Spitfire PR Mk X camouflage query

[Peter Roberts]

I am planning a build of Spitfire PR X MD194. Not a lot of Mk X's were built but surprisingly I've found MD194 is the subject of several artistic representations 

 

MD194 is portrayed in PR Pink - ? I thought PR Pink was used on aircraft for low level 'Dicer' missions, so I am surprised to see this on a high-altitude aircraft. Is this accurate?

 

Am I right in thinking MD194 would have at least begun life in the high-altitude scheme? My memory tells me Graham Boak put a post up on this but I can't now find it on line or in my references.

 

TIA

 

PR

[gingerbob]

Here's one thread, though I know there's another...

[Peter Roberts]

Thank you Bob.

 

Yes, I was sure there had been some discussion on this, but that thread is wonderful. Your Google Fu is better than mine!

 

Looks like MSG over PRU Blue it is.

 

Much appreciated

 

PR

[ben_m]

I'm not sure I agree with the ms grey over pru blue scheme interpretation. Pilots' recollections are not flawless. The carb intake looks same colour as top surface to me. The chin panel does look darker, but could easily be due to dirt.

 

The MSG over PRU blue scheme might be a mis-recollection of the mk.XIX postwar scheme (which has a high demarcation on the fuselage).

[gingerbob]

Yeah, I'm not convinced either.  The PR.Xs were built specifically to be PR birds, so why wouldn't they be in standard PRU paint?  Also, if you look at the "HF" scheme on this Mk.VII:

 

https://www.worldwarphotos.info/wp-content/gallery/uk/raf/spitfire2/Spitfire_HF_Mk_VII_MD124.jpg

 

Note that the underside colour goes across the tailwheel door, as well as the main gear doors, etc.

 

Here's a better shot of a PR.X, for the sake of comparison:

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives/8033937830

 

[rossm]

MSG over PRU Blue doesn't sound like a wartime PR scheme to me.

 

Pink - more like off-white - has been documented on PR1G aka PRVII used from St.Eval but I need to check my references to give more detail and I'm locked down 350 miles from them. I suspect that was a low level use.

 

Some more info on PR Pink in this thread

 

[EwenS]

MSG over PRU blue was used on some Spitfire PR.XI with 681 sqn in the Far East towards the end of the war. See “Eyes for the Phoenix”.

[rossm]

1 minute ago, EwenS said:

MSG over PRU blue was used on some Spitfire PR.XI with 681 sqn in the Far East towards the end of the war. See “Eyes for the Phoenix”.

OK, I knew it was used in FE post war on XIX but hadn't come across wartime use. Was it the same high demarcation?

 

Back to the PR.X - I do have some of my decals with me and the Almark decal sheet A36 - PR Markings Europe - has a PR.X (SR396 as in the photo linked by gingerbob above) in high gloss light grey. Annoyingly there is no reference quoted but the a pilots name is given so there must have been something. Research for the sheet was done by Les Whitehouse who was well regarded back in the day, but in those days we were more trusting and less critical.

 

If it was based on that photo then Pink has to be a good possibility with PRU Blue slightly less likely to my thinking. But film emulsions and filters can throw any attempt at interpreting colours from B+W photos.

[EwenS]

Re 681 MSG/PRU blue. It was a low demarcation. Alley Cat produced decals for one.

 

https://www.alleycatmodels.co.uk/supermarine-spitfire-pr-xi-conversion-raf-seac-decals-6252-p.asp

[Graham Boak]

Looks too dark for PRU Pink, which appears much lighter normally in b&w.  Had the red centre of the roundel been darker than the blue then this would have pointed to the use of ortho film and hence a darker tone to the Pink - but it isn't.  However there must be some doubt of the use of the Dicer scheme on a high-level aircraft anyway.  I'm quite happy about it being a fairly reasonable appearance for PRU Blue.

[Peter Roberts]

Hi All

 

Thank you for your replies to my question, and suggestions.

 

Re: MSG over PRU Blue, this is one of the better known examples, from 451 Squadron.

 

 

To my eyes, that photo of the Mk X (above) looks very similar, especially around the nose. My understanding is this was a high altitude scheme (?)

 

Given the Mk X was built as a high altitude fighter   PRU aircraft, I would have thought this would fit, later replaced with simply overall PRU Blue as on the XIX (?)

 

Bob, I take your point re: the rear u/c door, but am thinking this may be due to reflection off a different surface, which is more direct to the sunlight, hence appearing lighter (?)

 

Edited April 22, 2020 by Peter Roberts
correction to post

[rossm]

35 minutes ago, Graham Boak said:

Looks too dark for PRU Pink, which appears much lighter normally in b&w.  Had the red centre of the roundel been darker than the blue then this would have pointed to the use of ortho film and hence a darker tone to the Pink - but it isn't.  However there must be some doubt of the use of the Dicer scheme on a high-level aircraft anyway.  I'm quite happy about it being a fairly reasonable appearance for PRU Blue.

I was looking at the contrast from roundel to airframe, but looking again the contrast from white in the fin flash does point toward PRU Blue.

[gingerbob]

41 minutes ago, Peter Roberts said:

Given the Mk X was built as a high altitude fighter...

No, it wasn't.  They were built upon F.VII airframes, but they were not "conversions", they were PR.Xs from birth.  The fighter windscreen was retained because it was already set up for pressurisation.

[Max Headroom]

I thought the X was unpressurised?

 

Trevor

[Peter Roberts]

Ooops. thanks Bob - correction, Mk X built as a high altitude PRU aircraft, not fighter - apologies, my head was in the wrong space there. Post corrected. Um, I didn't mention "conversions" - ?

