Jump to content

Bf 109E blue air intake cover?


Fin

Recommended Posts

My plausible answers are that the later Bf109s have no such heat-resistant paint; nor do other Luftwaffe aircraft; or indeed any aircraft of other nations; that there is a shield above the exhaust deflecting the flow of gases away from the intake, as can be seen from the staining: that the effect of any hot gas re-ingestion would be so damaging to the power output that any local heating of the intake lip would be negligible in comparison; and that the airflow hitting the intake would be a major cooling effect.  Whatever the reason for the specific painting of this item, it isn't for heat-resistant reasons.  That the colour sometimes appears similar is just chance; if it was important it would be universal.

 

As I understand it, the purpose of the black surround on the fuselage aft of the exhausts was entirely for appearance reasons rather than protection, witness the fact that it was only present in a minority of cases.  If it was important it would have been universal.  A similar argument can be made for the postwar painting of black stripes above the wing on white Lancasters - but not on camouflaged one.  You could also consider the use of local black paint under the wings of Luftwaffe bombers around the cowlings, reducing the painting effort required for the transfer of the aircraft between day and night operations..

 

As for the intake "cover"  itself, I stand by my comment that for a permanent installation it is particularly badly designed, with steps and gaps (and leaks in and out!) in pretty well every mating joint.  Look at the difference in fit in each photograph.  Sometimes it rides high, sometimes low, but is never flush-fitting.   I should add that I have worked in an aircraft factory, with specific aerodynamic responsibility for signing off the build standard.  Not in 1939, it is true.  I also worked for a while on the Harrier, and other designs where hot gas re-ingestion was a serious problem.  It would not have been negligible in 1939, and is perhaps the best argument against any such problem being present.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"later Bf109s have no such heat-resistant paint" Really...

 

Bf_109_F_JG_1_II_Gr_1_31_Tatzelwurm_embl

 

Bf_109_F_JG_51_2_White_2_Emblem_8_2.jpg

 

post_1_0_67859000_1403988034.jpg

 

I'm not talking about the gases re-entering the supercharger specifically. I'm talking about the heat and flame that can emanate from the exhaust stubs and affect the paint and metal parts close to the exhaust areas. Take a look this photo of a Ju 188 and how far away from the exhaust stacks the metal is visibly affected by the heat and flames. Note also the area directly surrounding the exhaust stubs which appears to be painted with a black paint... This is not the roughly sprayed night finish on the lower surfaces either. That black paint is specifically painted on the exhaust stub housing. Note also the hard-edged diagonal application of black paint on the side of the cowling. That is not the camouflage demarcation because the power eggs on the Ju 188 were supplied in solid RLM 71/65. That hard-edged diagonal section of black paint looks to have been specifically applied to the side of the cowling to protect the cowling from what is emitted from the exhausts. Why would they pay particular attention to that section of the cowling and paint it in black paint?

 

Ju_188_1.jpg

 

The angle and location of the black paint looks to be suspiciously similar to the general coverage of exhaust staining on the cowling of this other Ju 188:

 

s_l1600_1.jpg

 

Obviously the minimal guarding of the exhausts on the Bf 109 E and the early Bf 109 Fs was deemed not sufficient so we see from the F-4 the exhaust guard is much larger and curves around the front of the exhausts thus funnelling much more of the exhaust heat and emissions away from the supercharger intake which is of the much sturdier and streamlined variety than the type used on the E-series.

 

bf_109_image.jpg

 

So all of these applications of a black paint specifically painted on the areas affected by the exhaust emissions are purely for aesthetic reasons. I'm sorry, but that is complete nonsense. Why would they go to so much trouble to carefully paint black paint around the exhaust stubs and wider areas just so that it looks nice? It clearly would have had a function and the most plausible explanation is heat protection. The supercharger on the E-series obviously also received special attention. Or it was painted black because it looked nice? Nothing is done without reason. Everything has a function otherwise it is just a waste of time on a warbird. There is no reason to not paint the supercharger intake with the same colour as the surrounding areas unless there was a specific reason.

 

Here's a few more to add to the list:

 

He 59

 

2018_04_24_12_38_59_am.jpg

 

He 45

 

Heinkel_45_spain_zpsymgihoxj.jpg

 

A Hs 126 with the black area behind the exhaust specifically not painted white like the rest of the aircraft. Perhaps they left it black because it looked nice?

