Jump to content

Ta 152H colours: Is there a definitive answer?


Brian J

Recommended Posts

Yes, but regardless of older stocks being used up which was generally the preferred and often ordered process when replacement colours were introduced. The development of 81/82 was because of the undesirable desaturation of 70/71. Short term use of these colours to diminish old stocks was obviously deemed not to be an issue and was encouraged. Hence why we are likely looking at various combinations of 81/82/70/71 on late war machines.

Edited by Kaldrack
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gents,

 

Interesting discussion.  Previously on this website I articulated my thoughts on these subjects might be of interest to fellow readers: 

 

Cheers,

 

David

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for this input David, to my inexpert knowledge, I believe this represents what might be thought of as current consensus of the relationship of nomenclature to specific colours with strong circumstantial evidence for it, while still not representing rock solid fact, which is something we may never have. I for one am happy to go along with your interpretation.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent Dora post David. An excellent bit of research all 'round.

At least I know now where I initially read about the 'blue' in the mid-1970's, didn't remember it was on Ju 88's though, trust me to post the pages from another reference describing the same thing in this thread!!! Now I just have to find the other articles that culminate in agreeance as to what RLM83 was approx ten years later . . . I think it may've been in an 'Air Extra' maybe or even an IPMS/APMA mag . . . . . . "sigh", more searching . . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RLM 81 and 82 were purposely developed because the older RLM 70 and 71 would fade to dark gray on exposure to the elements.  The new hues were successfully tested for resistance to fading and placed into service replacing the older 70/71 combination.  RLM directed manufacturers to employ residual stocks of 70/71 in combinations of 70/82 and 71/81.  Testing for color for the new shades was impossible because sample test cards for 81 and 82 had not been delivered.

 

 Extant factory camouflage diagrams (Oberflachenschutzliste) list RLM 81 and 82 with no mention of 83.

 

There are no RLM or Luftwaffe sources that describe the use of  RLM 83 as a late war camouflage color or in any combination with RLM 81 or 82.  Evidence for a late war green RLM 83 used as a camouflage color is exclusively based on speculative  interpretations of surviving relics and period photographs. 

Edited by Vonbraun
Punctuation
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An interesting period document can be found in Dénes Bernád and György Punka's Hungarian Fighter Colours, vol. 1.

 

It is an original Messerschmitt Augsburg document which was sent on 29th August 1944 and was translated into Hungarian on 2nd September 1944:

 

“Másolat.

Augsburg, 29.08.1944

Tárgy: Vadászrepülók rejtszinezése

A “General der Jagdflieger” legujabb követelményei szerint a vadászgépek rejtszinezését minden célra egységesen rögzitették a következó módon:

Felsó felület: 81-es szinü /oliva barna/
és 82-es szinü /világos zöld/

az eddig alkalmazott 74-es /szürkés zöld/ és 75-ös /szürkés lila/ szinek helyett. Alsó fele és a törzsoldalak továbbra is azt a /világos kék/ szinezést kapják, amivel a törzsoldalakat, függóleges vezérsikot, stb. az eddigi módon világosra festették. Ugyanez csata-, harcirepülógépekre /naponkénti bevetésnél/, rövid és hossztávfelderitó gépekre.

Magyar forditás kelte:
Budapest, 2.9.1944”

 

A rough translation below:

 

Copy.

Augsburg, 29 August 1944

Subject: The Camouflage of Fighter Aircraft

According to the newest requirements of the "General der Jagdflieger", the camouflage of fighter aircraft has been ordered for all purposes in the following way:

Upper surfaces: 81 colour (olive brown) and 82 colour (light green)

Instead of the 74 (grey green) / 75 (grey purple) colours used so far.

 

The lower surfaces, fuselage sides and vertical tail continue to receive the light blue colour from available stocks. So far it has been painted clear.

 

Same for battle, fighter aircraft / day-to-day operations, short- and long-range reconnaissance machines.

Date of Hungarian translation:
Budapest, 2.9.1944

 

The last section of the translation regarding types of aircraft is a little difficult, especially the “battle” text. I think it means “Zerstörers”? 

 

Also the text regarding the lower surfaces and “clear”. I’m wondering if this is in relation to the fighters not receiving paint on the undersides, but could do if the stocks of RLM 76 were available?

 

So from this document one can assume that the order to replace the 74/75 colours with the new 81/82 colours on fighter, heavy fighter aircraft and recon versions of those types serving with the Luftwaffe was 29th August 1944.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1.4.2018 at 12:04 PM, stevehnz said:

 

Yet Ullman hypothesized in the links to TOCH that I put up ages ago that the dark green late war colour was merely 70 or more likely 71 being used up before newer shades were used. Kari's theory of ex bomber paints being used up has an attractive logic to it, will we ever know for sure? :unsure: 

Steve.

This theory has a lot going for it ( see my line of thinking in #47). I have no idea what the average life expectancy of a fighter was in late 44/early 45, but it can’t have been much - 15 to 20 flying hours ( I think I read such a figure somewhere) , or 6 weeks in total?. Colour desaturation may have been a theoretical problem, but  a practical one only to the most diehard Endsieg believers. No idea how many of them were left at the time to take decisions. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kaldrack said:

The last section of the translation regarding types of aircraft is a little difficult, especially the “battle” text. I think it means “Zerstörers”? 