 

Trevor, according to Morgan and Shacklady, the Mk X fuselage was based on the Mk VII, with a Mk XI rear fuselage from frame 12 back (ie. the cameras) attached to Mk XI wings. The rear fuselages seem to have been utilised from later Mk XIs with retractable tail wheel and broad chord rudder.

Edited April 22, 2020 by Peter Roberts

[Peter Roberts]

 

I found this photo of a Spitfire Mk X (I believe it is SR396 though hard to see in the photo, or its my eyes that are the problem!) for comparison. This one looks overall PRU Blue. Note the chin, compared to the photo in Post 4 above. The upper surfaces also appear darker in this photo, but I suspect the differences could be due to climactic conditions - it appears to be a sunnier day in the photo at Post 4.

 

EDIT - just found this is the same plane as posted by GingerBob above - the link didn't open for me earlier, would have saved a bit if it had!

Edited April 23, 2020 by Peter Roberts

[gingerbob]

54 minutes ago, Peter Roberts said:

Um, I didn't mention "conversions" - ?

No, you didn't, I just misunderstood your slip (fighter).  Or at least, I thought that it might have been intentional, and not a slip.

 

 

[Peter Roberts]

Ah, yes, sorry, my bad there

 

Thanks again for picking it up

 

PR

 

PS The more I look at those chins, I can see a slight darkening in the photo at Post 16, so perhaps this feature is more pronounced with the brighter sunlight in Post 4 (or have I been looking at these photos too long?) I think I agree with the consensus here, overall PRU Blue. It also makes sense, to my mind, that the Photo Reconnaissance role would take precedence over the High Altitude role when considering camouflage. Thank you all for your considered views, very much appreciated.

Edited April 23, 2020 by Peter Roberts

[Troy Smith]

5 hours ago, EwenS said:

Re 681 MSG/PRU blue. It was a low demarcation.

this is one of the 681 Sq images

 

this is better res image of this

 

note the change of tone at the engine die to chin line, for comparison,  the demarcation is different, and the PR X may just have a new chin panel.  There does appear to be line on the tail wheel door, possibly shadow?  

 

HTH

[ben_m]

Just thinking of the 'high altitude' comments: I don't think the X was designed/used at greater altitude than the XI; the engine dictated the ceiling. Pressurisation was to increase comfort and physiological performance of the pilot.

[Graham Boak]

Yes, but the Pink scheme was for low-level work under cloud against a low sun.  Pressurisation was not needed and much better used elsewhere.  More basically you don't require a two stage two gear engine to fly at low level.  You see Mk.IXs in Pink at the end of the war because they had become the loose change of the available options.

[rossm]

37 minutes ago, Graham Boak said:

Yes, but the Pink scheme was for low-level work under cloud against a low sun.  Pressurisation was not needed and much better used elsewhere.  More basically you don't require a two stage two gear engine to fly at low level.  You see Mk.IXs in Pink at the end of the war because they had become the loose change of the available options.

Memory suggests they were LF.IX and even hazier memory suggests the LF designation means supercharger optimised for low level, not clipped wings.

[Giorgio N]

Yes, the LF designation (like the HF) refer to the engine rating. Wingtips could be replaced depending on the needs so are not necessarily a reliable indication.

 

On the main subject of the post, I can't see the presence of a two colour scheme in any of the pictures showing the PR.X. Maybe it's just my eyes that aren't good enough.... but I also can't find any potential reason when looking at the history of PR Spitfire schemes.

By the time the PR.X arrived, the overall PRU Blue scheme was pretty much standard for Spitfires, with the exception of those used for low level work and those in the MTO. The grey over blue scheme was a fighter scheme, not a PR scheme predating the overall PRU. On the contrary, the Spitfire XIs that carried this scheme in the CBI theatre used it towards the end of the war, not earlier.

Sure PR units have a reputation for having tested a lot of schemes, however this was mainly in the early years. I'd be surprised if any of the few PR.Xs would have worn anything different from what had by then become the norm

[Graham Boak]

In this case it means lower than the previous standard, but only by a few thousand feet, giving more power over the majority of the combat region at the expense of slightly less at altitudes over 30,000 feet.  This is very different to the LF rating on the Merlin 45, which boosted power up to 5,000 ft but faded away over 10,000ft.  Which tended to make experienced fighter pilots rather unhappy, but did help considerably in chasing low-level raiders.  The LF Mk.5 was a pocket rocket up to 5,000ft, climbing faster than any other WW2 propeller aircraft bar some re-engined Mk.XIIs, possibly only experimentally.  In comparison the LF rating on the Merlin 60 series was just fine tuning.

[ben_m]

8 hours ago, Peter Roberts said:

I agree with the consensus here, overall PRU Blue. It also makes sense, to my mind, that the Photo Reconnaissance role would take precedence over the High Altitude role when considering camouflage.

 

2 hours ago, ben_m said:

Just thinking of the 'high altitude' comments: I don't think the X was designed/used at greater altitude than the XI; the engine dictated the ceiling. Pressurisation was to increase comfort and physiological performance of the pilot.

 

2 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

Yes, but the Pink scheme was for low-level work under cloud against a low sun.  Pressurisation was not needed and much better used elsewhere.  More basically you don't require a two stage two gear engine to fly at low level.  You see Mk.IXs in Pink at the end of the war because they had become the loose change of the available options.

Sorry for the confusion Graham, my post above was referring to Peter's comment at the top of this post- I should have quoted it for clarity. Any association of the X with pink scheme was always nonsensical. I was meaning that the X wouldn't have been seen as a (especially) high altitude PR type, so I don't see them thinking it needs a special colour scheme.