 

hs126_6_K_EM_001.jpg

 

Another good shot of the black heat resistant paint applied specifically behind the exhaust stub on the Hs 126. I wonder why they would do that if it was not for a specific function?

 

hs126_a1_spain_19_6_006.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.... but if the supercharger intake was so susceptible to exhaust heat why place it so close to the exhaust?

 

You argue your point well, but I'm with Graham on this one - black paint was used for 'tidiness' of appearance around engine areas as far back as the pre-war Junkers airliners, but it wasn't to stop the wings from melting. If the paint used was for heat protection it would be present on all aircraft and not painted over in ordinary paint, and for all the pictures you can find with black paint directly around the exhaust area you will find more with no such paint.

 

Also the RLM02 in the gun troughs: the fact that it looks a (slightly) different colour in two different photographs over 75 years old, taken at different times, in differrent locations, probably on different cameras using a different type of film... doesn't prove the existence of a different shade of paint used specifically for that purpose. My (comparatively) modern digital camera can produce two apparently different colours from the same object in the space of a few seconds, if the sun goes behind a cloud, or if I switch a light on.

 

Cheers,

 

Stew

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"but if the supercharger intake was so susceptible to exhaust heat why place it so close to the exhaust"

 

Where else are they going to put it? Placing it anywhere else on the cowling would have limited the view of the pilot. They already tried it under the port wing on the Jumo engined Bf 109s and it suffered from debris brought up by the wheels. Regardless, the supercharger on the DB 601 was built into the engine as a single unit which was not just for use on the Bf 109. The supercharger intake on the Bf 109 directs the airflow directly into the supercharger because that is where the supercharger was located on the DB 601/605 engine...

 

"black paint was used for 'tidiness' of appearance around engine areas as far back as the pre-war Junkers airliners, but it wasn't to stop the wings from melting."

 

And you know this is the specific reason how exactly? They just so happened to paint black and grey paint around the exhaust areas on numerous Luftwaffe aircraft for purely aesthetic reasons even during wartime. Again, complete nonsense as per the reasoning already stated. Not all factories worked to the same standards or practices. Who said anything about the wings melting?

 

"If the paint used was for heat protection it would be present on all aircraft and not painted over in ordinary paint"

 

Do you think every single one of the in-field painters would care about painting over the black heat resistant areas if they had to paint the cowlings of every aircraft in the Gruppe in a matter of days if not hours after receiving the order... Regardless of the paint on top. The paint underneath would still serve its purpose...

 

"for all the pictures you can find with black paint directly around the exhaust area you will find more with no such paint."

 

That is simply not the case. I can find just as many if not more that are painted with black paint when you remove the repainted aircraft from the equation. It also seems to be factory specific to a certain extent. The majority of Fieseler and Messerschmitt built aircraft tended to use the black paint more so on the exhaust areas than say WNF. WNF did, however, paint the supercharger intakes as seen on this brand new aircraft undergoing flight testing at Wiener Neustädter Flugzeugwerke GmbH:

 

1366141516_T2e_C16_Rs_E9swm_Zpl1_BRRIF2j

 

Colour identification is a subjective matter. I know what I can see regardless of your opinion or stories about your camera. The troughs in the same film are clearly a different colour to the RLM 02 used on the engine bearer. If there was a specific RLM colour shade allocated to the heat resistant paint to be used on the gun troughs it would have been stated in the excerpt sourced from the period document I posted earlier. It is not thus meaning that a particular shade was not of importance. It simply had to be a heat resistant paint...

 

Black painted exhaust surrounds on various early (and late) He 111 versions:

 

10934136_821883467864893_730504020824721

 

IMG_0285.jpg

 

IMG_0323.jpg

 

IMG_0284.jpg

 

A lighter (grey) paint applied specifically around the exhausts:

 

84149494.jpg

 

Black exhausts on a Bf 109 E in 1939:

 

2018_04_24_08_37_38_am.jpg

 

At least some of the painters took care not to overpaint the black heat resistant paint:

 

2018_04_24_08_40_02_am.jpg

2018_04_24_08_40_23_am.jpg

 

