 18 inch bands were worn."

From Fighting Colours by Michael J F Bowyer (Patrick Stephens 1969 & 1975), my emphasis.

On August 18 1941 Mr Bowyer recorded AH848 in the same colours. Late in 1941 Mr Bowyer also recorded AH947 and AK137 at Bottisham in the same colours.

If the under surfaces had appeared to be light grey Mr Bowyer would probably have noticed that and recorded it as a matter of interest. Since the spinners and fuselage bands were painted after delivery any tonal difference to the undersurface colours seen in greyscale is inconclusive, even before planes of reflection and angles of illumination are considered. But actually the photographs do not consistently show those significant contrasts. Two Life photographs show spinners which appear to be identical to the under surfaces. Besides, Mr Bowyer also makes the point that spinners and bands often appeared paler than the under surface colour, showing such variation even on RAF types.
In general the RAF and US manufacturers articulated the under surface colour requirement as "duck egg blue" rather than Sky. It is difficult to envisage how light greys might have been considered as suitable substitutes or mistaken for a colour described that way.
Tomahawks sent to the Middle East in Temperate Land scheme (TLS) colours were also described as painted brown and green with greyish green undersurfaces.
Another consideration is that 26 Sqn operated Tomahawks briefly and AH893 from June to October 1941. Although the well-known photo of RM-D leading RM-E and RM-Y appears to show it in TLS, 26 was one of the squadrons designated to undertake tactical training and fly sorties over Europe under Fighter Command and from its airfields (Kenley in their case), reportedly with the selected aircraft being re-painted in Day Fighter scheme (DFS) colours specifically for that purpose. The aircraft were required to fly Rhubarbs in pairs during cloudy weather and at heights not exceeding 2,000 ft. The changeover to DFS for all Tomahawk squadrons was gradual and Mr Bowyer recorded RZ-E, RZ-F and RZ-L of 241 Sqn at Bottisham still in TLS colours (with Sky under surfaces) on 6 January 1942 and NM-Q and NM-D at Snailwell in TLS (with Sky under surfaces) on 31 March 1942. But then RZ-J and AH928 were recorded at Bottisham in DFS on 2 April 1942. Two days later he recorded HB-T AH789 and AH982 also in DFS, observing that those colours were pretty much standard by August 1942.
PS Also perhaps worth mentioning that the reflectivity of Medium Sea Grey was 26% whereas the USN light grey was around 35-36% so should have appeared lighter than the codes anyway, all things being equal. But really speculating about colour from greyscale tonal contrasts is just that - speculation.
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Nick. I can go with you with this. One point though. Paul Lucas pointed out some while ago that 'Sky Blue' was still being used in lieu of 'Sky' in 1941. Might those spinners and fighter bands be that colour?

Possibly. That question has been discussed here before with various viewpoints expressed!

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/65834-raf-fuselage-bands-and-spinners-sky-or-light-blue/

5 pages for perusal! And it has come up before with the same photos discussed. One thing to note in the colour photographs is how light and unsaturated the Sky can appear, almost like a creamy light grey or off-white, which is consistent with some of Mr Bowyer's observations. This could be down to storage and preparation issues with the RAF stores stocks of the paint vs the factory applications. The ratio of coloured pigment to white in Sky paints was really quite small and the tendency for both the yellow and blue pigments to clump would have been a factor. It is doubtful that the paint manufacturers at that time would have had the same quality of manufacture so milling and dispersability was probably not consistent. The paint finding its way into RAF stores might not have been equal in quality to that being used by aircraft manufacturers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possibly. That question has been discussed here before with various viewpoints expressed!

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/65834-raf-fuselage-bands-and-spinners-sky-or-light-blue/

5 pages for perusal! And it has come up before with the same photos discussed. One thing to note in the colour photographs is how light and unsaturated the Sky can appear, almost like a creamy light grey or off-white, which is consistent with some of Mr Bowyer's observations. This could be down to storage and preparation issues with the RAF stores stocks of the paint vs the factory applications. The ratio of coloured pigment to white in Sky paints was really quite small and the tendency for both the yellow and blue pigments to clump would have been a factor. It is doubtful that the paint manufacturers at that time would have had the same quality of manufacture so milling and dispersability was probably not consistent. The paint finding its way into RAF stores might not have been equal in quality to that being used by aircraft manufacturers.

