Colour question for Hanriot floatplane

[JackG]

Researching this one before bringing it to the bench, and there seems to be a variety of possibilities (guesses?) as to the colour of these aircraft:

Most popular seems to be either overall aluminum paint, or canvas surfaces remain in clear dope.

A French web page on this particular maritime unit

http://albindenis.free.fr/Site_escadrille/CAM_Dunkerque.htm

has this rendering found on that page, which looks to be (flat?) aluminum or is that grey on the canvas surfaces?

I've posed the same question on a couple other forums (Aerodrome and AerosScale) but maybe someone here has some answers?

regards,

Jack

[wyverns4]

Hi Jack,

Have just had aflick through;

Alegi, G, 2002, Hanriot HD.1/HD.2, Windsock Datafile No. 92, Albatros Publications Ltd., Berkhampsted, UK, ISBN 1-902207-47-5, pp. 36.

On page 33 Alegi states that Aviation Maritime HD.2's have been portrayed in both silver, (aluminium) and beige/light brown and that the lack of evidence makes any conclusion either way speculation.

On the back cover is a port side view of D. 37, (the third airframe in the picture above), with natural metal panels around the engine, clear doped linen/beige/light brown fuselage and wings, dark brown under, (although the text on P. 34 indicates that it could also be black or dark blue), the elevators and light grey floats.

HTH.

Christian, exiled to the cesspit of the world with his reference library, (A.K.A. blanky).

[vince14]

As Christian said, there's a lack of definitive evidence either way. In my own mind I've decided that they were most likely to have been finished in aluminium dope, with natural metal panels, as the contrast between the fabric and metal areas doesn't seem that distinct - plus, the Hanriots were built around the time when French aircraft were primarily finished in overall aluminium dope, and we know that the (French-built) Italian Hanriots were finished in that scheme.

I think this picture of D.37 lends support to the theory they were overall silver.

[JackG]

Thank you both, wyverns4 and vince14.

That profile found on the back cover of the Windsock book, how is the back end of the fuselage portrayed? The illustration I linked in the opening post has it dark grey, but has me wondering if it was coloured the same as the undersides of the elevators as some sort of friendly recognition?

The HRmodel kit instructions have the underside of the floats as black - was this some kind of protective coating, or part of a recognition system?

regards,

Jack

[wyverns4]

Hi Jack,

I made reference to the possible rang of colours above. Yes I think they were a recognition feature, but looking at various images of these particular airframes I do not think it extended onto the elevators, but that it passed onto the lower surface of the fuselage.

Floats, IIRC, would have been given a coating of a black tar/bitumen like substance to help with making them watertight. So a glossy to matt, (depending on length of use), black finish.

Looking at Vince's image and some others I am inclined to agree with the overall aluminium/NMF scheme, but I keep looking at the way the rib tapes appear, as in your image and I come back to CDL/beige/light brown... Oh for a time machine!

Christian, exiled to the cesspit of the world.

[JackG]

wyvern, thanks for that, and the continued conversation.

One argument I can think of against CDL surfaces are that the floats appear the same tone as the body - but this could just be the limitations of the grey scale range in photography back then.

Another interesting note, it has been pointed out that in the first photo, D.30 appears to have camouflage on the top wing. Could be just the power of suggestion, now I think I'm seeing camouflage on the spine too, and something similar happening on D20?

regards,

Jack

[wyverns4]

Hi Jack,

Always happy to chat, especially if there is a conundrum!

Firstly, to me there is a close but not exact tone. Most likely, the slight variation in tone is due to similar finished being applied over dissimilar material. In reference to the 'beige' scheme, the French had similar finishes for the fabric and non fabric areas, which can show little tonal variation...

Your second point; I am not sure if I see a different colour scheme, or a variation in the reflectance of the finish. I can see no matching variation on the rear deck. Again, to me, it appears if the variation is symmetrical on both wings, so if it is an artifact of applied finish, or some other marking/camouflage, I am unsure. The symmetrical application does not match any of the camouflage schemes that I am aware of. Could it be a flight leaders identification marking????

Christian, exiled to the cesspit of the world

[JackG]

Looked some more at French camou schemes, and you are correct - the shapes seen on the top surface of D30 do not match the 4 color pattern let alone the 5 of the late war period. Neither does it fit the 2 colour pattern.

Then I spotted my Osprey book cover on Nieuport aces, and there is a curious marking on top in the same location as the Hanriot - possibly painted out in the b/w photo?

regards,

Jack

[wyverns4]

Yes, or something of a similar ilk.

The tonal value would indicate that the section from the wingtip to the change in tone is the same, (or very similar), to the fuselage, with the central section being different.

Comparing this area to others displayed in the photograph, might it be white?

This pure speculation on my part. However, if it is then it might make more sense for the airframe to be finished in 'beige', as this area would be much more visible than if applied to an aluminium finished airframe.

On the counter, there is no reason for the airframe not to be aluminium as there are many examples of this finish with white, (and other colours), applied.

Personally I am still leaning towards the 'beige' scheme, but it is your model!

Christian, exiled to africa...