Anyway, opinions are personal and in reality, I only really need to convince myself of the use of heat resistant paint in the areas mentioned, convincing other is not my goal, putting forward evidence to ascertain historical accuracy is my main aim. You can take it or leave it. Hopefully, others will see the photographic evidence supplied throughout this topic and make up their own minds. One thing is for sure, no decisions on the design, development or standard markings on a warbird were for aesthetic purposes. Everything had a specific and predetermined function.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have completely missed my points.  I did not deny there was what appears to be heat resistant paint - if that is what it is - in the immediate vicinity of the exhausts.  I denied that there would be any value in such paints further aft, particularly where (as on some Bf109s) this black pattern extends back as far as the trailing edge of the wing, or is painted (sometimes!) in pretty zig-zag patterns such as on Fw190s.  As for the suggestion that this paint would be casually overpainted by the ground crew, this is not only insulting to the levels of discipline and engineering knowledge within the Luftwaffe but readily disproved.  If the exhaust gases were hot enough to damage the metal then the ordinary paint put on top of it would be melted and blown away, and this would be readily visible in photos showing the supposed heat-resistant paint underneath.  Where are the photos showing this?  And equally importantly, where do you see this on other nations' aircraft?  The laws of heat distribution apply equally to the RAF, the VVS, the USAAF etc.

 

Forget that photo of the Bf109F in #27 - this is an extended intake to include a dust filter for tropical use.

 

My main comment however was about the lip of the air intake.  You say "I'm not talking about the gases re-entering the supercharger specifically."  Yes, you are.  You cannot have exhaust air hot enough to damage the metal lip of the intake without that hot air going into the intake.   This would then  reduce the power output of the engine, much as less power is available in tropical climates and more in polar regions, at least at low altitudes.    But exhaust air is much hotter than tropical air.  Think of the laws of thermodynamics, specifically related to the Carnot cycle.  All heat engines rely upon the difference between the temperature of the air coming in, and the maximum temperature achieved inside the combustion chamber.  The greater the difference, the greater the efficiency, the greater the power.  (It's fifty years since I studied this, so I guarantee it could be expressed better.)   The maximum internal temperature is limited by the materials, so any increase in temperature of the incoming air reduces the efficiency of the engine, and the power that can be produced.  The temperature of the exhaust gases greatly exceed that of any environment.  Basically you are recycling the internal temperature back into the engine and the efficiency falls towards zero (at the extreme).

 

This is not my unsupported opinion but the laws of thermodynamics.  If any manufacturer had such a poor design that hot air from the exhausts recycled back into the engine then he would redesign the exhausts to avoid this.  Which is exactly the purpose of the small lip above the exhausts.  Linked to the backdraught from the propeller, and the direction of the exit of the exhausts, this constrains the flow from the exhausts to being directly aft.  With of course some intermixing and broadening (and cooling!) of the exhaust flow as it moves aft.

 

Whatever the purpose of the dark paint on this intake lip, it has nothing to do with any heat-resistant properties it may have.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

Plus a good reason why it is such an awful un-aerodynamic fit!

 

The entire nose of the Emil looks like an "awful un-aerodynamic" design to me, which is a major reason why I much prefer the F and beyond- even with the lumps and bumps that snuck back in.

 

It seems to me that the primary time for heat trouble would be ground-running (especially start-up?)  Obviously once the airplane is moving forward, the airstream is going to take over and the intake will have nice clean air.  A bit of exhaust gas ingestion while idling or taxiing is immaterial (unless it starts a fire, which has been known to happen!)  Even with propwash, though, with negligible forward motion it would be quite easy for exhaust gases to wind up around the supercharger intake (and note that the direction of rotation would serve to assist).

 

Relative to "aesthetics", obviously that comes into play to some degree, such as the stylized black area on some Fw 190s, but that's playing with a black patch that's  there for other reasons.  Perhaps I've misread, but we seem to be forgetting the evidence of the text on factory drawings.

 

I also have a mental image of the light-colored Me's from the Spanish Civil War- don't they also have prominent black surrounds to the exhaust?

 

And finally, it is an interesting discussion- let's not ruin it by getting testy, anybody.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, this has been a very interesting discussion and by all means please continue with it. At the same time, could you give an opinion on the subject that made me start this thread too? I`m trying to decide how to paint the supercharger intake cover on the Romanian:

https://www.asisbiz.com/il2/Bf-109E/FARR/pages/Messerschmitt-Bf-109E3-FARR-7-Grupul-Yellow-6-Germany-1941-01.html

and Yugoslav Emils:

https://www.asisbiz.com/il2/Bf-109E/RYAF/pages/Messerschmitt-Bf-109E3-VVKJ-6-Fliegerregiment-32-Gruppe-L65-WNr-2507-Yugoslavia-1941-01.html

(they are not black! :D )

 

 

Edited by Fin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"As for the suggestion that this paint would be casually overpainted by the ground crew, this is not only insulting to the levels of discipline and engineering knowledge within the Luftwaffe but readily disproved."

