Royal Navy FAA white / anti-flash white questions

[Phantome]

Hi folks,

 

Doing some researching on FAA colors, and I have come across a number of questions regarding the white used on Cold War aircraft. The main one is whether anti-flash white was the basic one or whether a standard white was used as well. Here's what I've seen:

1) The Scimitar appears to have been the first aircraft using white undersides, followed shortly by the Sea Vixen, introduced in 1957 and 1959 respectively. The white seen on both aircraft is an ivory-like off-white, similar to US Insignia White and can be differentiated from the white of the roundels. And no, don't give me the "it looks darker because it's dirty" unless you want to explain what magical properties make the roundel white not get dirty when it's right next to the underside color.

2) The Buccaneer was introduced in 1962 and early aircraft used overall anti-flash white and later EDSG (or DSG?) over anti-flash white. This can be deduced by the use of pale roundels. But later they switched to overall EDSG with normal roundels.

3) The Phantom was introduced in 1968 and also had off-white undersides. However, it had normal roundels. Ten years later, the Sea Harrier was also introduced with identical colors.

 

It is not a coincidence that the only aircraft seen wearing white are also the ones that are nuclear-capable: the Gannet retained Sky undersides. This seems to suggest that the purpose of white undersides was for anti-flash protection, much like the US Navy's use of Insignia White. However, I am wondering whether anti-flash white is a distinct color, which has peculiar paint properties, or simply refers to the purpose of the paint. From all the photo evidence I've seen, the known "anti-flash white" used on Buccaneers is identical to the "normal" white used on all other FAA aircraft.

 

Complicating the matter is that I have not yet read anywhere what was the actual BS number for FAA white. There are no whites on BS 381C so I would assume that this refers to BS4800:00E55. This is indeed an off-white, at least from what e-paint.co.uk says. Few model paint manufacturers have anti-flash white, and it is notable that Colourcoats matches it to 00E55... which would imply both whites are the same.

 

Would be great to hear from @Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies to know what info he got for making the paint. Or anyone who may have worked with anti-flash white and whether it was indeed a different paint.

 

Thanks!

 

In the meantime, some pics:

 

A Scimitar. See the difference in whites

 

A Buccanneer. Pale roundels suggest this is anti-flash white... and it's identical to the Scimitar's "normal" white. Btw, is this Dark Sea Grey rather than EDSG? Looks too light to be the latter...

 

Close up of a RN Phantom... Perhaps it did yellow considerably with age?

 

And finally, a V-Bomber for comparison. Again, note the difference with the roundel color:

 

Oh and also... Royal Navy anti-flash clothes. Also an off-white!

Edited January 10, 2020 by Phantome

[Phantome]

A related question: what can anyone say about the obscure BS 381C: 302 "Identification White" that is seen on some Model Alliance decals?
 

Also, there are references to BS 381C: 802 White... could this be the basic roundel/markings white?

[EwenS]

Scale Aircraft Modeller had a Colour Conundrum article about this sometime in the last couple of years or so. Wish I could remember which month.

[71chally]

I've been researching FAA aircraft all my grown life and I've never heard of one white being used for roundels and another for the main airframe.

I have the paint AP somewhere and I will double check, but sure that I've only seen one white mentioned, this for both FAA and RAF types.

The white underside was introduced on FAA fighters before the need of 'anti-flash', which really came in with the Buccaneer and the all over white scheme.

Always assumed the airframe had the white areas painted, and then the roundel blue ring & the red dot applied over the top.

 

I genuinely can't see any discernible difference in the white of the roundels and the aircraft in the above pictures or elsewhere.

Possibly the fact the white sits within colours effects the roundel white on the eyes, but I can't see a difference.

 

The white does yellow/age slightly, and the example on the Phantom in the FAA museum is noticeably yellowed and stained, also it looks to have a replacement oleo fitted.

 

I could be wrong, and would be fascinating to know, but this is something that has passed me by if so.

Edited January 10, 2020 by 71chally

[71chally]

Just double checked the paint manual AP, white for airframes is not stated as being any different to the white used on any other markings, such as roundels and titles etc.

The manual even describes anti-flash finishes, the only difference stated being that for the colours of markings, roundels (apart from white) and titles etc, ie not the white airframe finish itself.

White does not have a BSC ref, unlike all the other paint colours.

If two whites were used it would have to pointed out in the manual.

 

Somewhere, I have got a factory paint guide for the Sea Vixen, c1959, and again I'm sure that it doesn't state two different whites being used.

 

Thinking about this it wouldn't even make sense to have two whites stocked in stores and ships etc, if a special 'toned' white was required for anti-flash finish, then surely all white areas on the aircraft would be painted as such.

[Phantome]

Well, I know people's tonal perception is different but I'm willing to bet most people looking at the above pics will agree that the fuselage and roundel whites are not the same and that difference is consistent across all FAA aircraft with white undersides.

 

If you don't believe me, test it with a color picker.

 

[junglierating]

You were joking about anti flash clothing weren't you?