[JackG]

Interesting, so what conclusion can the comparison be when in shadow - if CDL appears darker than an aluminum finish, then the martinet symbol supports this theory with it's white belly?

regards,

Jack

[wyverns4]

Dangerous ground here, but tally-ho!

I would expect an aluminium finish to have a similar reflectance to the, (assumed,) metal panels further forward. It does not, but does this mean that it is in the 'beige' scheme? The lack of reflectance could be that the fabric was weathered, producing a dulled finish. However, the bright white of the martinet's dorsal surface looks bright and therefore fresh and not weathered.

In the enlargement, did you notice how the upper longeron edge catches the light? It was not unknown for the fuselage and wings to be outlined in a different colour. So could this be an example of that, or a reinforcing tape applied along the longeron and subtly catching the light??

Questions, questions!

Christian, exiled to africa

[JackG]

Really didn't pay attention to that outline you mention. Perusing the Aerodrome forum, a statement was made that with the introduction of aluminum painted dope, the French ceased the use of tapes for outlining wings and such.

Was a grey-blue ever considered a possibility, something special just for maritime aircraft?

regards,

Jack

[wyverns4]

Hmm, interesting that.

Looking again at the enlarged photo I am being intriuged by the similarity in reflection shown by the cowling panels and the central section of the upper wing. This upper wing surface is how I would expect an aluminium finish to look.

IIRC a blue-grey was used on some late war maritime airframes, but I will need to have a read as it is not something that I have really looked into yet. Here though I do not think that a blue-grey has been used as it is quite a dull, dark colour, unlike the images shown here.

Personally, after looking through both Windsock Datafiles, the images here and this ongoing discussion, I am being convinced by the 'beige' theory. But it is your model!

Christian

[JackG]

I wonder if the environment, ie. saltwater, would be a reason against the use of aluminum dope? Then again, it could explain the shabby appearance.

Sigh, I'm still not convinced in which direction to go ...

[wyverns4]

Don't think that it would be a reason not to use aluminium dope. This dope was used as the finely ground aluminium pigment gave superior protection from ultraviolet rays from the sun that rapidly degraded and 'rotted' the fabric used to cover the airframe. The later 5 colour camouflage that the French used later contained a component, (IIRC 50%), of this pigment for exactly this reason. The dope component tautened the fabric and smoothed out the surface irregularities of the fabric.

Seawater does degrade a finish fast due to the salt content, but as long as the surface is regularly washed down this should be kept under control. Of course, these airframes needed fairly regular re-skinning, (if they survived long enough), but they could start looking really tatty. Think the most excessive Spanish School model and then add some!

I think what is starting to coalesce, for me, is that I would expect an aluminium doped airframe to still be quite reflective, (shiny), as the pigment was contained in the dope and thus mostly protected from the worst ravages of the salient environment. Of course the airframe could be very dirty, etc. But add to this the white breast of the Martinet. That still looks bright and white, therefore the airframe cannot be too dirty. Also the central upper wing section area is bright, (newly painted?), in contrast to the rest of the fabric covered airframe and the metal panels still have a luster.

I think 'beige'.

But I could be wrong...

[JackG]

Totally agree that the fuselages looks to be flat finish, but not so much the wings - any possibility of both finishes being present?

I think my indecision has much do with the shape of the tail/rudder. The seaplane version should have the larger type, but the group photo has the smaller HD.1 type. Does the data file book give a date for this photo, and any mention when the rudder was changed?

[wyverns4]

Morning!

Early Hd.2's sported the original fin/rudder seen on the HD.1, and a seen above. From airframe serial 201 and onwards airframes were frequently armed with twin machine guns and "Eventually" (No. 241 I think was the first), received the enlarged fin and rudder with the extension below.

Looking at the line up photograph I think the first two serials visible are 226, (D.30) and 228, (D.20), which would make them early HD.2's without the extended, enlarged fin/rudder and possibly armed with twin machine guns. In fact there is another photograph of D.30, (P. 10), taken from the 10 O'clock position that clearly shows twin machine guns. Also the structure of the upper wing is visible from the underside, something that I would not expect to happen from a opaque finish such as aluminium dope, but from clear doped fabric... Perhaps the finish is clear doped fabric of a 'beige' hue??? The leading edge of the upper wing is washed out and no demarcation for the marking visible in the photographs above can be seen.

I think the difference between the fuselage and wing is an artifact of the relative angles of incidence between the different surfaces and falling sunlight. Apart from the central area of the upper wing which is clearly of a differing finish/colour.

Date-wise the only information that I have is that D.30 and D.37 were involved in combat on the 04/05/18, with the former being lost that day.

HTH!

Christian

[JackG]

Very enlightening, Christian - thank you.

I had thought the improved tail was arrived at before deliveries, but such is not the case. Info on this dedicated web page

http://albindenis.free.fr/Site_escadrille/CAM_Dunkerque.htm

supports this, stating our main photo of discussion is from early 1918. So we are seeing Hanriots at least 3 months old.