 

Don't take your high horse and virtue signal on behalf of people you never knew, worked with or have any understanding of how they operated on a busy airfield in a wartime setting. There are many things that can be seen which would point out just how lax some of these ground crew could be if and when the pressure was on regardless of what higher headquarters or the RLM thought about the situation. I searched for and offered enough photographic evidence to disprove every statement you have made so far regarding this black paint so I suggest you go off and do some research instead of relying on everyone else to run around while you sit there being cantankerous and argumentative about what is clearly seen in the photos I have posted.

 

"Forget that photo of the Bf109F in #27 - this is an extended intake to include a dust filter for tropical use."

 

Anyone who cares to look through any books on the Bf 109 F or G will see that the larger curved guard/deflector around the exhaust stubs was not only present on tropical Bf 109s with tropical filters. There are many in France and Russia with this component. Go and take a look for yourself...

 

Here's a Bf 109 F with the larger curved exhaust guard/deflector with the black heat resistant paint... :

 

img20180424_11593732.jpg

 

 "Whatever the purpose of the dark paint on this intake lip, it has nothing to do with any heat-resistant properties it may have."

 

You do not know that and you have not presented any evidence to suggest otherwise. You have not tested the heat or flames that spurt out of the engine of the Bf 109. You are presuming that none would exist simply because it does not fit your narrative. You can see on many aircraft just how far beyond the exhausts the exhaust staining and emissions could affect the surrounding metalwork and especially the paint. You have no clue about whether the black paint was for heat resistance even though we have an almost perfect Ju 88 being restored and they actually know that the paint behind the exhausts was black heat resistant paint. I say again 1+1=2. What other reason is there for the exhausts and supercharger intake to be specifically painted in a completely different colour to the rest of the airframe. You have not offered one single plausible explanation other than because it looked nice. Seriously...

 

Here are some more photos of the black heat resistant paint around the exhausts of late war fighters that you said didn't exist. :

 

Original Ta 152:  

 

2018_04_24_12_40_00_pm.jpg

2018_04_24_12_10_48_pm.jpg

2018_04_24_12_09_17_pm.jpg

 

FW 190:

 

2018_04_24_12_30_04_pm.jpg

2018_04_24_12_30_46_pm.jpg

 

 

Hellow Gingerbob,

 

"Relative to "aesthetics", obviously that comes into play to some degree, such as the stylized black area on some Fw 190s, but that's playing with a black patch that's there for other reasons.  Perhaps I've misread, but we seem to be forgetting the evidence of the text on factory drawings."

 

Agreed, that eagle design on the JG 2 FW 190s used the black paint applied to the area and grills behind the exhausts on the cowling. Utilising it in the design of the eagle artwork.

 

"And finally, it is an interesting discussion- let's not ruin it by getting testy, anybody. "

 

Here, here. It is an interesting discussion, but it comes with frustrations. When there are people who offer nothing whatsoever that could constitute as actual evidence and all they do is sit there arguing and being cantankerous about there own personal opinions that are based on absolutely nothing except what they personally think is right or wrong. It just causes people who might add new understandings about certain things or provide documentary evidence from their own personal archive to walk away and not bother trying to get involved. They will never do anything in their lives that would positively increase the understanding of the markings and camouflage systems in use during WW2 because all they are interested in is stifling any discussion that goes against their biased personal opinion. By throwing spanners and loops for those offering evidence to trip up on or jump through.

 

I have offered as much evidence from my own image and document collection as I am willing to share. Those viewing the topic can take it or leave it and make up their own minds. I feel that there is ample evidence to suggest that heat resistant paint was applied to the areas in question.

Edited by Kaldrack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are now up to 74 posts, I see.  I've been around here long enough to have over 5000 (!)  Your assumptions about Graham are quite wrong, and the tone YOU are taking is not making anyone more interested in listening to your case.  PLEASE calm down.  And please edit your last post to remove all the annoying underlining, for the benefit of my eyes, if nothing else.