 

Literal back-translation for battle would be „Schlacht“, which may refer to Schlachtflieger - Fw 190F, Ju 87D and the like. 

The section about „clear“ sounds a bit odd, as I read the translation to indicate „continue“ to use light blue and „so far“ being „clear“, at the same time? With my admittedly limited knowledge, I thought the dispense with underside painting was confined to wing undersurfaces from metal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what Ullmann states which is sourced from various reports for the testing and reasoning for the new 81/82 colours:

 

“Test order E2-45/19 (Flight verification of camouflage „Land“)

 

• Report June 1943: The to darken RLM 70/71 will be replaced with color 281 H (olivgreen) and B657 (brightgreen). After 9 month of environmental testing they are very lightresistant.

 

• Report August 1943: The new colors RLM 81 and 82 (brown tint) introduced

 

• Report October 1943: The exposure of the colors (also small production batches) after finishing the summer sun period showing no discoloration.

 

• Report December 1943: RLM 81 and 82 introduced. Lightresistant without objection 

 

• Report February 1944: RLM 81 and 82 accordingly report 2138/43 dated 02. July 1943 introduced. Lightresistant, including serial production, without objection.”

 

So it appears that they determined that the colours remained light resistant for at least 9 months including a summer period.

 

I agree that many aircraft were lost before the desaturation of the paint would even become an issue, but we also have a great number of aircraft surviving to be used in various units and as trainers. Desaturation was obviously deemed a serious issue hence the development of new light resistant paint colours. The fact that they waited 9 months to check the light resistance of 81/82 means they must have required the paints to last at the very least longer then 9 months. Which also suggests that 70/71 didn't last that long until it started to desaturate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, tempestfan said:

Literal back-translation for battle would be „Schlacht“, which may refer to Schlachtflieger - Fw 190F, Ju 87D and the like. 

The section about „clear“ sounds a bit odd, as I read the translation to indicate „continue“ to use light blue and „so far“ being „clear“, at the same time? With my admittedly limited knowledge, I thought the dispense with underside painting was confined to wing undersurfaces from metal.

Not sure. I just used several different online translation sites to get a general translation that made some kind of sense because not all of the sites did well with the full translation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

„Introduction“ *** may*** mean the hue was „elevated“ to official RLM status, though admittedly it doesn’t make much sense to introduce colours without specifying what to use it for. Maybe the shades were initially intended for craft working low down and later extended to interceptors when ground concealment took priority over a/a camouflage? Just guessing...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Kaldrack said:

I’m just wondering why there is a time difference between the introduction of 81/82 between the Ullmann documents and the Augsburg/Hungarian document.

 

Perhaps it’s just when that message was sent (August 1944), opposed to the earlier general order to use the new paints. 

 

As in there was a lttle subcontractor somewhere In Hungary they forgot to tell about the change in colours and they intercepted it? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bingo! You hit that nail on the head, Tony! That wouldn't surprise me in the least. Contractors/subcontractors not getting a notice occurs in peacetime; the late war period in Germany almost guarantees that some producers were never notified; or, were notified very late, or too late to make whatever changes were mandated/needed, etc.

Joe

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s certainly possible. Although the document is from the Messerschmitt-controlled Magyar Waggon és Gépgyár (MWG) plant at Györ in Hungary. It was producing Bf 109 Gs in 1943. So it wasn’t a small, oft forgotten and obscure sub-contractor. It was directly controlled by Messerschmitt to produce entire airframes.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thinking about that time difference between the two documents Kaldrack mentioned:

 

During the war there was a great number of all kinds of "special officials" traveling around Germany and the occupied territories. They all knew someone "important" who gave them a special brevet to execute "Fuhrer Befels" on different matters. This is of course guess work but let's assume that shortly after the publishing of Sammelmitteilung 2 an official appeared at an aircraft factory and said that despite the orders from RLM this is what you actually should do. After one week another official came with different instructions. In many cases those "special brevets" were signed by Hitler himself so it must have been confusing for the aircraft factory's management to decide what to do and whose orders to obey. Make the wrong move and you'll pay for it...

 

Albert Speer used this "multi-layer" bureaucracy to his own advantage. For example at one point Hitler personally ordered him to produce nothing but anti-aircraft guns. Speer knew that it would take at least a year to modify the industry to fulfill that order. So he answered to Hitler that he would personally take care of that matter without giving it really a further thought. After a couple of weeks factories were still producing fighter aircraft and AA -guns. So from Berlin's point of view it was necessary to send the first "special official" to find out why a "Fuhrer Befel" was ignored. This official was then explained that actually the factory was waiting for lorries to take out all aircraft aluminium and return loaded with steel for guns.

 

My point here is that the further the war went the more all kinds of high ranking "special officials" there were giving their own orders at all government levels. Everyone knows how much delays such a system can create; especially if people are afraid on their own lives.

