Vol 2 All the Spitfire questions here

[Sky Pilot]

Has ANYBODY been able to resolve the issue of the colour of the upper cowling and fuel tank armour plating on MJ250 / UF-Q ? In the photo in Spitfire Aces of North Africa and Italy it seems, from what can be seen, that the cowling is the same colour as the fuselage ( bare metal / silver / ) whilst the fuel tank armour is a dark colour, like camouflage ( grey / green ? ). I'm hoping to model MJ250 together with its sister a/c MJ532 / UF-G all bombed up as shown in the photo.

Any knowledge or opinions would be greatly appreciated.

John

[Work In Progress]

I doubt there is anything new from the last time we did it

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234958500-spitfire-mj250-upper-camo-or-not/

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?73982-Spit-camo-scheme

[Sky Pilot]

A spinoff of the MJ250 cowling/fuel tank armour debates is the question of whether or not MJ532 / UF-G was ever in 43 squadron. On the Spitfire Production site there is no mention of MJ532 being in 43 squadron. It does however indicate that MJ562 was in said squadron in the right place at the right time and it indicates the fate of the a/c. I've had my doubts about the serial number in the "photo" because the "3" looks quite like a "6". Hence the possible confusion. It also makes sense that with MJ250 being accompanied by MJ532 it suggests that MJ532 was also 601 squadron. So, for me it's MJ532 is UF-G even though, on the Production site, it is shown as UF-P. A typo ?

There is mention of MJ562 here

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_rcsEah93-cC&pg=PA117&lpg=PA117&dq=43+squadron+raf+famo+italy&source=bl&ots=EeV9ll7GMR&sig=Yrcex8LPPgQhT1OLl2n76NCy0xo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjoncudpObLAhXGGQ8KHaQrC1EQ6AEIRjAH#v=onepage&q=43%20squadron%20raf%20famo%20italy&f=false

HTH

John

EDIT

Further to the above, is it possible to determine when did the first "E" wing spits leave the factory - I've read that it was early 1944 ? MJ532 was delivered to 33MU on 22/12/43 - could it have been an "E" wing ? I ask this because, on the decal sheet X48-123, MJ532 is depicted as having a clipped wing carrying "E" wing armament.

Edited March 29, 2016 by Sky Pilot

[Airgunner]

Anyone know when the yellow leading edge id markings came into being? Building a Spitfire II based at an OTU in Agust '42 and would like to know if it would have had them.

Thanks, Steve

[Troy Smith]

Anyone know when the yellow leading edge id markings came into being? Building a Spitfire II based at an OTU in Agust '42 and would like to know if it would have had them.

Thanks, Steve

with introduction of Day Fighter Scheme, August 1941

from http://www.boxartden.com/gallery/index.php/Profiles/Camoflage-Markings/01-Supermarine-Spitfire

[gingerbob]

Further to the above, is it possible to determine when did the first "E" wing spits leave the factory - I've read that it was early 1944 ? MJ532 was delivered to 33MU on 22/12/43 - could it have been an "E" wing ? I ask this because, on the decal sheet X48-123, MJ532 is depicted as having a clipped wing carrying "E" wing armament.

Early '44, and the first 'e's went to particular squadrons (though there could be exceptions). I'd say around June for subsequent factory 'e's. It is possible that an earlier airframe was converted, but probably far more likely that it remained as built.

bob

[Airgunner]

with introduction of Day Fighter Scheme, August 1941

from http://www.boxartden.com/gallery/index.php/Profiles/Camoflage-Markings/01-Supermarine-Spitfire

Wonderful, thanks Troy

[Sky Pilot]

The Xtradecal sheet X48-123 portrays Spitfire LFIXc, MJ532/UF-G as having clipped wings. Is there any evidence to confirm this ? The photo showing MJ532 taking off alongside MJ250/UF-Q is not clear enough to determine one way or the other. Might the fact that both aircraft are carrying bombs have any bearing on the wing configuration ?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

John

[Red five]

Has anybody got any decent pictures of the 22.5 gallon combat slipper type wing tanks used on the later Seafires (FR47). I have drawings which show shape and size but they lack detail.

