Jump to content

Dragon Sexton II colour question


Geoff Bizley

Recommended Posts

Hi guys

 

This is my first post in the AFV section so I apologise in advance if I violate any conventions of this section. I have just purchased Dragon's sexton II with CDP and cannot see anywhere on the instructions where it refers to the colours of the gearbox/final drive assembly (or indeed any of the other interior features). Since it appears that these parts will be visible on the finished model, it would be kinda nice to be able to paint them in the appropriate colours. Any thoughts/suggestions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Geoff Bizley said:

Since it appears that these parts will be visible on the finished model, it would be kinda nice to be able to paint them in the appropriate colours. Any thoughts/suggestions?

 

Hmm, if it was visible from outside, I suggest that it would be the external colour. (see note below)

 

folks who will know more would be @Mike Starmer and @Das Abteilung

 

I don't know how much you know about Allied armour colours,  so it would be worth mentioning when and where your model will represent,  a brief reminder of what a Sexton (for me)  brings up the following question, basic built in Canada,  so Olive Drab?  25 pdr's added in Canada, or UK?

This can make a difference,  for example, Shermans converted to Fireflies were built in US Olive Drab,  but were partially/fully repainted in British SCC 15 Olive Drab when converted.

 

Others will know more,  and maybe driven by my best guess assertions to give the proper answer!

 

HTH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The base interior colour would be the same as the main exterior.  What that is depends on the manufactured date, as production straddles the period when olive drab/SCC 15 was introduced in April 1944. 

 

Other details may be determined from interior shots, but can't vouch if the museum walk around did any altering:

http://www.primeportal.net/artillery/paul_adamson/sexton/

 

Some b/w images here at least confirm black seats:

http://panzerserra.blogspot.com/2019/04/sexton-mki-25-pounder-spg-case-report.html

 

regards,

Jack

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

Thanks to both Troy and jack.

I suspected body colour would be the answer but felt I aught to confirm this because these parts would not be accessable for a repaint after a certain stage in the build. I've decided on a late model with single piece nose plate painted in  SCC15 since I already have a quantity of the excellent Vallejo mix for this colour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are referring to those automotive assemblies visible within the fighting compartment then the basic external colour.  The nose plate does not necessarily denote  late production Sextons.  It was introduced early during the production runs.  My book on the Sexton does not specify how many of the three piece nose types were built but there were not many.  25 pdrs were built in Canada and fitted there.  The majority of Sextons were built in 1943 and thus were finished in SCC.2 brown.  Quite a lot had SCC.1A dark brown disruptive painting as per MTP.46, often mistakenly called Mickey Mouse which strictly speaking, was not.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steven Zaloga had a publication with Osprey, and his research indicates 424 Sextons produced in 1943, out of a total 2,150.

 

Here's his  chart based on quarterly production:

spacer.png

If we add the first half of '44 production (423+425=848) that gives at most 1272 completed before switching to either Olive Drab or SCC 15.

 

regards,

Jack

 

 

 

Edited by JackG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...
On 15/08/2019 at 17:06, Mike Starmer said:

If you are referring to those automotive assemblies visible within the fighting compartment then the basic external colour.  The nose plate does not necessarily denote  late production Sextons.  It was introduced early during the production runs.  My book on the Sexton does not specify how many of the three piece nose types were built but there were not many.  25 pdrs were built in Canada and fitted there.  The majority of Sextons were built in 1943 and thus were finished in SCC.2 brown.  Quite a lot had SCC.1A dark brown disruptive painting as per MTP.46, often mistakenly called Mickey Mouse which strictly speaking, was not.

Mike, good afternoon. I noticed the you mentioned "My book on the sexton " is this a book you've had published or a book you've bought? Could you please let me have any information as I'm currently building a Dragon 1.35 scale kit and need a copy of a sexton Mkii storage diagram. Many thanks. Jock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure the document below has been seen before.  In it are 2 conflicting period photos.  One suggesting that the entire interior was the exterior colour and another that seems to show the entire interior in a lighter colour.  But this may be a prototype or test vehicle: it is a Mk1 but the FDA can't be seen

 

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1469&context=cmh

 

However, I understand that MLW received supplies of automotive components including gearbox and final drive assemblies for Rams, Sextons and Grizzlies from the US M3/M4 supply chain. Many M3 FDAs were certainly made by Mack.  In that case they would have been received in the US standard factory interior colour, which would have been white for both M3 and M4.  As their location below the gun and under the nose rendered then effectively invisible would they have been repainted?  You can see in photos that the driver's compartment and controls are the exterior colour, but the gearbox and FDA are well hidden.  In which case I suppose we might ask ourselves whether it really matters if it can't be seen.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Internal colours - one thing.

