Black or light bottom of Singapore's Vildebests in 1942?

[JWM]

Hi,

Sorry that I return back to this river. I've read two closed threads on colours of Vildebeests in Singapore at time of Japan invasion on Malaya early 1942,  but I remained not convienced that bottoms sides were painted with some light blue colour instead of black, as was required for bombers at the time (was it really?).

Currently available SH model shows it this way (the same picture was on front page of {EDIT: SAM} Aeroplane journal):

One of crew mamber testimony says that machines were equipped with 250 and 500 lb boms, so the picture above shows rack configuration for two 500 lb bombs. 

This photo shows black undersides (please look at the darkness of slot mechanism elements and on lower edge of fuselage just behind engine) 

OK, I know that that photo was aken in 1941, before the invasion.

 

Even on this photo (made on Ceylon after evacuation) I do not see traces of evidence for light bottom

 

Again - slots mechanism, lower edge of fuselage, and darkness of tail wheel fairing and construction elements. 

BTW - this photo shows shadow shading on wings and both shows roundles "B" on top. 

I am again sorry about raising up this topic, but I am just about finishing my Singapore Vildebeest (started in 2018 and then stopped due to those doubts...) and do not want to make obvious mistake. Therefore some explanations would be much appreciated.

Regards

J-W

 

Edited December 30, 2019 by JWM

[tonyot]

A photo on this link appears to show glossy black dope;

http://www.rafseletar.info/Vickers Vildebeest/Vickers Vildebeest.html

 

I`m presuming you`ve seen this BM link;

 

 

 

I would agree that some at least had black undersides,

Cheers

           Tony

[JWM]

1 hour ago, tonyot said:

A photo on this link appears to show glossy black dope;

http://www.rafseletar.info/Vickers Vildebeest/Vickers Vildebeest.html

 

I`m presuming you`ve seen this BM link;

Yes, this is one of two topics I mentioned,,,

1 hour ago, tonyot said:

I would agree that some at least had black undersides,

Cheers

           Tony

Many thanks . I will go for the black one . Simply I needed some suport...

Regards and All the best in New Year!

Jerzy-Wojtek

 

[JohnMacG]

Two small points - no Vildebeests ere evacuation Malaya/Java. The Ceylon Vildebeest on its nose was probably from the local Station Flight;  the VB was not a 'bomber' - the RAF classified it as a 'torpedo-bomber' - a rather different thing as far as camo goes.

Now, the only pic I have the clearly shows VB undersides is one captured by the Japanese 'somewhere in SEA'. This clearly shows that whatever this a/c's undersides were, they Are Not black.

[Graham Boak]

Night was one of the approved colours for RAF torpedo bombers, others being Aluminium or Sky,  I believe Sky had replaced Aluminium before the end of 1941.  We do however known that Blenheim bombers in the theatre earlier in 1941 had a light blue (not Sky) undersides, suggesting that this could equally well be true for the VB in daylight colours.  I am not sure whether TSS had similarly replaced TLS, but I strongly suspect so.  Therefore if we assume that the VBs were painted according to the current temperate regulations, then they would have been TSS over either Night or perhaps Sky Blue. 

 

Given how little we actually know, any such scheme for the December campaign can only be surmise and a case of picking whichever set of assumptions appeal the most.  However it does seem that TLS over Night would certainly have been an highly likely combination at some stage in the early 1940s.  The earlier the better.

 

Were any Vildebeest evacuated to Ceylon?  I rather doubt it - it's a long way and no Blenheims or Hudsons achieved it.  (To my knowledge.)  Therefore this photo was pre-Pacific War, or not a Malayan-based aircraft.  It shows a fairly typical appearance of faded TLS in tropical climes.  Given the varied appearance of TSS on different films and filters, I don't think anything definite can be said ruling it out or in.

[mhaselden]

There were Vildebeests from Singapore operating at Ceylon as a detachment prior to hostilities.  

 

There are 2 photos of captured Vildebeests in the NEI which appear to show light-toned undersides but without roundels.  It's not clear when the paint was applied.  It's possible it was done prior to the Endau raid given that almost all Vildebeest operations prior to that date were flown at night, and so black undersides would be far more sensible.  

[JWM]

Many thanks, but again I realized wh I have stopped build! Nothing is for sure with colours. BTW - on both photos (No. 36 machines in flight and mishap landing in Ceylon) the pattern on top is different (same among those photos) then given in SH kit instruction .

 

It looks like shouldl be for smaller wingspan machine scheme... - like for Gladiator rather:

 

Regards

J-W

 

[Ed Russell]

One assumes you have read and absorbed the 422 (at time of writing) posts here................. (:>)

 

Having read through it several times I would go for Green/Brown/Black as per post 112. From the pics Mark's light colour is also likely at some time.

[mhaselden]

The SH marking instructions contain several inaccuracies so treat them with caution.

 

The question of camo pattern depends on the timeframe you wish to represent. 

 

Prior to May 1940 we have a high contrast scheme with black undersides.  The upper surface camo, possibly Light Earth and Dark Green, has some pattern irregularities compared to the standard template.  Aircraft were seen with and without Type A underwing roundels.  The squadron crest was painted on the fin and Type A roundels were on the fuselage side.

 

After May 1940 (as shown in the formation photo), we still have the high contrast scheme but the fin was overpainted with a large flash and a yellow ring was added to the fuselage roundel.  Upper wing roundels were Type B (presumably they were also Type B prior to May 1940 but no photographic evidence exists).