Thanks

Andrew

[PhantomBigStu]

The Xtradecal sheet X48-123 portrays Spitfire LFIXc, MJ532/UF-G as having clipped wings. Is there any evidence to confirm this ? The photo showing MJ532 taking off alongside MJ250/UF-Q is not clear enough to determine one way or the other. Might the fact that both aircraft are carrying bombs have any bearing on the wing configuration ?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

John

cant be certian, but comparing to pics of what are known to be clipped, the outer wings of mj532 don't look like it, even at a significant angle, a clipped a wing is visible as flat, wheres as that isn't , also clipped tips are thicker, not nice and thin like the standard wing, so again I say to me that is a standard spit wing

Edited May 18, 2016 by PhantomBigStu

[Graham Boak]

Wing failures after steep bombing attacks lead to the advice to clip the wings of Spitfires for these missions. That doesn't mean that all Spitfires carrying bombs should be assumed to have clipped wings, even when the photo is known to have been taken after the issue of this instruction - and I don't recall ever seeing a date for such an instruction, or a copy of the instruction itself. An alternative would simply be to carry out less steep attacks - with some reduction in accuracy.

[Sky Pilot]

Stu and Graham

Thanks for your replies. I had hoped to build MJ532 as a clipped wing a/c but as there is no clear supporting evidence I shall kick that project into the dust.

Cheers

John

[PhantomBigStu]

Is there a list of which squadron used a particular mk? tryign to pick a mkIX for my next subject, using home printed decals so can print anything I want

[Graham Boak]

There's a table in the back of Fighter Squadrons of the RAF, but I suspect there are more convenient listings on the net and in other Spitfire books. You may find that the Mk.IX squadrons are not subdivided into F Mk.IX, LF Mk.IX, HF Mk.IX and LF Mk.IXe.

[PhantomBigStu]

There's a table in the back of Fighter Squadrons of the RAF, but I suspect there are more convenient listings on the net and in other Spitfire books. You may find that the Mk.IX squadrons are not subdivided into F Mk.IX, LF Mk.IX, HF Mk.IX and LF Mk.IXe.

Thnaks graham, just reminded me there's such a thing from the preinternet days called a book, pick up my copy of Robert Jacksons spitfire, turned to the back and theres an appendix on just what I needed : )

edit: bloody hell, 100s of squadrons used the mark ix.....this is goinn to be difficult to narrow down what I after

RAF squadron (ie. not a RCAF unit nor a free french, [polish etc)

MkIXc with late tail full span wings OR MkIXc clipped with early tail

Edited May 19, 2016 by PhantomBigStu

[PhantomBigStu]

I've finally found a subject that matches my requirements, the 601sqn spitfire mj532 on the xtra decal sheet, what fonts will I need for the codes and serials? https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=mj532&rlz=1CDGOYI_enGB598GB598&espv=1&hl=en-GB&prmd=sivn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjghvX2k-vMAhXDtRQKHTHcB2QQ_AUICCgC&biw=320&bih=504#hl=en-GB&tbm=isch&q=mj532+spitfire

[JackG]

Ideally you want a font without serifs - I'm certain Edgar mentioned Helvetica was a good starting point.

You can also check out the free aircraft fonts here:

http://web.archive.org/web/20020210183915/members.aol.com/p5219/fonts.htm

regards,

Jack

[PhantomBigStu]

thanks JackG, downloaded them and found the right ones to use....now just to make sure I get the font sizes right before printing

[Sky Pilot]

Can somebody please tell me if there is any evidence, preferably photographic, of Mk FIXs ever being fitted (factory or otherwise) with the narrow cannon blister.

Similarly, were any "early" Mk LFIXSs so fitted ? The Eduard kit (8282) for early IXcs includes an option to build a MkLFIX with the narrow blisters but I can not find any evidence of this.

Any advice/examples will be greatly appreciated.

[PhantomBigStu]

Alan Deers P9398, can of worms but what would be recommended for the underside colour? Sky, Sky Blue, or Eau de Nil?

[Biggles87]

According to Vol2 of SAM's Camouflage & Markings it was duck egg green/Eau-de-Nil but there is also a note to say that all underside shades are provisional and based on B&W photograph interpretations, so as you say, can of worms.