Nick,Many thanks for the colour information I have decals on order for a 26 sqn machine and due to the fact there is an all white soviet offering on the sheet

have extended my build to two aircraft,can i assume this would have been a white distemper over the delivery scheme?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick,Many thanks for the colour information I have decals on order for a 26 sqn machine and due to the fact there is an all white soviet offering on the sheet

have extended my build to two aircraft,can i assume this would have been a white distemper over the delivery scheme?

I presume so, yes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is doubtful that the paint manufacturers at that time would have had the same quality of manufacture so milling and dispersability was probably not consistent. The paint finding its way into RAF stores might not have been equal in quality to that being used by aircraft manufacturers.

I find this surprising on a number of points. Firstly, that the paint manufacturers should suddenly have become incompetent at their profession of colour matching. Secondly, why should the quality of paints delivered to manufacturers differ at all from those delivered to the RAF? Thirdly, why is it that this failure to match the specified colour always results in a shade lighter than that required? And finally, why the resulting colour is such a close match to another colour in RAF stores, namely Sky Blue? It was the same manufacturers making Sky as making Sky Blue - does it not seem likely to you that they would have noticed the resemblance before delivery?

Whereas we do know that at least one MU painting this trim onto RAF fighters did not know what colour was referred to as "Sky" late into 1940.

For a modeller this historic quibble doesn't really matter. The colour needed for the model looks more like Sky Blue than it looks like the underside Sky in the same photos. You can take some Sky and add a little blue and a little white if you wish. Or you can just buy a tin of Sky Blue off the shelf. If it looks like a duck... (egg jokes resisted.)

Edited by Graham Boak
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see why there would be any difference in paint quality between that supplied to factories and that to RAF, BUT if I understand Nick correctly, any "clumping" of colour pigments that was inadequately returned to suspension would be deducted from the white base, thereby resulting in "a shade lighter than required". I can imagine (it is a definite fact that I can imagine!) that the manufacturers might go through a larger volume than an RAF station/MU, thus (perhaps) offering less opportunity for the colour pigments to get together and go off into some dark corner of the tin.

Now, as for that whole "looks blue" question, I'll duck that argument!

bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Graham - don't be surprised - it is not about incompetence or inherent colour but the quality of the paint manufacture and the implications of that (together with preparation) for the appearance of the colour after application. To clarify I wasn't referring to Sky looking like Sky Blue but just to variance in the Sky paints so my comments might have confused. The most typical result of clumping in Sky paints would have been a decrease in dispersal of yellow and blue pigment therefore making the colour look whiter or creamier. Exactly the impression given in some colour photographs of the spinners and bands.

There was not a single manufacturer providing paints to the aircraft factories and the RAF. There were several manufacturers supplying paints under contract and extant documentation shows that the formulae used for ostensibly identical colours were not the same. Not all paints were the same, even if they bore the same colour name. Even today there are many qualities and classes of the same pigment colour. At the blog there is a detailed account of post-war RN trials of Extra Dark Sea Grey where it is apparent that the Cellon and Docker versions of that paint colour were not at all the same in the way that they behaved once applied to the aircraft.

Even in 2015 Humbrol can't provide a perfectly consistent quality and colour from batch to batch

It was not a failure to match the colour per se but the combination of a number of characteristics relating to the composition of the paint. The variance of and paler Sky shades are well documented by Messrs Bowyer, Huntley and Rupert-Moore.


I don't see why there would be any difference in paint quality between that supplied to factories and that to RAF, BUT if I understand Nick correctly, any "clumping" of colour pigments that was inadequately returned to suspension would be deducted from the white base, thereby resulting in "a shade lighter than required". I can imagine (it is a definite fact that I can imagine!) that the manufacturers might go through a larger volume than an RAF station/MU, thus (perhaps) offering less opportunity for the colour pigments to get together and go off into some dark corner of the tin.

Now, as for that whole "looks blue" question, I'll duck that argument!

bob

Absolutely correct and the individual painting practices (factory vs MU) introduce inevitable variance.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi

I remember when working with MOD painters, years ago, On any job they did they always used paint from tins with the same batch number, and if not from the same batch number they mixed the different batch numbered tins together before using them, as paint not only varied between manufacturers but also batches from each manufacturer.

old paint was strained through fine mesh to remove the lumps before use.