 

 

Edited by gingerbob
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoopi doo! You have more posts than me! What has that got to do with anything. I’m not alone in thinking that Graham Boak is an argumentative, cantankerous know nothing. Many in my circle think the same and it’s one of the main reasons they do not get involved on modelling forums. So take it or leave it. No skin off my nose... :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It gets dusty on the Russian steppes too, also in summer in many places, and under the pressures of war not every aircraft gets sent to the theatre for which it was originally intended.  So yes, you did find aircraft with dust filters  operating away from the desert - for example they were standard fit on late-model Spitfires.  You also find many aircraft without such filters operating in temperate and tropical climes - and they are totally irrelevant to this argument.

 

None of the photos you have presented give any evidence at all for heat resistant paint at any distance downstream of the exhausts, or at any distance away from the direct path of these exhausts.  You quote only the one example of such paint, without describing just where it was found, and extend it to cover every example you find of a dark colour around exhausts.  Perhaps, although why German aircraft are quite so particularly sensitive could do with some attempt at an explanation.

 

I suggest you attempt to provide a logical engineeringly-sound answer to valid objections.  Resorting to insult rather suggests that you lack the same, which can only expose weaknesses in your position.  Being argumentative and cantankerous, I will add that I have been insulted by better individuals than yourself, but they at least had the courtesy to use their real names rather than hiding cowardly behind a pseudonym.

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bring evidence to the table Graham. You bring nothing, but nonsical personal opinion which is based on erroneous information derived from your clearly lacking reference material and research experience. It’s why you get absolutely destroyed and made to look like a complete fool on specialist forums by people who actually know what they are talking about.

 

Perhaps we could exchange numbers so we can meet up for cup of tea and find out who the real coward is. Other than that button it you keyboard warrior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Kaldrack said:

I bring evidence to the table Graham. You bring nothing, but nonsical personal opinion which is based on erroneous information derived from your clearly lacking reference material and research experience. It’s why you get absolutely destroyed and made to look like a complete fool on specialist forums by people who actually know what they are talking about.

 

Perhaps we could exchange numbers so we can meet up for cup of tea and find out who the real coward is. Other than that button it you keyboard warrior.

Your to tone on here is similar to another person who was banned for behaviour like you are showing to respected members, i'm beginning to wonder if you are the same person under a different user name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kaldrack said:

Whoopi doo! You have more posts than me! What has that got to do with anything. I’m not alone in thinking that Graham Boak is an argumentative, cantankerous know nothing. Many in my circle think the same and it’s one of the main reasons they do not get involved on modelling forums. So take it or leave it. No skin off my nose... :D

That takes the biscuit.  A personal attack will not be tolerated on a member, regardless of their standing in the community.  You'll be on holiday now for 31 days, and hopefully will come back with a better attitude toward people that have a different opinion than you.  BY all means discuss them, but when it comes to aggression that's when we step in.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kaldrack said:

I’m not alone in thinking that Graham Boak is an argumentative, cantankerous know nothing

Cantankerous?  Argumentative?  A matter of opinion.

 

But 'know nothing'?  No-one in this debate has struck me as deserving of that.  The Physics mentioned here is the very same as that which I studied, possibly at around the same time - after all, I do come from the same Universe, as do you.

 

On the exhausts, my opinion is this: that heat is best exchanged by conduction, and the areas around exhausts do get very hot - more so, I would say, than the exhaust gas and therefore the material over which it is blown.  So the black paint probably was heat resistant; after all, it doesn't look burned.

 

Aesthetics do play a part in the maintenance of weapons of war which have periods away from the muck and bullets; it's a matter of morale, unit pride as a whole and that of the pilot in particular.  Hence emblems and other artwork.  Nothing wrong about wanting to risk your life in a well groomed mount, if you must risk it at all.  Pride inspires confidence.  If you don't want to win, nor think you can, the battle is lost - ancient authorities on combat knew this.  Read Musashi Miyamoto's Go Rin No Sho - the Book of Five Spheres.  Work goes better with good tools, and that includes appearance.

 

I would suggest that the intake geometry on the 109F onwards was deliberately designed to facilitate fitting of filters; a 'plug and play' solution, perhaps.  If there was concern about 'rebreathing', surely a simple duct would have sufficed?

 

None of this, however, answers the original question!