HTH

John

[Troy Smith]

Alan Deers P9398, can of worms but what would be recommended for the underside colour? Sky, Sky Blue, or Eau de Nil?

According to Vol2 of SAM's Camouflage & Markings it was duck egg green/Eau-de-Nil but there is also a note to say that all underside shades are provisional and based on B&W photograph interpretations, so as you say, can of worms.

HTH

John

it should be noted that 'sky blue' and 'eau de nil' usually not considered the acctaul colours, but close matches from wreck examined by Paul Lucus in some museums in Kent and Sussex

I posted the below in this thread, which sums up several threads and posts on this

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234985915-raf-sky-grey/

Regarding Lucas, here's the relevant bit from "Britain Alone" and is what the various other paint matches are based upon.

But, this thread covers a lot of the main points raised over the use other paints instead or Sky, or local mixes.

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234966713-spitfire-mk1-with-extra-dark-sea-grey-belly/

But here's the edited version. Much of this is about Eau De Nil, another colour identified above.

I don't have the Lucas book to hand, but IIRC the main evidence was from wreck parts, matched to colour chips, by eye, unfortunately no photos of this are shown. I con't remember what the colours were matched to, possibly FS595?

Also, we are dealing with parts from mostly buried wrecks, and soil chemistry and just ageing of the paint can change apparent colour, for example paint binders can yellow with age, causing the colour to shift and darken in appearance.

In the case of Sky paint, that would cause a darkening and greening of the apparent colour.

It is possible to analyse the paint to find out the pigments and binders etc, but a visual comparison with paint chips is of limited use.

The above is trying to put simply what Nick Millman has written about, at length, here and on his blogs, and any errors in the above are mine, not his!

I mention Nick as he is a very through and careful researcher on the subject of paint and colour

Varitions in the Sky have been noted since the time of introuduction, This is discussed in the Ducimus Camouflage and Markings series, in particular in the Spitfire volume, which was written in about 1970, but makes many valuable points as reasons for variations.

What has happened since the Lucas book is that profiles in the book have had a variety of underside colours given to them , Eau De Nil, Sky Grey, Sky Blue, and this has lodged in modeller and decal manufacturers brains as a 'fact'.

That said the use of Sky Blue instead of Sky seems to be more widespread than was thought when the Ducimus was published. There have been thread on this here.

Without professional analysis of the wreck parts, and that would only tell you what those specific aircraft were painted in, you are into the realm of a 'best guess'

The 'best guess' can be improved upon by finding out when the plane entered service and from photos of non-standard underside demarcations, eg as seen on some 85 sq and 17 Sq Hurricanes in June 1940, implying an infield repaint, for an example of elimination of unlikely airframes, see the quoted Spitfires above.

From a modeller's point, it's only really aircraft that are in this 'window' that are candidates for having non-standard underside colours. They certainly make for more visually appealing models.

I'm not claiming any special knowledge of the subject, more adding a basic summary for the less obsessed who may be intrigued by the thread title, and confused by some of the comments.

There was one interesting (at least to me) point within Paul Lucas's book. The three undersides identified from wreck sites as being Eau de Nil came from the units that were at Linton-on-Ouse and one other Humberside base (Kirton-in-Lindsay?) when the order came through. To me, this suggests a very local use of whatever colour it was, whereas Paul seems to have extrapolated this to a wider range of units coming from different parts of the UK. In this he could be said to have been supported by MJF Bowyer, based on personal observation at the time by his acquaintances and himself, that Sky as in use in 1940 was distinctly greener than that seen later in the war.

I entirely agree that Eau-de-Nil was in fairly wide use prewar, within the RAF and indeed domestically. But the paint applied to aircraft will have come from the limited range of colours available to the correct DTD specification, and those did not (to my knowledge) include Eau-de-Nil. I have wondered if it was the identity of the lighter green sometimes spoken of as in use for some aircraft interiors.

In his excellent book, Paul does pretty thoroughly discuss the problems of supplying Sky at this time, and the potential solutions/problems. Nick Millman has also contributed to the subject, elsewhere on this site.

The issue of No16 EdN and No1 Sky Blue to the correct DTD standard for application to both fabric and metal exterior surfaces is a point I have raised many times. If EdN *did* exist in this form it was most likely a civillian order for the colour.

