Harrier Colours Confusion

[Fantata]

All,

 

I'm coming back to modelling after (many!) years absence. The first aircraft I am building is the VAAC Harrier, as I used to work on it in the 1990s are DERA Bedford and Boscombe Down. I am using the Kinetic 1:48 model but don't want to apply the 'raspberry ripple' scheme of the VAAC as it was most recently, but instead want to use the scheme the airframe had whilst I worked on her. Looking at the paints recommended and other resources (here) it should be DG/DSG/LAG. However, the LAG (I am using Tamiya XF20) looks way too dark; it should be almost an off-white.

 

I have a few photos of the aircraft from the era, some are given here. I wondered if it was just the age of the aircraft or the lighting, but then I saw the brand new retro paint scheme on one of the harriers on the last day of flying at RAF Cottesmore (here) and the underbelly looks a lot lighter than LAG.

 

So question is, is it a trick of the light or am I missing something? Is the Tamiya paint wrong? Should I just eyeball it?

 

Thanks!

 

[Giorgio N]

Welcome to the forum !

The problem is with the Tamiya paint and it's not much that Tamiya did wrong but simply XF20 is not a match for Light Aircraft Grey, it's a generic medium grey that someone incorrectly suggested to reproduce LAG. IMHO a much better match in the Tamiya range is XF49, I've used this in the past for a Harrier GR.1 and while not perfect I decided I could live with it

If ou want a better match you can try paints from other manufacturers, Gunze for example have a proper Light Aircraft Grey in their range as H332. I say Gunze as their paints are very similar to Tamiya's, others have this paint in enamel or acrylic, like Humbrol and Xtracolour/Xtracrylics, depending on the type of paint you prefer you may be happier with one of them

Edited October 1, 2018 by Giorgio N

[Fantata]

Thanks Giorgio. 

 

Looking at XF49 it is khaki which seems too green and too dark. Gunze H332 again seems dark but this time with a blue tint. Neither seem to match the light off-white (say bone/stone) colour on the underside of the aircraft. It could just be my interpretation!?!?

[Giorgio N]

Sorry, my mistake, it's XF19 Sky Grey, not XF49... it is still a bit darker than LAG, but sure much lighter than XF-20. I misread the code on the paint bottle I have.

The Gunze paint should be pretty light, I used this paint a few years ago and is maybe even lighter than the real BS paint, guess they went for a lighter interpretation for scale effect. Don't be fooled by the colour of the cap, the paint inside is a much better match.

If you want something even lighter, one option is Vallejo 986 Deck Tan. This is kind of close, a bit lighter than LAG and with more brown.

BTW, it's not just your interpretation if you see something like a very light stone in LAG, it does indeed have a slight brownish cast.

 

[Fantata]

Ahhh, XF-19 looks closer.....just needs a little lighter and brown tinge. Let me loot at Vallejo 986. Thanks for your guidance!

[perdu]

Humbrol's 166 Light Aircraft Grey looks about right if you can use it, in acrylic

 

I know it is daft advising on a paint I dislike but the colour is close enough to the real deal that I will be using it, slightly reluctantly on my RAF Buccaneer which is a while down the road yet

 

That light creamy grey comes across nicely

 

I find some Humbrol acrylics a bit soft to work with either brushing or airbrushing but I had luck using Dark Sea Grey and Dark Camouflage Grey from the range on my RAF Jaguars a while back so I'd consider it worth a punt

[e8n2]

19 hours ago, Fantata said:

All,

 

I'm coming back to modelling after (many!) years absence. The first aircraft I am building is the VAAC Harrier, as I used to work on it in the 1990s are DERA Bedford and Boscombe Down. I am using the Kinetic 1:48 model but don't want to apply the 'raspberry ripple' scheme of the VAAC as it was most recently, but instead want to use the scheme the airframe had whilst I worked on her. Looking at the paints recommended and other resources (here) it should be DG/DSG/LAG. However, the LAG (I am using Tamiya XF20) looks way too dark; it should be almost an off-white.

 

I have a few photos of the aircraft from the era, some are given here. I wondered if it was just the age of the aircraft or the lighting, but then I saw the brand new retro paint scheme on one of the harriers on the last day of flying at RAF Cottesmore (here) and the underbelly looks a lot lighter than LAG.

 

So question is, is it a trick of the light or am I missing something? Is the Tamiya paint wrong? Should I just eyeball it?

 

Thanks!

 

When I was stationed at RAF Woodbridge in the mid 70s, our F-4Ds officially had light gray FS 36622 undersides.  To me, and in the pictures I took during my time there, it sure looked white to me.  It could just very well be our old Mk. I eyeballs playing tricks on us.  As LAG is supposed to be very close to FS 36440, the topside gray on USN aircraft at the time, the undersides should have had some grayish appearance to them, but you saw them a lot more than I did, so I would go with your judgement on it.

Later,

Dave

[brinjal]

I'm looking at a Harrier GR.3 in the Falklands, from what I googled it seems GR3 at the falklands are 2 schemes (Dark green and sea grey).

 

I was wondering if tamiya's XF-81 and XF-82 (Ocean Grey) can be used, for the top side camouflage, and medium sea grey (XF-83) for the interior?

[Giorgio N]

Yes for Dark Green as the colour remained the same and IIRC Tamiya's XF-81 is ok.

No for Ocean Grey as this fell from use after the war and when camouflage returned on RAF fighters they used Dark Sea Grey. The two are quite different, better look for a proper dark sea grey paint 

[CharlieNZ]

41 minutes ago, Giorgio N said:

Yes for Dark Green as the colour remained the same and IIRC Tamiya's XF-81 is ok.

No for Ocean Grey as this fell from use after the war and when camouflage returned on RAF fighters they used Dark Sea Grey. The two are quite different, better look for a proper dark sea grey paint 

Tamiya XF54 is actually pretty good for Dark Sea Grey.

[CT7567]

The perception of varied light greys (or grays) as "white or nearly off-white" when used as underside camouflage on otherwise much darker schemes is a good example of the contrast skewing the impression from the objective color.

 

The Checker-Shadow Illusion provides an excellent illustration:

 

"A" is much darker than "B", right?

 

Are you sure?

 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Checker_shadow_illusion

 

Lighting, shade/shadow, context and contrast all play a *huge* role in how individuals "see" the same color, so while there are usually some rare exceptions I will always trust formal specs on the colors of a given airframe before I start looking for unicorns like the USAF Phantoms that kept their original white undersides from the "Navy" scheme and had only the upper camouflage colors applied.

 

But there will always be folks that tell you, "I've been up close to B on real airframes so I know it's lighter." 🤔

 

[e8n2]

As I posted way earlier in this thread that 36622 on F-4Ds looked like white to me, I will also mention that the problem is the scale affect.  If you paint 36622 on a 72nd scale model, it will definitely look nothing like what you see in the flesh.  It is the scale affect.  Either add some white to the 36622 to make it lighter, or add some black to white to make it look a little darker.  You could also try, and I plan on doing this as a test before committing to it, try using 36495 instead.  It at times looks like white even though it is really gray.  I know it doesn't make much sense since 622 is lighter than 495, but stranger things have been known to happen.  What it all comes down to, unless you are building for a contest or for a paying client, is use whatever looks best to YOU!

Later,

Dave