Anyway dammed ratings blue overalls and brilliant white hood and gloves ....and an action snack.....for those who know

[71chally]

27 minutes ago, Phantome said:

If you don't believe me, test it with a color picker.

I don't, I have thousands of my own images, and I'm not about to waste time with colour pickers on analogue images that have been digitised.

 

People's perception can be different, and colours (in old photographs especially) can come across in different ways due shading and adjoining features, but unless I see evidence of two different pots of white paint being used I remain unconvinced.

[Phantome]

7 hours ago, 71chally said:

I don't, I have thousands of my own images, and I'm not about to waste time with colour pickers on analogue images that have been digitised.

 

People's perception can be different, and colours (in old photographs especially) can come across in different ways due shading and adjoining features, but unless I see evidence of two different pots of white paint being used I remain unconvinced.

 

EDIT:

 

I've re-checked the pics with a color picker, this time picking the most middle part of the roundel white and also the furthest white fuselage part that isn't conceivably distorted by lighting and angles. The difference in colors is very modest and I am willing to agree that it's the same color now. There is definitely a) an optical of illusion of the white between blue and red looking brighter and b) distortion of pixel colors the closer you are to the blue and the red.

 

This still begs the question of what white is actually used, and whether it's indeed 00E18. It is definitely not a "pure" white...

 

 

Edited January 11, 2020 by Phantome

[Phantome]

BTW I also agree (without any factual evidence of pigment composition to back this up) that "anti-flash" meant nothing and was merely descriptive. Probably to explain to people why planes were now being painted all-white which is a most un-military camouflage...

[canberra kid]

I'm with James on this one @71chally, I've had a look at the only Sea Vixen AP I have that mentions colors and finish and there is only one reference to one white with no distinction between roundel or underside colour. Just for a matter of interest, this is part of one of the TSR.2 external markings and finishing drawings which was most definitely 'Anti Flash White' 

John

 

[NorthBayKid]

A colour picker used on a digitized film image found on the internet is utterly useless.  I can prove all kinds of things that aren't true about colours using that method.

 

Here are four well exposed photos of the exact same aircraft (not the same type, the same airframe).  Tell me what you can state to be categorically true about the colour based on nothing but these four images.

 

[alt-92]

Interesting bit in the AP, an ICI reference number.

[Harry Lime]

7 minutes ago, alt-92 said:

Interesting bit in the AP, an ICI reference number.

The section of TSR-2 drawing John has posted above isn't from an AP, it is from a BAC manufacturer's drawing. As it was a prototype and not an 'in-service' finish, I wouldn't be inferring too much from seeing an ICI paint reference on it. ICI paints have also been specified on a number of British made aircraft for overseas customers, Hawks for Zimbabwe and the Hunters for various Middle East customers spring to mind.

 

Mark.

[Graham Boak]

A fair warning.  However given the very specific connotations of the name, it is unlikely that ICI would have so named it unless it did refer specifically to a Services requirement.

 

For modelling it may well be irrelevant.  It seems at least possible, if not likely, that it was the constituents of the paint rather than its colour that made it differ from previous RAF Whites.  If it did, and we need different Stores designations to be sure about that (and even then a description would be handy).

[EwenS]

As a follow up to my post #3 above the articles were in SAM Dec 2016/Jan 2017 BUT related to the 1945-55 period and were by Paul Lucas. By 1956 however everything was supposed to be “anti-flash white”.

 

Around 1953 Paul had documentation identifying SIX “whites” for use on FAA aircraft. That is not to say they were used it seems, but there is evidence of their existence. Some had blue tints but one seemed to be an off white cream / yellow tint. I’m not going to try to explain it as it is complicated. If anyone wants to pursue it then I recommend you order back copies and a large bottle of your favourite alcoholic beverage before reading!

 

 

[John]

On 1/10/2020 at 7:17 PM, Phantome said:

A related question: what can anyone say about the obscure BS 381C: 302 "Identification White" that is seen on some Model Alliance decals?
 

Also, there are references to BS 381C: 802 White... could this be the basic roundel/markings white?

What we can say is that BS381 has never included white, or black for that matter.

 

302, if it existed, would fall in the yellow/brown/beige range. The Standard only goes up to 7**, so 802 would be outwith that range.

 

John 

[Phantome]

9 hours ago, NorthBayKid said:

A colour picker used on a digitized film image found on the internet is utterly useless.  I can prove all kinds of things that aren't true about colours using that method.

 

Here are four well exposed photos of the exact same aircraft (not the same type, the same airframe).  Tell me what you can state to be categorically true about the colour based on nothing but these four images.

 

 

 

The point of using a color picker was to establish if there was a difference between the roundel and the fuselage color... on the same airframe and in areas close enough to each other as to not be affected by lighting and shadows. This is completely different from trying to ascertain the exact hue of a color, which is obviously not recommended.

 

In fact, using a color picker is the only way to have conclusive proof that we are not succumbing to an optical illusion (as I was). And if you don't believe me, I leave you with this...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dress