Airfix Bomber Command Resupply

[Roland Pulfrew]

Evening all. Well as its GE night I've decided to avoid the TV and do something a little different following the thoroughly enjoyable Lesser Built Air Forces Group Build and so I decided to raid the stash and found the Airfix Bomber Command Resupply set. Having done a Lancaster in last year's Bomber Command GB I thought 'why not?'

Lots of similar coloured painting required so decided to leave everything on the sprue to start with. Instructions suggest Humbrol 29 as the majority colour and the nearest equivalent I had was Tamiya XF 52. Now this has sprayed well but looks a bit............ chocolatey! I feel the colour needs to be much more khaki in colour, a lighter yellowy brown, so my question for the assembled experts would be: anyone got any suggestions for a better colour match for WWII RAF vehicles? Thanks in advance

[Graham Boak]

Humbrol 29. The colour was close to Dark Earth. Why do you think it should be yellower? However, if you want a more precise answer look in Mike Starmer's work with different paints to get a proper match. The colour you want is SCC2 with SCC1A, but G3 and G4 would be another possibility earlier in the war.

http://www.mafva.net/other%20pages/Starmer%20camo.htm

[Mike Starmer]

Given the date that this set is circa 1942 the basic colour would have been SCC.2 brown, although earlier painted vehicles were Khaki Green No.3 which would still be on many vehicles by 1942 since the wastage was nothing like as bad as for army vehicles on active service. The disruptive colour would have been SCC.1A dark brown or black but using up old stocks could easily have been Dark Tarmac No.4. I noted that you used Tamiya paints. These mixes with Tamiya will give you the correct colours for your vehicles.

KHAKI GREEN 3 = 8 x XF62 + 3 x XF59 + 1 x XF68.

SCC.2 = 3 x XF3 + 5 x XF68 + 1 x XF1.

SCC.1A = 7 x XF10 + 2 x XF1

DARK TARMAC = 1 x XF24 + 1 x XF69

SCC.14 black = XF69.

These colours are probably nothing like the colours you are expecting to see, but they are the War Office and Air Ministry standards. The mixes are for the real colour. For your models I suggest adding a small amount of medium grey to the mixes to reduce the intensity of the colours. When you add the grey the appearance of your colour will change, dramatically in some cases. DON'T panic and add anything else, all will be well when they dry.

The disruptive painting is correct in that ALL surfaces that may be seen from above the vehicle should be the darker colour, no exceptions. This scheme is set out in MTP.46/4A November 1941 and an A.M.O later that year. You could play a variation by having one vehicle in the early 1940 scheme of overall Khaki Green 3 with undulating Dark Tarmac stripes across it. Another point, the RAF did not apply roundels to the sides of its vehicles in the UK, the kit is based on an inaccurately painted restoration or film set. HTH

[Roland Pulfrew]

Thanks Mike, very helpful. I guess my reticence was from looking at the pictures on the Airfix refuelling set and emergency set box art which does look like a lighter brown than that called for in the instructions.

[Roland Pulfrew]

I have another question for the vehicle modellers, if I may? If I went by modern convention, I would paint the chassis and undersides of my vehicles dark grey or black, but the instructions on the Airfix kits suggests that they should be painted body colour; is this correct? What about for vehicles like the airfield fire tender in the WWII emergency services kit? Should the chassis be red? Again any advice gratefully received.

[Graham Boak]

I'd put the set at later than 1942, given the Lancaster Mk.II, the heavy bombs and the late production Bedford (though the last is not really definitive). In which case you are back looking at the chocolate brown SCC2 as a base, though some of the older vehicles could be still in the older colours - like the towed bowser perhaps? Add a bit of fading and the body base colour may not have been quite so far from the lighter brown, though the darker top would still be required. The Fire Tender is postwar (as is that particular QL bowser in the Refuelling Set), and wouldn't have been red in wartime anyway.

I did ask Mike some time ago about the chassis for some Army vehicles, body colour or black, and he said that it wouldn't matter as it would all be covered in mud anyway. I'd suggest body colour for wartime - let's wait and see what anybody else might say.

If you are interested in a wartime fire tender then MMS Models have recently issued the Crossley fire tender. This is in white metal, but in general assembly and approach very similar to the Airfix kits. MMS also do a significant number of other RAF vehicles. Matador also produce (in resin) a number of conversions and kits for RAF Matadors, and a few other vehicles including the Albion bowser that Airfix have just done (sadly in the wrong scale...)

Edited May 12, 2015 by Graham Boak

[old thumper]

All I did when painting my RAF recovery, refuelling and re-supply vehicles etc was to study the Night Bombers documentary film that was shot at Hemswell. This film is not much use for those wishing to create an early war scene with a Wellington or Whitley though.

[Mike Starmer]

Wartime vehicles in camouflage had all components painted in the basic colour, whatever that was at the time. Unless there was a specific reason for certain components to be otherwise. Graham is correct, the fire appliances would have been camoughled like everything else. Red didn't appear on RAF staions until post was, I have a note somewwhere that it was circa1948. I was 1946 when the RAF Blue Grey colour was restored for RAF vehicles but with gloss black ront valance, all mudguards and wheels. Box art colours must only be used as a very basic guide to finish, and then with care as in the case of red fire appliances!

[stuartp]

the Night Bombers documentary film that was shot at Hemswell.

That's my 3MB broadband limit blown for the month then, I'm currently on my third viewing. Thank you for reminding me of that :-)

[Pete in Lincs]

Hemswell is home for me.

It's not that far from you, Stuart.

Four of the old barrack blocks are

now full of antiques for sale and there

is a Sunday market most weekends.

(Including a model stall in that Hangar!)