So which statement is truer:

1.) - three months of service reveals a loss of sheen on aluminum painted surfaces, or

2.) - three months of service has weathered the CDL, creating a darker and stained finish

... and not to forget the devil's advocate,

3) some other overall colour is on these surfaces.

regards,

Jack

[wyverns4]

Three months, or so, of castor oil and sea spray would dull without a doubt! But for me the clincher is the photograph page 10 alluded to above. The internal structure is clearly visible from below which indicates that an opaque finish has not been applied. I have had a look at other airframes that are known to be finished in aluminium dope or other colour(s) and in all, where applicable, there is no visible internal structure. This would rule out an application of aluminium dope, or another coloured finish. Interestingly the wing structure is fully visible which would indicate that the different finish visible in the above photo has either not yet been applied, or that the fabric, on at least the wing, had been replaced, or perhaps a replacement airframe, or...

That is a great website! and duly bookmarked. Looking at the images of HD.2's both D.30 and D.33 appear to be showing the internal structure of the upper wing. Note that both ribs and spars are visible, the point being that it might be rib tapes showing up, but I have never heard of spar tapes being applied!

The picture below D.33 is the same as that mentioned above on page 10.

Looking through the earlier Datafile, (Bruce, J.M. & Rimell, R.L., 1988, Hanriot HD.1, Windsock Datafile 12, Albatros Productions Ltd., Berkhampsted, UK, ISBN 0 948414 14 6, pp.24), there is a photograph on page 20 of D.47, with twin machine guns and the wing internal structure just visible.

Iustus servo in conundrum,

Christian

[JackG]

Too bad that website is in French. I can use google translate to do it's stuff, but unfortunately a lot of the text info is presented as image files, and can't be translated.

The decal option from HRmodel has a later D30, with the larger tail unit and serial No.241, so will likely go with that. Otherwise have to make a new number, but for some reason no bird motif for the fuselage. Will have to make my own, and hope that it would still be correct.

Still deep in the cockpit building stage, so haven't decided on the colour of finish, though am tossing around the idea way out there in the form of horizon blue. Apparently the same paints used to colour infantry helmets were also found on the exterior metal structures for aircraft. Who knows, maybe this shade was used overall for some naval planes.

regards,

Jack

[wyverns4]

Horizon Blue is recorded as being used to lacquer metal fittings and even rigging wires! IIRC there were two variations, one light and the other darker. The problem is that the paint would have to be treated in a specific way to enable it to adhere to a fabric surface, otherwise it would rapidly start flaking off, especially in flight. Also if the airframe had been painted, then it would be unlikely that the internal structure of the upper wing would be visible.

But, it is your model

Christian

[JackG]

So horizon blue could be used on metal surfaces, say on the floats themselves?

Had a little photoshop session on possible colours, and must admit the CDL does look slightly more aesthetically pleasing:

Still not sold on the CDL as being fact. Does not make sense that aluminum (and all it's positive qualities) would be abandoned and replaced with the earlier type of finish. As far as photos go, I think at least one of the mentioned ones has been touched up for better reproduction ( the one below D33 with the fellow standing on the port pontoon). Some explanations might be wiped dirt, or reflection of light from underneath such as in this modern photo below:

regards,

Jack

[wyverns4]

Morning!

Hmmmm, I like the idea of Horizon Blue being also used on the floats and it would make some sense as well, as it could be described as a light blue-grey!!

The photo below D.33 on the website is presented in a much larger and clearer format, (possibly from an original glass plate), in the Windsock Datafile mentioned above. In this image it is very clear that it is the wing structure being illuminated from above. The main point for this is that the spar and aileron structure is visible as well as the ribs. The photograph above of the Ni 28 has the ribs picked out by the reflected light interacting with the subtle undulations of the fabric where it interacts with wing components and slightly accentuated by the rib tapes. Dirt may also highlight the the wing structure by becoming adhered to areas, such as the interface between the wing surface and rib tapes. Spars tend not to show up as they not joined to the fabric surface of the wing, so there is no 'spar tape, to catch light and/or dirt. When they do come into contact with the wing surface they are usually indicated by a slight change in surface curvature, bulge, or pucker. It is difficult to see how any of these conditions would present itself, as it does, in the Datafile photograph with the wing structure illuminated.

Christian

[JackG]

Christian, you then have me at a disadvantage regarding the photo in question. Here it is enlarged from that French web page:

Next, alightened up version, with some notes that, to me, indicate this is an example of photo retouching old style. Also why would the undersides of the main wing be so dark, if light is filtering through?

regards,

Jack

[wyverns4]

Also, I have just noticed the rudder. Early HD.2's had the original HD.1 rudder, with a vertical hinge. Here there is a angular break leading on from the vertical section, which matches that of the later HD.2 fin and rudder. I l know of no HD.2's that were retro fitted with the different fin/rudder assemblage.

It does look like some modification has been done, whether it is retouching, an artifact of the reproduction of the image, something else, or a combination of which...? However the indication of the wing structure looks continuous and autochthonous.

The wing cellule had two spars. I think the first, nearest the leading edge might be 'hidden from view behind the leading edge curve; an artifact of the angle the image was taken at. The second, rear spar can be seen, in front of the aileron hinge.

Seeing as this is a later HD.2, perhaps it has yet to receive the cockade on the upper wing, or perhaps they were not applied in this location for camouflage reasons.

C