I don't have my copy of Lucas immediately to hand but I do recall that there are photos (inside one of the covers?) of researchers holding a FS595 fandeck against their chosen specimen parts, rather than a copy of the chips from BS381(1930).

I’m also fairly certain that PL didn’t say that these colours *were* EdN and 1 Sky Blue, just that they looked like them. The certainty has been applied retrospectively by others.

Sky is essentially white with a couple of strong pigments added to get the required final colour. Varying the proportions of these pigments even slightly can have a distinct effect on the final observed colour. I've long been of the opinion that this is a more likely source of the variations observed in 1941 (and indeed later) than the use of non-standard colours.

For the record I doubt the widespread use of Air Ministry Sky Blue for the same reason.

John

I agree and FWIW (I've mentioned it before) I've recreated colours close to both BSi standard colours using similar pigments to the white, yellow and blue paints that would have been held in stores. The use of yellow instead of yellow ochre makes a significant difference to the resultant hue and recreates the stronger blue-green appearance.

The "old" cheap recipe for Eau de Nil, in use as late as 1929, was Zinc Oxide (white) and Pale Chrome Green. The zinc oxide has a rather poor tinting strength and a tendency towards yellow or creamish. The chrome green is interesting because it is made from chrome yellow and Prussian blue pigments. The chrome yellow decomposes the blue pigment over time making the appearance browner, exacerbated by yellowing of the binder. On the Lucas examples genuine Eau de Nil would have shifted towards more yellowish. But they looked to me like typical "sky blue" paints where age darkening and yellowing of the binder had made them look more turquoise or greenish than they probably were originally.

I thought this the case when I looked at the chip in the 1930 standard for BS 381 # 1 Sky Blue but very usefully the original book includes a sample of the clear celluloid used for the swatches so the extent of browning can be gauged reasonably accurately. The original colour was undoubtedly more turquoise (greenish) than the colour one usually associates with sky blue but the complication is that clearer sky blues and blue-greys shift towards a similar appearance with the yellowing of their binders. This is why the French Gris Bleu Clair is now thought by some to have had a more blue-green appearance than it really did, because they are assessing it from extant but aged paint surfaces. The shifts can occur without the surface appearing in any way degraded, even retaining its gloss, which can be misleading because the assumption is that the paint is "as good as new".

Nick

The Lucas book does list where the parts are, which is several small museums in Sussex and Kent, which are listed but no photos, and no history of the where the parts are from.

I'd go round these places if I had a car, I'm not dedicated to try to get to them by public transport, but as the research was done maybe 15 years ago the paint may shifted more anyway.

If you could get actual samples you could analyse them, and that would yield more information, but would you even be able to get samples?

I would suggest that aircraft built after the introduction of Sky in June 1940 are probably going to have the specified paint as factories would get the right paint as a priority?

and in the case of Spitfires this can be pinned down if you have a serial.

see http://www.airhistory.org.uk/spitfire/production.html

From this I'd suggest all the Castle Bromwich and the Supermarine somewhere on this page

http://www.airhistory.org.uk/spitfire/p010.html are likely to have factory applied Sky.

IN the case of Deeres plane?

P9398 Ia 580 EA MIII FF 13-3-40 6MU 20-3-40 64S 18-5-40 74S 26-5-40 54S air collision with Bf109 F/Lt Deere force-landed Manston 9-7-40 shot down by Bf109 into Folkestone Harbour Sgt Eley killed 31-7-40 FH72.20

HTH

[PhantomBigStu]

thanks guys, will go with my eau-de-nil, or as its really humbrol 90 with added 30

[Graham Boak]

Airfix Mag July 2016 has a build article by Steve Abbey of the 1/32 Tamiya Spitfire Mk.XVIe, and a beautiful piece of work it is. There is one piece that puzzles me: he states that the postwar aircraft had a revised undercarriage ... "which had less of a forward angle than the standard versions". I know that late-war and post war Spitfires had modified axle geometries, (and possibly tyre sizes?) , resulting in the re-appearance of bumps in the upper wing, but a change in the undercarriage legs giving a different rake?

[gingerbob]

Sounds like a misunderstanding to me.