[Roland Pulfrew]

All I did when painting my RAF recovery, refuelling and re-supply vehicles etc was to study the Night Bombers documentary film that was shot at Hemswell. This film is not much use for those wishing to create an early war scene with a Wellington or Whitley though.

Wow. What a great film. Really useful reference "library"; thanks for pointing me in the direction of that - although watching it did stop me from doing any modelling!!

[old thumper]

Wow. What a great film. Really useful reference "library"; thanks for pointing me in the direction of that - although watching it did stop me from doing any modelling!!

I love that movie it is an absolute gem in so many ways.

[Mike Starmer]

Regarding the film. Notice theThorneycroft crane in SCC.15 and black Camo with a yellow jib?

[old thumper]

Regarding the film. Notice theThorneycroft crane in SCC.15 and black Camo with a yellow jib?

Yep, I copied that paint scheme when I built my Thorneycroft.

Is there something odd about this paint scheme?

Edited July 22, 2015 by old thumper

[Mancunian airman]

Roland

Did you ever get this built ?

I would be interested in the colour scheme used.

[Miggers]

I need some elements of the Airfix set(DB tractor,oil bowser and Bedford MW) for a March 1946 No.1 PTS vignette with a Dakota.

 

Am I still looking at brown(ish)/black(ish)Mickey Mouse type cammo or something else.

 

Also what about vehicle markings?

 

A Ringway/Upper Heyford DBtractor wouldn't have a "B/5" for "Bomber/5 Group" on it would it?

[Graham Boak]

I've seen it said that although most of the Night Bombers film was shot in wartime, some of the continuity shots were filmed postwar.   If so, that might explain the high visibility yellow and RAF Blue Grey on some vehicles.

 

I'd be inclined to assume that the wartime camouflage was still around in early 1946, but that could depend upon the Station Commander.  If he was "old guard" by nature he might leap at the chance to restore prewar standards.  However, a tractor at Ringway was not in 5 group nor even in Bomber Command, so no it wouldn't carry the B/5 markings.  I don't know what it should carry - presumably an A for Airborne Forces Command but I don't know the Group it belonged to.   38?

 

A relevant question might be when the RAF stopped using this system of markings.

[Graham Boak]

The Parachute school at Ringway went through a series of name changes and controlling Groups, starting with 20 Group, then 70 Group, but by the time it had Dakotas it was under 38 group.

[Miggers]

Well that's a start,cheers Graham.

 

I'll do a bit of research on 38 Group,see what that throws up.

Edited April 6, 2017 by Miggers

[Miggers]

10 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

The Parachute school at Ringway went through a series of name changes and controlling Groups, starting with 20 Group, then 70 Group, but by the time it had Dakotas it was under 38 group.

 

Certainly 38 Group Graham.

 

By June 1945 it had transferred to Transport Command,so possibly "T/38" on vehicles?(if that desgnation style was still being used in 1945/46.)

 

No.1 PTS didn't move from Ringway to Upper Heyford until 28 March 1946,so the Dak(KK138/S)I'm doing must've

certainly been at Ringway.

 

The airframe was C-47B-15DK, Bu no.43-45459,C/N 26720,serial KK138 and from my research,only seems to have

ever been with No.1 PTS,no service with other units(except the Yugoslav AF)is listed.

[Graham Boak]

38 Group transferred to Transport Command 1/6/45, as you say.  Air Britain's Flying Training and Support Group gives no mention of a change of Group allocation for 1 PTS, so yes, T/38 would seem appropriate.  It's easier to paint over later than to add, if you find out otherwise.  I'll raise the more general question on Flypast Historical Forum - or perhaps the Airfield Research Group.  Or both.

 

[Selwyn]

On 05/04/2017 at 8:55 PM, Graham Boak said:

I've seen it said that although most of the Night Bombers film was shot in wartime, some of the continuity shots were filmed postwar.   If so, that might explain the high visibility yellow and RAF Blue Grey on some vehicles.

 

I'd be inclined to assume that the wartime camouflage was still around in early 1946, but that could depend upon the Station Commander.  If he was "old guard" by nature he might leap at the chance to restore prewar standards.  However, a tractor at Ringway was not in 5 group nor even in Bomber Command, so no it wouldn't carry the B/5 markings.  I don't know what it should carry - presumably an A for Airborne Forces Command but I don't know the Group it belonged to.   38?

 

A relevant question might be when the RAF stopped using this system of markings.

They were certainly still using this basic system of markings. into the 1960's. I have a picture of a S type Bedford refueller marked T/CRAN refuelling a Mk 3 JP in the silver dayglo stripe scheme as a screensaver on my computer.

 

Selwyn

Edited April 16, 2017 by Selwyn

[Hardcastle]

On 7/22/2015 at 6:47 PM, Mike Starmer said:

Regarding the film. Notice theThorneycroft crane in SCC.15 and black Camo with a yellow jib?

So Mike

 

How does one explain that? Was it possible that some "less risky" airfields kept the original schemes (say Western UK, rather than Eastern side of the country due to less risk of attack? Just a thought - orders may be orders, but if the paint was in short supply???

 

Just asking.

Tim H 

South Africa

[Mike Starmer]

Vehicles were usually painted at works according to specification for the vehicle.  The RAF had it's own MU for vehicle refurbishments using standard paints which required a triplicate requisitioning form from stores.  The application of the yellow jib was so that it showed up readily during work in dark conditions,.  Refuellers had dimmed spotlights to facilitate that too.  The risk of intruders was considered very low by late 1944 -45.  Practicality was the general rule.  By wars end many vehicles that had by occupation to be on an airfield carried some yellow areas on upper surfaces for safely. not by any means large but noticeable.