Exterials - would they really bother to respray those things to whatever was "actual" (ie. SCC15 / Mickey M, etc), I'm talking about post-landing period.

That was a "two steps behind frontline" artilery, as generals imagined ( not working all the time, as you can read in a link from Das Abtailung (thanx 4 that :-))

So, I wouldn't really know, how to paint my Sexton.

If I had one :-)) None in my friendly "mask" to "mask" LHS :-(

Gotta wait for some of " husband passed away, pile of model boxes to sell" adds.

Take care!

Zig

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike Starmer is the expert here, but if I read his material correctly only tanks were required to be repainted (plain) SCC15 before DDay. Other vehicles would only be repainted when they needed it.

 

Sextons in the UK for DDay, Mks I and II, would therefore almost certainly be in SCC2 with either blue-black/SCC14 or SCC1A. While the SCC15 change came in about 3 months before DDay it is unlikely that many, if any, in SCC15 would have been shipped over and issued in that period. Units arriving later and replacement vehicles would probably be SCC15, with or without SCC14.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going a bit off from OP, (sorry), in Herr Abteilung  link , on page7 is a very interesting photo.

1: guy doing some touch-ups, so, maybe those rusty streaks did not last very long?

2: he is doing that on US type of suspension, while everybody (and his dog) saying - it should be Canadian style - larger fins etc

Just stirring the pot :-))

Z

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not all Sextons had the reinforced bogies with the deeper ribs anyway.

 

However, I think that the painting photo on p7 is actually a Sherman, not a Sexton.  Possibly the unit's OP tank.  If you look directly above his paint brush hand you can see the corner of the glacis and the angled weld.  A Sexton would have a light metal stowage box there.  It also has the pressed spoke roadwheels, and I'm pretty sure that Sextons all had open cast or plugged cast roadwheels.  Of course either the whole bogie or the wheels could have been replaced.  It seems that the fella has just repainted the front axle arm.  But it also has a type of sprocket not used on Sextons.  I believe all Sextons were factory fitted with the plain disc sprockets, but again we could be looking at a replacement.

 

Whatever it is, it has extended end connectors fitted.  This would seem unlikely on an SPG.  But I think the peeking glacis is the clincher that it isn't actually a Sexton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right! It's not a Sexton. Just a fact of repainting took all my attention.

I would expect to take care of all mechanical bits during a break, but paint?

That goes against the grain of most rust streaking, paint chipping modellers :-)

Z

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gunners. Plenty of time on their hands............

 

Don't get me started on over-zealous rusting and some modellers' complete failure to understand the properties of the materials tanks were made from...............................  British instructions, which Canada largely followed, noted the importance of mantaining good paintwork as a protective finish

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to get you started on this.

You have lots of info. :-))

The more we are talking about it, then there is a slight chance to change that blind following of Spanish school of weathering.

Less rusting tracks etc, who took notice, what kind of metal tracks are made off.

Yet, at the shooting war, I was rather surprised with a guy repainting ANYTHING!

It was like -"WHAT?- to me.

Whole idea of repainting received US "olive drab" vehicles to paint them, which something, which "emulate O/D" - scc-15 is rather strange.

Why bother?

Z

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because maintaining vehicles in fully serviceable condition and minimising the burden on the maintenance and supply chain is absolutely fundamental to the maintenance of effective combat capability.  And because Sergeants-Major and Officers Commanding often required it.  Not always because it needed to be done but sometimes to stop troops finding other less desirable things to do during halts and lulls in action.  A slovenly army is an inefficient and ineffective army and instilling an attitude of attention to equipment care is vital and is part of building esprit de corps.  Drivers of any class of vehicle in Commonwealth armies  had - and in most cases still have - a series of "parades" to carry out at certain times to ensure that their vehicles were kept in safe and serviceable condition, and it was one of their duties to attend to those things they could attend-to themselves.  What we would today call Level 1 maintenance.  This is quite probably a Halt Parade photo.  Alternatively the fella painting could be a defaulter and has been given grubby menial jobs to do as a form of punishment for committing some misdemeanour.

 

This sign was chalked on the side of an abandoned British half-track in Italy left by the roadside as a warning to others.  I can't find the actual photo right now.  It isn't painting but this is what happens if your soldiers don't pay attention to looking after their kit.  Broken vehicles and Dead Man's Click when you pull the trigger are no use to anyone.

spacer.png

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with The Spanish School, as you describe it, is that art has taken over from reality. Not helped by the arrival on the market of a zillion weatherig products and a whole library of books on how to use them from competing brands.  Many of course self-promoting and self-serving: use my products, not theirs......