Presumably the colours would change on a scale model kit from the full size a/c anyway due to the different lighting effects at the smaller scale.

cheers

jerry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny, that's the way house painters do it too.

The guy in Home Depot also knows this and sold me 2 gallons of paint and a big bucket to mix them together. The living room looks better than it might have otherwise. :winkgrin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yet, automotive paint finishers have little trouble matching colours that were laid down years or even decades ago.

Simply not true.

http://www.autobodysupply.net/Articles.asp?ID=140

There are plenty of tales of woe out there. Matching the colour for application is one thing. What happens after the paint has cured is another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to expand on this a little and courtesy of Edgar's diligence in researching the National Archives an undated circular letter (probably early May 1940) was sent to Resident Technical Officers (RTO) referencing a letter of 5 January 1940 on the subject of achieving smooth paint finishes on camouflaged aircraft. The circular basically reiterated the appendices to that letter and explained that the new 'Type S' paints had finer ground pigments to achieve the required degree of smoothness with roughness less than one thousandth part of an inch, whereas previously the final roughness on many aircraft types had been as high as five thousandths and sometimes up to ten thousandths of an inch.

The relevant part of the circular for this discussion is that it warns that the new paints "will still be liable to coagulate if they are not used fresh".

I am confident that this tendency was probably the main reason for Sky painted spinners and fuselage bands to sometimes appear so pale, because the colour tinting pigments had clumped and affected their proportionate dispersal within the predominantly white paint. If the paint was strained before spraying the resultant colour would have had less tinting pigments dispersed within the white.

And on the subject of variance in Sky colours just by way of an example, whilst the original Titanine formula was white (unspecified as to the pigment), about 4% yellow iron oxide and a trace of Prussian blue, the formula used by one contractor in September 1940 was antimony oxide (white) tinted with vegetable black, chromium oxide (green), and yellow iron oxide. Antimony oxide is susceptible to darkening as a result of surface pollutants anyway but having tested the formulae there is no doubt they are not identical.

There were several common white pigments in use and all of them would have resulted in subtle differences to the appearance of the final colour and the way in which it aged and weathered. The use of the anatase form of titanium dioxide white pigment and china clay as an extender would have exacerbated surface chalking.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm no expert on this, but I really like Martin T's example here:

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234948421-airfix-172nd-tomahawk-iia/

He definitely put a lot of thought and skill into it, and I'd have a hard time arguing with the result.

Thanks for the comment on my Tomahawk. I used some of the information from Nicks comments on BM and to be honest the colours used are a 'best guess' at how the aircraft might have appeared 74 years ago, as looking at all the factors Nick, Graham and others have highlighted, i doubt we will ever know for cetain. i am convinced however, that when the Americans were contracted to produce aircraft in Temperate Land Scheme with Sky undersurfaces they were expected to do just that. Even though it was wartime in the UK, the USA was at peace, with no real desire to become involved and arms manufacturers were interested in making money and the normal rules of contract law would have prevailed. The equivalent colours produced seem to have been acceptable and so the undersurfaces of Tomahawks, Buffalos etc. would, in my limited view, been in a shade not far removed form Sky and that is how I have chosen to finish my models of the Tomahawk and Buffalo

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the comment on my Tomahawk. I used some of the information from Nicks comments on BM and to be honest the colours used are a 'best guess' at how the aircraft might have appeared 74 years ago, as looking at all the factors Nick, Graham and others have highlighted, i doubt we will ever know for cetain. i am convinced however, that when the Americans were contracted to produce aircraft in Temperate Land Scheme with Sky undersurfaces they were expected to do just that. Even though it was wartime in the UK, the USA was at peace, with no real desire to become involved and arms manufacturers were interested in making money and the normal rules of contract law would have prevailed. The equivalent colours produced seem to have been acceptable and so the undersurfaces of Tomahawks, Buffalos etc. would, in my limited view, been in a shade not far removed form Sky and that is how I have chosen to finish my models of The Tomahawk and Buffalo

Very nice it is too. And an interesting exercise is converting your pics to greyscale! ;)

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...