F-105 Thunderchief Foible

[iainpeden]

I just want to see what happens on the other side - so far it's all pictures of the portside.

Going back to that first picture the discolouration goes into/over the indentation in the ECM pod.

[Blimpyboy]

2 hours ago, iainpeden said:

so far it's all pictures of the portside.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 17, 2020 by Blimpyboy

[iainpeden]

Thanks Blimpyboy - that knocks out my thought it might be on one side only due to an exhaust vent linked to engine start up.😀😀

[Blimpyboy]

I wonder if it's a case of some emission (in vapour form or thermal), rather than general crud, being trapped between the door and the fuselage and causing a localised discoloration of the paintwork. I notice in a lot of instances, the lower portion of the 'stain' tends not to be present, and possibly not always from painting over (although I don't think that necessarily explains the near-perfect outline in some instances).

 

 

 

Edited August 17, 2020 by Blimpyboy

[Blimpyboy]

D'you think this is the same thing? If so, it is a markedly different contrast.

 

[Blimpyboy]

4 hours ago, Haydn said:

According to former Thud Crew Chiefs it is just an accumulation of dirt

I am very tempted now, to make a Thud with this feature - possibly a vignette with the aircraft being cleaned!

[71chally]

3 hours ago, Blimpyboy said:

If so, it is a markedly different contrast.

And colour, I would say that is very similar to the first image that I posted.

[noelh]

I pulled out some my old picture books. I  was surprised how many pictures I had of F105s. Of the flying shots it was visible in varying degrees or not at all. Obviously dirt as per the Crew Chief. But  of course on the ground not easily visible or accessible because the door is quite snug against the fuselage. 

 

I  think it does prove that crew chiefs did a good job trying to keep 'their' jets as clean as possible. But it looks as if they didn't want to risk their knuckles trying to get at the dirt behind the door.

[tony.t]

You need to talk to a contemporanious Crew Chief but I've heard (yeah, we know about those theories) that the paint peeled a lot around that area, and as an anti-corrosion measure the CC's would touch-spray the offending areas — but a gazillion other things also needed doing so retracting the door that could bang on yer head and the fact spraying 36622 into the wells showed up recent leaks, probably meant the but behind the door was neglected.

 

Thin at one end, thicker in the middle, and thin at the other end. By An Elk.

 

Tony 

[Patrick Martin]

This is interesting.  I do see it on several of my slides.  One shot from slightly below gives the impression that the door is open as one can see into the wheel well.  Others do not - it could as simple as the scrubbing brush just does not fit behind the open door during cleaning.

PM

[easixpedro]

I’ll throw in my .2 worth.
 

It’s grime/dirt. Aircraft undergo planned maintenance and inspections. Both the Navy and AF are similar, but I’ll use the Navy as an example (cause I know that side intimately). A/c undergo 7, 14, 28 56 and 180 day inspections. During the bigger ones, that’s when the planes actually get washed. As in a no kidding scrubbing. The 7 and 14 day inspections can be deferred for a bit, but the 56 and 180 days not so much. In between, there’s no washing, just a quick wipe down in between sorties. Usually a rag, maybe soaked in cleaner. That rag likely accounts for the somewhat softer definition on the bottom where the fuselage bends away. It was combat after all, and the crew chiefs were likely just trying to meet the next launch.

-Peter

[Finn]

Here is another early Thud:

 

 

looks like the panel by the door is a different material compared to the rest of the fuselage sides.

 

Jari 

[RidgeRunner]

I heard back from Dennis (Wills) but he doesn’t have any idea about this. I reckon the wash down theory holds up. 
 

Martin

[71chally]

13 hours ago, RidgeRunner said:

I reckon the wash down theory holds up. 

Martin

I absolutely agree that the majority of examples are, but I'm not sure in the case of these images.

The area concerned doesn't look dirty and appears to be of a uniform colour, of maybe a pale greenish.

It's quite distinct from dirt or shadow.

 

Will try and add closer images later

 

[Dennis_C]

A very interesting topic! I've got a Thud on top of my stash so would be fun to reproduce this feature. 

From my viewpoint this is unwashed dirt rather than unpainted area. I can easily imagine the ground crew quickly cleaning aircraft but not cleaning in places where the officer will not see the dirt. But I can't see how the paint job would stay unchecked. 

The dirt was obviously accumulating there leading to very pronounced edges and significantly darker colour on some aircraft. 

[iainpeden]

On 9/11/2020 at 9:20 AM, Dennis_C said:

A very interesting topic! I've got a Thud on top of my stash so would be fun to reproduce this feature. 

From my viewpoint this is unwashed dirt rather than unpainted area. I can easily imagine the ground crew quickly cleaning aircraft but not cleaning in places where the officer will not see the dirt. But I can't see how the paint job would stay unchecked. 

The dirt was obviously accumulating there leading to very pronounced edges and significantly darker colour on some aircraft. 

Only problem there is that if you build it wheels down nobody would notice.

[Dennis_C]

1 hour ago, iainpeden said:

Only problem there is that if you build it wheels down nobody would notice.

Hmm. I can reach fully realistic effect and attach doors prior to painting! Nobody will notice!