 

The truth is that many of these are very useful and there is often little or nothing to differentiate between competing brands' products.  I have several brands of pigments and washes etc and I can't say that any one is better than any other, although some colours are "better" than others. 

 

BUT - used in moderation.  Many models we see are weathered to look like 20-year range wrecks.  No Sherman, for example, was ever more than 3 and a half years old during WW2: mostly very much less.  There were still 1942 Shermans serving in 1945.  But the half year would have been spent in depots and shipping.  Of the other 3 years, probably less than a year was spent in contact with the enemy: actual combat.

 

To understand weathering of the materials and finishes etc, as distinct from dust and mud etc, you need to understand the way tanks were made and finished and the properties and degradation of those materials.  Not zenithal lighting.............

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, zigster said:

 

Whole idea of repainting received US "olive drab" vehicles to paint them, which something, which "emulate O/D" - scc-15 is rather strange.

Why bother?

Z

They didn't.  The vehicles received in OD were not repainted in SCC15.   The Army changed its preferred camouflage colour from brown to green(ish) in order to better match the material they were receiving from the US, and because they always preferred a green anyway.  The brown had only been introduced because green pigments were in short supply.  SCC15 was an olive green that did not require green pigments.  Only British builds were in SCC15, plus those that required repainting in overhaul anyway.  However some units chose to repaint their current vehicles in order to look good.  At this stage US equipment would have been repainted before issue, so there'd be no reason for anyone to overpaint OD with SCC15.  Having some idea of the Army's approach to things, maybe some people did, but it was not authorised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the feedback!

Then, going back to OP, why would Canadians paint Sextons in SCC2, if GB Army preferred "green" finish anyway?

Getting their supplies from US, I'm sure, truckloads of OD paint would not be too difficult to obtain.

Mr Boak - does your post mean, that SCC15 applies to Firefly, Cromwell, Humber etc, but "typical, off the boat from US" Sherman is left in OD?

Mr Abteilung - There are many great product on the market, making my head spin around

I'm no bashing those products, and thanks for them boys, to develop, and improve on it! My word - Just take easy on it!

Cheers!

Zig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like all Armies, the British liked to standardise.  Not quite to the extent of the US, but it still helps keep things simple - especially the supply side and rapidly recognising friend from foe.  The Canadian Army fought beside the British and followed British rules.  It is of course another matter whether US supplies, in the crisis year of 1942, would be quite as readily available as they were once the US Industry ramped up to meet the suddenly enormous demand of US forces.  

 

Yes, US-supplied vehicles were to be left in OD after the arrival of SCC15.  Firefly is an interesting case, but in view of the rework on the turret, it is believed to have been repainted in SCC15.

 

Having brought up the subject of rapid recognition, then it is certainly possible that having all Allied Armies in basically the same colour could have partially been driven by the need to avoid friendly fire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, rapid recognition, or rather familiarity with the colour is a key factor, that's why all front line vehicles had to be in OD/SCC15.

Shortages in supply during 1942 can justify something, but main production run of Sexton was a bit later.

Firefly was rather extensive mod of the turret/front glacis and all that would be repainted for sure.

Liberal use of SCC2 was (my guess) probably due to a large stock of that paint in stock, with - that's what you wanted, approach.

Since Army accepted "second line of attack" vehicles in not blessed OD/Green, then we have a something to talk about :-)

Which is good :-)

Zig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, zigster said:

probably due to a large stock of that paint in stock, with - that's what you wanted

Doubt there would be large stocks of paint in stock. Supply difficulties & high demand more probably resulted in a situation more like today's Just In Time philosophy and that stocks were limited. Delay's in applicaton would be a result of lengthy & slow supply chains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not in any way wishing to stifle discussion, but we are here walking over ground that is already well trodden and well understood.  After all this time, why things were done has become less relevant. What was done was done. It's been documented, photographed, archived and researched.  Circumstances 80 years ago were very different. In paint terms we now have synthetic pigments, and in a zillion colours. Then we did not. There's a reason why the 1930s BS and RAL codifications had relatively few colours. 

 

All of the reasons - researched reasons - and instructions are explained in Mike Starmer's booklets. There isn't really a huge scope for further  discussion about the whys and wherefores. Just seemingly endless questions about the almost-impossible identification of colours from period monochrome photos.