 

Kind Regards,

Antti 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A great thread demonstrating that a reputable author ought to publish a document that updates all the great published works by Ullmann, Merrick, and others to bring us to 2018.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a misundestanding worth noting. The Sola He 115 was raised from Hafrsfjord, i.e. seawater, not a fresh water lake as some seem to think. Whether and how that has any effect on the way the paint deteriate us anyones guess. I think the most interesting find is that in all likelyhood the gelb (RLM04) theater bands on the underwing was repainted by locally sourced maritime paint. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's worth keeping in mind that until someone who is competent at analysing historical paint samples has examined that wreck then it would be wise to take anything mentioned in that report with an incredibly large pinch of salt. (no pun intended). ;)

Edited by Kaldrack
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

I haven't read all through this discussion on RLM 83 and the paint analysis of He 115 W.Nr. 2398 I and my colleague Pilawskii conducted some years ago, but I have noted the rude and mocking replies of this Kaldrack character. I do not understand why you, Kaldrack, cannot critique our research and analysis without resorting to such descriptions of us and our work as you did? Why cannot colours of aircraft be discussed without one or both parties resorting to name calling and the lower levels of human interaction. I just don't understand that.

 

You use terms such as "charlatan" and "sensationalism" about me and my research. How can you assign such terms to me and such a motif to my activities? As far as I know we have never ever met, and I cannot therefore imagine I have hurt you to such a degree that I deserve such characteristics in what should be an innocent debate about aircraft colouration!? I strongly suggest that if you want to present yourself as a serious researcher or participant in scientific discussions (which this is, after all) that you refrain from calling people you do not know such names and try to belittle their research activities by using characterisations for which there is no basis to use. Do you think I invented the colouration off the He 115 at Sola to be outrageous and sensational so I could become famous and well-known in the community.

 

Sentences like this: "Erik Pilawskii and the guys pushing the narrative for the BV 138 float being RLM 83 Dark Blue are even suggesting that this He 115 was painted in RLM 83 Dark Blue which quite frankly is absurd considering that it was lost in the lake on 28th December 1942. This is the level of sensationalism these charlatans are willing to lower themselves to..." says more about you and your lack of character than me and Pilawskii. And it is also factually wrong as to what we said in our research document, see below.

 

I will give you one more chance, Kaldarack, display some integrity and apologise for using such terms when describing my character and admit you had no reason to use them and I will hold no grudge. You can disagree with me all you want and I will welcome that and we can discuss RLm 83, the He 115 and Luftwaffe colours in a civilised manner. You can conceivably for all I known be correct about the colour on the BV 138 artefact, after all, and I could be wrong, but I will not accept your characterisation regardless. So, can we perhaps try to bring this down to a level of academic, civilised discussion and not name-calling. Guess which one is most productive scientifically!? 

 

I will refrain from commenting on your remarks regarding the PH-method as that was not my responsibility during our research, but I will comment on this:

 

"I think that what has been presented over the course of this topic illustrates that the possibility of both the float and the He 115 being painted in RLM 83 Dark Blue as impossible based on the areas in which these machines served and the areas/timescale of the testing/introduction of RLM 83 Dark Blue. It just does not match in the slightest and I believe that any researcher worth his salt would come to the same conclusion."

 

In future discussions with me I strongly suggest you read the document you critique and then try to understand what you have read. Nowhere in the document have we stated that the He 115 was painted in RLM 83! That part of the analysis was an aside dealing with the single Bv 138 float and that analysis stands. The He 115 was painted in an odd mix of RLM 02 on the ventral surfaces, and an unusal combination of what appears to be RLM 66 and a local mixture of a darker grey which itself seems to be a mixture between RLM 66 and 22, on the top surfaces. The yellow parts were overpainted with a strange bright green colour. I have seen those colours and the airframe for myself. we compared the RLM 66 on the outside with the RLM 66 in the interior of the nose area, we certainly did not make up colours of our own minds! Have you seen it? Have you analysed it first hand? And the Bv 138 float was analysed for what we saw and for what it was. It may not fit with what we know of the introduction of the blue RLM 83 colour, but given the evidence at hand, that is not enough to discount the colour seen on this float. What you are trying to do, Kaldrack, is to fit the terrain to the map! That float is blue, we need to find out why, not dismiss it because it doesn't fit with our current understanding of the use of RLM 83.

 

To the rest of those who may read this, I am sorry about blowing life into what is apparently an old thread, but I cannot let such characterisations about myself as those quoted above stand unopposed.

 

Kjetil Åkra

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was a bit of a wasted effort Kjetil, as Kaldrack hasn't been back to the site after he was told (by me) to be more polite, after giving people grief for disagreeing with him.  It was evidently too much for him as he hasn't even acknowledged the warning, and has probably stomped off in a huff.  I'm going to shut this down, as there's no merit to leaving it to fester.  What is it about colour "discussions" that lead people to get so upset with each other? :shrug:

 

This sort of thing is likely to get people warnings and holidays in future.  Be warned :dull:

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Mike locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...