 

At some point after May 1940, it seems that many airframes were repainted in a low contrast scheme, probably in Dark Earth/Dark Green with shadow compensation on the lower wings and wheel spats.  The aircraft still wore the large fin flash, Type B upper wing roundels and Type A1 fuselage roundels.  This scheme is illustrated by the Ceylon airframe.  It closely matches the standard pattern.  Underside colour is unknown but black would match other bomber types in the theatre, and it would make sense given the night operations flown by the type.  As to underwing roundels, there's no proof one way or another.  If they existed, they'd be Type A.  My suspicion is that they were present given the markings applied to other aircraft in the theatre, plus it would align with the established standard scheme.

 

The final wrinkle are the 2 photos of captured airframes which show light-toned undersides with no underwing roundels.  As noted, I suspect that may have been an expedient for the Endau Raid but I have zero proof of that.  It's possible the light underside was worn throughout with the period of the low contrast scheme, but that would be odd for an aircraft operating at night.

 

To be honest, there is so little photographic evidence that nobody can say you were definitively wrong, given the pretty broad scope within the above summary.

Edited January 6, 2020 by mhaselden

[JWM]

7 hours ago, Ed Russell said:

One assumes you have read and absorbed the 422 (at time of writing) posts here................. (:>)

Ed, of course I went through it, this is one I mentioned of two... 

Many thanks @mhaselden for summary, I will go for Dk Green/Dk Earth with shadow shading on lower wing and black bottom (plus roundles A on it).

Many thanks ALL for advices

regards and Happy New Year!

The Vildebeest should be on RFI soon in January

Jerzy -Wojtek

 

 

[Mike Starmer]

I may be going to muddy the waters here.  Back about 1968 or so I worked with a number of ex-servicemen whom I pumped for information.  One chap had been a fitter with 36 sq. in Malaya in 1939-42.  He told me that their Vildebeests had been overall silver dope but when the war began in December they painted the top surfaces with green and brown stripes the same as the other RAF planes.  The underneath as he recalled were left silver.   He couldn't remember anything about markings.  After a lot of losses the squadrons with Vildebeests amalgamated and some personnel were sent to Java.  He remained at Singapore a while then with others was shipped to Ceylon.  I am aware the witness statements are not 100% reliable but the recollection of locally applied dark colours on top and left light underneath rings true. 

I have just compared the image of the Ceylon Vildebeest with AD.1162 of May 1939 for single engined biplanes.  The fuselage, fin, tailplane and upper mainplanes are in pattern A whilst the lower mainplanes are in pattern B.    The Super-hobby pattern is in AD.1160 for single engined monoplanes which unsurprisingly,, is incorrect.  However, written that, did Super-hobby copy a photograph which does show the mainplanes?

[mhaselden]

4 hours ago, Mike Starmer said:

I may be going to muddy the waters here.  Back about 1968 or so I worked with a number of ex-servicemen whom I pumped for information.  One chap had been a fitter with 36 sq. in Malaya in 1939-42.  He told me that their Vildebeests had been overall silver dope but when the war began in December they painted the top surfaces with green and brown stripes the same as the other RAF planes.  The underneath as he recalled were left silver.   He couldn't remember anything about markings.  After a lot of losses the squadrons with Vildebeests amalgamated and some personnel were sent to Java.  He remained at Singapore a while then with others was shipped to Ceylon.  I am aware the witness statements are not 100% reliable but the recollection of locally applied dark colours on top and left light underneath rings true. 

I have just compared the image of the Ceylon Vildebeest with AD.1162 of May 1939 for single engined biplanes.  The fuselage, fin, tailplane and upper mainplanes are in pattern A whilst the lower mainplanes are in pattern B.    The Super-hobby pattern is in AD.1160 for single engined monoplanes which unsurprisingly,, is incorrect.  However, written that, did Super-hobby copy a photograph which does show the mainplanes?

 

Witness statements are unreliable but often not entirely incorrect.  There is photographic evidence showing Vildebeests with camouflage on the upper surfaces and black undersides so, while they may have operated briefly with the silver undersides retained, it seems ultimately they were repainted.  However, the recollection of dark brown and dark green uppers does make Paul Lucas' continued advocacy for the Tropical Sea Scheme even more untenable.  

 

As to where SH got their camo pattern, that remains a mystery.  As noted, there are several inaccuracies so it may be the mis-application of a different camo scheme.  There are precious few photos of Far East Vildebeests, so I doubt they accessed anything that hasn't been reviewed by others on this forum.  The error in the upper wing roundels suggests at least some of the SH markings scheme is fanciful.  

Edited December 31, 2019 by mhaselden

[Graham Boak]

TLS was entirely correct for the start of the war, over Aluminium or Night, depending upon day or night operations.  However at some stage (I plead memory fatigue) it was replaced by TSS.  If you happen to believe that sufficient stocks of these colours were not available (despite the presence of FAA stores) or that the unit/command organisation just couldn't be bothered, then TLS would have been retained.  If you believe that AM orders would have been followed, as with the initial repaint to TLS, then they would have been repainted.  Against this, Mike's contact didn' t mention repainting.

[mhaselden]

4 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

TLS was entirely correct for the start of the war, over Aluminium or Night, depending upon day or night operations.  However at some stage (I plead memory fatigue) it was replaced by TSS.  If you happen to believe that sufficient stocks of these colours were not available (despite the presence of FAA stores) or that the unit/command organisation just couldn't be bothered, then TLS would have been retained.  If you believe that AM orders would have been followed, as with the initial repaint to TLS, then they would have been repainted.  Against this, Mike's contact didn' t mention repainting.

Apologies...I meant Tropical Sea Scheme not Temperate.  I've corrected the error in my previous post.  

 

It's pretty clear that the Catalinas based at Singapore were painted in Temperate Sea Scheme.  However, most other RAF types were in Dark Earth/Dark Green which would align with the reminiscences of  the veteran that Mike Starmer knew.