 

Canada began supplying military materiel to the UK and its own expanding armed forces 2 years before the USA entered the war. Exports from the USA of anything useful to the war effort were initially difficult. Canada was contracted to produce equipment for the UK in UK colours: initially Khaki Green 3 then SCC2. Canadian army units were expected to fight alongside and be fully interoperable with British. So they followed British practice.

 

The only Canadian vehicles finished in OD were the 188 Grizzlies. But these were considered part of the M4 programme and intended to be interoperable with other M4s and were assembled from parts mostly supplied from the USA. Probably the ALCO supply chain as Montreal Locomotive was an ALCO subsidiary. Even Canadian-built models of US trucks for military use were finished in UK colours.

 

As noted before, SCC2 was an undesirable colour but green pigments were short world-wide and the RAF had first call on what was available in the UK. So it was a function of circumstance. Needs must and all that. Umber pigments were mined in the UK and elsewhere within reach so browns were do-able. OD was a similar response by the USA. As soon as a viable alternative became available, SCC15, it was substituted. But that was not until early 1944 and old stock was to be used up. No room for waste in war (no-one mention some thousands of useless Covenanters, Cavaliers, Centaurs and Cromwells Mks 1-4...........).

 

As for the guy painting, I'm not certain that the British/Canadian supply system stocked US OD paint. It is commonly accepted that OD vehicles needing repainting became SCC15.  So that raises the interesting possibility of him repainting parts of an OD tank with SCC15. Try getting that past a show judge on a model......

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

  • 3 weeks later...

Sextons were initailly painted SCC.2 brown because that was what the War Office specified in the contract.  SCC.2 brown was selected as the replacement colour for Khaki Green No.3 for common sense reasons.  Firstly KG3 required chromium oxide green pigment which was in very short supply.  SCC.2 brown had the same reflectivity as KG3 by Mk.I eyeball and aerial photography at the time  Large quantities of the basic pigment, Burtisiland Red were immediately available and sustainable.  This pigment was a by-product of the aluminium industry and named after the factory there.  Which is part the reason to use SCC.1A dark brown as the disrupter over SCC.2.  Meantime the chemical industry attempted to evolve and produce a green which was suitable for military use and in vast quantities and produce a reduced infra-red return.  That subject was really top secret then too which I am not going into here. 

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

  • 9 months later...
On 06/06/2020 at 02:41, Das Abteilung said:

Not in any way wishing to stifle discussion, but we are here walking over ground that is already well trodden and well understood.  After all this time, why things were done has become less relevant. What was done was done. It's been documented, photographed, archived and researched.  Circumstances 80 years ago were very different. In paint terms we now have synthetic pigments, and in a zillion colours. Then we did not. There's a reason why the 1930s BS and RAL codifications had relatively few colours. 

 

All of the reasons - researched reasons - and instructions are explained in Mike Starmer's booklets. There isn't really a huge scope for further  discussion about the whys and wherefores. Just seemingly endless questions about the almost-impossible identification of colours from period monochrome photos.

 

Canada began supplying military materiel to the UK and its own expanding armed forces 2 years before the USA entered the war. Exports from the USA of anything useful to the war effort were initially difficult. Canada was contracted to produce equipment for the UK in UK colours: initially Khaki Green 3 then SCC2. Canadian army units were expected to fight alongside and be fully interoperable with British. So they followed British practice.

 

The only Canadian vehicles finished in OD were the 188 Grizzlies. But these were considered part of the M4 programme and intended to be interoperable with other M4s and were assembled from parts mostly supplied from the USA. Probably the ALCO supply chain as Montreal Locomotive was an ALCO subsidiary. Even Canadian-built models of US trucks for military use were finished in UK colours.

 

As noted before, SCC2 was an undesirable colour but green pigments were short world-wide and the RAF had first call on what was available in the UK. So it was a function of circumstance. Needs must and all that. Umber pigments were mined in the UK and elsewhere within reach so browns were do-able. OD was a similar response by the USA. As soon as a viable alternative became available, SCC15, it was substituted. But that was not until early 1944 and old stock was to be used up. No room for waste in war (no-one mention some thousands of useless Covenanters, Cavaliers, Centaurs and Cromwells Mks 1-4...........).

 

As for the guy painting, I'm not certain that the British/Canadian supply system stocked US OD paint. It is commonly accepted that OD vehicles needing repainting became SCC15.  So that raises the interesting possibility of him repainting parts of an OD tank with SCC15. Try getting that past a show judge on a model......

 

Ony the US made T16 carriers were (us) OD?

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...