Edited by Chillidragon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Fin said:

Guys, this has been a very interesting discussion and by all means please continue with it. At the same time, could you give an opinion on the subject that made me start this thread too? I`m trying to decide how to paint the supercharger intake cover on the Romanian:

https://www.asisbiz.com/il2/Bf-109E/FARR/pages/Messerschmitt-Bf-109E3-FARR-7-Grupul-Yellow-6-Germany-1941-01.html

and Yugoslav Emils:

https://www.asisbiz.com/il2/Bf-109E/RYAF/pages/Messerschmitt-Bf-109E3-VVKJ-6-Fliegerregiment-32-Gruppe-L65-WNr-2507-Yugoslavia-1941-01.html

(they are not black! :D )

 

 

I'm not sure Fin, the first one could just be light striking the front  of the supercharger cover. The sun seems to be directly in front of the aircraft but it's difficult to say for sure. The second picture is more obviously a different colour, from the tone I would guess RLM02 or RLM65; if it were my model I'd probably go with the former :). I'd use RLM02 on the cowling gun troughs too.

 

Cheers,

 

Stew

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or, you could go with Stew's original suggestion of RLM 24 Dunkelblau for the intake lip; it doesn't appear to have a "standard" behind it; so, who can challenge it as a "wrong" color?

Joe

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Chillidragon said:

Cantankerous?  Argumentative?  A matter of opinion.

 

But 'know nothing'?  No-one in this debate has struck me as deserving of that.  The Physics mentioned here is the very same as that which I studied, possibly at around the same time - after all, I do come from the same Universe, as do you.

 

No more of this.  He's gone for a holiday, don't continue the storm in a teacup and join him, please.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somewhere in the deep dark cobwebby recesses of my memory I recall the OP's question being asked by someone else on another forum. IIRC the answer for the colour difference is that that particular part was painted as a part of the engine due to it being on the engine when installed. The fairing to the rear was part of the aircraft skin and not the engine.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Mike said:

don't continue the storm in a teacup and join him, please.

I had valid points to make thereafter.  I intended the comment to be conciliatory to both sides of this debate; some very good points having been made.  Without the emotive dambusting it would have remained interesting and enjoyable, even though this era and subject are not on my list of modelling interests.  I feel that I really don't deserve to be threatened, unless I should take that as an imperative, rather than a threat?  I never react well to threats.

 

I'll take at least 31 days off, then, and actually get something done away from the keyboard.

 

Chillidragon out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, JPuente54 said:

Or, you could go with Stew's original suggestion of RLM 24 Dunkelblau

I'd stand by that for the 109s in the film, for want of a better suggestion anyway, but the Yugoslavian 109 and the Romanian one - if indeed that one has the cover painted a different colour - do appear to be considerably lighter than we might  expect RLM24 to appear on photographs :) 

 

Fin, as I said, personally in the case of the Yugoslavian and Romanian 109s I'd go with RLM02, but as Joe points out there is no definitive answer at present so if you wanted to go with RLM65 or even RLM04 it would be your call and it would be hard for anyone to contradict you without providing concrete evidence... 

 

Cheers,

 

Stew

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

Wow! A lot of passion here, but, not life or death, it's about paint. Let's keep it calm, Mike was correct to do as he did.

First: Stew, you are correct about the other colours. In all this discussion, the original reason seemed to have been lost/forgotten.

Second: @MilneBay, in posting 44 above, made a point that no one here(to include myself) seemed to consider: The intake is a part of the engine itself. The factory where it was built would have painted that part when it was assembled. Perhaps an inquiry to the Daimler-Benz people may help? It is likely to be in their company archives still(provided those particular ones survived the war). I am aware that there are people here who are as knowledgeable about the engines as the Nick or Dana are about paints(for the outside). They can tell a DB 601 from a DB 605 at a glance; or a Jumo 213 from whatever.

Joe

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  I think the only thing that I would rule out is the blue edging being a tactical marking - but yes, the anodized idea is certainly a possibility, though my knowledge of it is next to none.

Wonder if they had the ability back then to anodize metal with different colours?

 

anodise.jpg

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

There is this example from Flying Heritage Collection Bf 109E-3 Emil, but I've no idea how true the restorers were to the colour of the area in question;

 

https://acesflyinghigh.wordpress.com/2016/06/25/under-the-cowl-of-the-flying-heritage-collection-bf-109e-3-emil/

 

img_6516-900x600-fhc-bf-109e-3-db-601aa.

 

regards,

Jack

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that intake cover is painted in the same mottled scheme as the fuselage aft of the engine Jack? Hard to say for certain without the cowling fitted but it looks a fair enough match to me...

 

Cheers,

 

Stew

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...