P-51B Mustang III

[Sean_M]

I am trying to understand why there were so many variations in the camo patterns. Richard Franks at pg 68 and 69 of his book says there was a standard and late. Unfortunately the late picture is to fuzzzy to make any distinctions. Can anyone shed some light on this?

[Black Knight]

One thing which caused variation was that each wing was sprayed separately from the fuselage assembly. The port wings were stored and shipped together, as were strbrd wings. As all parts were interchangeable, when being erected at the depot the assemblers just used the next available wing, not bothering to worry if the camo pattern aligned with the fuselage, or if the port wing camo matched a strbrd wing

[Boman]

Not sure I agree on this, as the main wing on the P-51 is one construction as can be seen in this photo: 

[Sean_M]

I suspect that matts or templates ere not used. I can't see the pattern and I am only looking at the MKIII. Selfish ba***ds some of us are trying to make a living 80's later

 

[72modeler]

IIRC Mustang wings were built in two halves and joined together on the assembly line; I remember seeing video footage of a P-51D on the assembly line where this was being done. BTW, I think AG585 is a Mustang I, not a P-51B. See the attached link to its history.

Mike

 

http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=56813

[Boman]

The photo is just for illustration, and not ment to be the P-51B/Mustang III 

 

I guess this photo, although showing Mustang IV/P-51D wing is better to describe my point 

[canberra kid]

I can't answer the specific question but but on the construction and transport side of things it would seem to depend on how the aircraft were transported. If they were 'deck cargo' they would be almost complete airframes cocoond for the trip, if the were to be transported as 'Hold cargo' they would be fully dismantled and fitted in custom crates, I've included some pages from the P.51 Erection manual to illustrate what I mean. I hope it helps? 

John      

[Troy Smith]

16 hours ago, Sean_M said:

Can anyone shed some light on this?

Someone who might well know is @ColFord

 

A look through the Ducimus monograph doesn't give an answer,  The Mustang one is noted for having some errors or omissions,  (Col knows about this) but it does have this 

 

 

whole thing scanned here

https://boxartden.com/reference/gallery/index.php/Modeling-References/Camoflage-Markings/02-North-American-Mustang

 

HTH

[canberra kid]

A drawing from the P.51 manual

 

 

John

[Sean_M]

Thanks Troy. I am still trying to work out the reason for the huge variation. If you look at Techmods Decal paint scheme it is a nightmare. Surely these came off a production line like all other aircraft?

 

[Graham Boak]

The ones shown above from Ducimus are all clearly variations of the standard RAF pattern, and about what you'd reasonably expect from freehand spray painters in wartime conditions.  I know that other variations did exist, as described in the work on RAAF Mustangs in Italy (which I don't have), but perhaps the further interpretation carried out by Techmod in creating their drawings may have introduced more change than actually existed?  Have you compared the drawings on the sheet with photographs of the original?

[72modeler]

18 hours ago, Boman said:

The photo is just for illustration, and not ment to be the P-51B/Mustang III 

 

I guess this photo, although showing Mustang IV/P-51D wing is better to describe my point 

Yep- that's the still from the video that I made reference to in  my post- thanks!

Mike

[Admiral Puff]

On 5/28/2018 at 10:47 PM, Graham Boak said:

The ones shown above from Ducimus are all clearly variations of the standard RAF pattern, and about what you'd reasonably expect from freehand spray painters in wartime conditions.  I know that other variations did exist, as described in the work on RAAF Mustangs in Italy (which I don't have), but perhaps the further interpretation carried out by Techmod in creating their drawings may have introduced more change than actually existed?  Have you compared the drawings on the sheet with photographs of the original?

The book is Southern Cross Mustangs, and it's not confined to the RAAF's operation of the P-51 in Italy.

 

I was Production Editor of SCM. We identified four schemes used on RAAF Mustangs, which we categorised thusly:

RAF1 - aka the "Technical Order", or TO, scheme - as depicted above in the Ducimus pamphlet. Applied to all aircraft obtained from RAF stocks other than those delivered in RAF2,  i.e. it's the same scheme used on RAF aircraft.

RAF2 - aka the "Loop" scheme, which we believe was applied to aircraft previously painted in the Temperate Land (i.e. Dark Earth/Dark Green) scheme, and to aircraft delivered to the U.K. unpainted. The scheme was applied at one or other of the U. K. Aircraft Depots before an aircraft was issued to a unit. It was distinctly different from RAF1. Although there appears to be no paperwork remaining to describe it, there are more than enough photographs depicting it to confirm its existence.

RAF3 - natural metal. Also used on Australian-based RAAF aircraft and the RNZAF's P-51s. Mainly, if not exclusively, used on Mk IVs - certainly there were no RAAF-operated Mk IIIs in RAF3.

RAF4 - aka the "Firewall" scheme. Not strictly relevant to the OP's question, because it was only applied to about twenty aircraft in total, not all used by the two RAAF Squadrons, and mostly to Mustang IVs (although we have identified at least three Mk IIIs that also carried it). SCM describes it as being "... a central block broadly aligned fore and aft with simple diagonal bands on the outer wings ...". It originated at 159 MU in Egypt, which also "zapped" aircraft wearing it with the Unit's crocodile motif above the fin flash on the port side. The name is derived from the fact that the forward edge of the central block was aligned with the engine firewall.

All these schemes are shown and discussed in much greater detail in Chapter 3 of SCM.

 

There were other one-off schemes: for example, Group Captain Brian Eaton's first Mk III, FB260, carried a unique camouflage pattern as well as its "owner's" initials and personal artwork.

 

My involvement with SCM was a labour of love - I get no commission or other payment from the sale of any copy.