Possible Obvious Question- RAF/RN Initial Colours

[71chally]

I agree with Antti

The grey of the RN jets were noticeably lighter, and to me blue-er, and that the grey on the RAF jets were somehow different paler maybe, on delivery than that of the standard finishes of those services at the time.

My guess is that McDonnell used their own paint formula (UK33B 1527? what is that?) to get near enough to what the British asked for.

I do wonder if that 'blueness' of the early aircraft, led to so many models and toys of RN Phantoms being blue in colour?

 

I say this is as a regular visitor, I don't think the preserved Phantom at FAAM will be a lot of help, XT596 does look to be proper Extra Dark Sea Grey and I think would have been repainted sometime in it's life, probably early on as a correction to the delivery paint, as I touched on earlier.

The second one at RNAS Yeovilton is a modern repaint from an RAF finish, assuming the spec was exact it will still be some what fresher and glossy than '596.

[Giorgio N]

I feel that there's a little detail that may be worth finding: the paint used is stated with a name and an MoD store reference number( 33B/1527). However we know from many discussions that often names were not used correctly, so what matters here is to pin down the stores reference number, as these are afterall what properly identify the paint used. So the name listed is Dark Sea Grey, the ref. number is 33B/1527, do the two match ?

Unfortunately while these numbers are well known for WW2, there seems to be amongst modelers no information about the same in later times. I remember @Dave Fleming trying to find information on this forum for stores reference numbers in 15xx series, wonder if he managed to find anything ?

[Antti_K]

3 hours ago, 71chally said:

I say this is as a regular visitor, I don't think the preserved Phantom at FAAM will be a lot of help, XT596 does look to be proper Extra Dark Sea Grey and I think would have been repainted sometime in it's life, probably early on as a correction to the delivery paint, as I touched on earlier.

 

There is a photo of XT596 in Patrick Martin's "British Phantoms" vol. I and it shows a very weathered/faded paintwork on upper sides. So faded that the museum staff had to make more than their usual magic to get the aircraft look as good as it does. Re-paint before the aircraft was donated to the museum seems plausible. On the other hand there are still details on the exterior surface that were McDonnel items only; like those small white circular seals applied on certain panels. I believe that they weren't re-applied when the aircraft were re-painted in Britain. Is it possible that XT596 was only partially re-painted?

 

Cheers,

Antti

[Dave Fleming]

4 hours ago, Giorgio N said:

 

Unfortunately while these numbers are well known for WW2, there seems to be amongst modelers no information about the same in later times. I remember @Dave Fleming trying to find information on this forum for stores reference numbers in 15xx series, wonder if he managed to find anything ?

No, although I did find a picture of an F4 on Eagle alongside a Sea Vixen, and it was noticeably lighter. I

 

IRc the reference on the F4M drawing was to the same grey as the F4K

 

Edited October 30, 2020 by Dave Fleming

[Harry Lime]

5 hours ago, neilfergylee said:

Now, I could be putting two and two together and making five, but perhaps Royal Navy F-4Ks were finished initially in FS36118

 

Potentially, yes you could be. Depends when 36118 was added to the FS595 standard. The 'UK33B/1527' reference in the paint listing refers to a specific item in the UK stores listing in use by the forces at the time, i.e. it refers to a specific size of tin with a specific type and colour of paint within. The key to unlocking the mystery is to find out what 33B/1527 is and as Giorgio has alluded to already, it seems that info isn't currently widely available. It is interesting to note that the paint listing uses two different US standards (FS595 and ANA). I also think it would be useful if the MDD paint schemes for the F-4M were available to see if they reference Dk Sea Grey/Dk Green/Lt Ac Grey in the same UK33B/xxxx manner.

 

Mark.

 

Edited October 30, 2020 by Harry Lime
Triple posting!

[iainpeden]

40 minutes ago, Harry Lime said:

 

Potentially, yes you could be. Depends when 36118 was added to the FS595 standard. The 'UK33B/1527' reference in the paint listing refers to a specific item in the UK stores listing in use by the forces at the time, i.e. it refers to a specific size of tin with a specific type and colour of paint within. The key to unlocking the mystery is to find out what 33B/1527 is and as Giorgio has alluded to already, it seems that info isn't currently widely available. It is interesting to note that the paint listing uses two different US standards (FS595 and ANA). I also think it would be useful if the MDD paint schemes for the F-4M were available to see if they reference Dk Sea Grey/Dk Green/Lt Ac Grey in the same UK33B/xxxx manner.

 

Mark.

 

@Dana Bell - any chance you can help out with this one?

[Tailspin Turtle]

2 hours ago, Antti_K said:

 

There is a photo of XT596 in Patrick Martin's "British Phantoms" vol. I and it shows a very weathered/faded paintwork on upper sides. So faded that the museum staff had to make more than their usual magic to get the aircraft look as good as it does. Re-paint before the aircraft was donated to the museum seems plausible. On the other hand there are still details on the exterior surface that were McDonnel items only; like those small white circular seals applied on certain panels. I believe that they weren't re-applied when the aircraft were re-painted in Britain. Is it possible that XT596 was only partially re-painted?

 

Cheers,

Antti

Those small circular seals overlap the joint between a panel/door and the adjacent fuselage skin. In McDonnell flight test (and as it happens, XT596 was one of the F-4Ks that I was personally involved with), before a panel was replaced or some (most? all?) doors were closed, quality assurance would take a look inside to be sure that the work that required removal or opening the panel had been accomplished and there was no FOD, loose wires or hoses, etc before giving his/her approval to replace/close it. Once that was done, he/she would apply the sticker with his personal stamp number on it. If the sticker was subsequently torn, the inspection/approval would have to be repeated. I went back to graduate school before XT596 went to England so I don’t know whether it spent a lot of time on flight status there. It’s possible that the same QA process was used in England but if not, I’m pretty sure that a repaint would have resulted in the removal of those seals.

[Giorgio N]

The presence of paints from both ANA and FS standards in the same document is not unusual for the era. We should keep in mind that the first edition of Fed Std 595 was not very old by then and US forces kept using the "older" standard for quite some time, in some cases into the '70s

 

[Dave Fleming]

Had a chance to have a little delve into my notes over the weekend. It seems there were colour stencils on the FGR2 as delivered from MDD that used the same 33B reference for the dark grey as on the FG1. (1527)

 

Later UK colour specs for the FGRs used completely different 33B references. - DSG is listed as 33B/2242613, but that was after it had changed from AP1086 to AP100 and they all got new references., and clearly the FG1s were in EDSG

 

It would be interesting to see the MDD colour scheme drawings for he FGR2 - they are one missing piece in this little jigsaw.

 

 

For comparison, have a look at this video from about 1.34 - you can see one of the early F4Ks alongside a Sea Vixen - does it appear lighter? 

 

 

Perhaps the first few F-4Ks were delivered in the wrong grey and this was amended? The colour scheme drawing is only a snapshot in time, so perhaps this was updated later

 

*PS the F-4K at Yeovilton still has the original MDD Colour plaque stencils  showing 33B/1527 Dark Sea Grey and dated 3/2/68

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

On 10/30/2020 at 10:28 AM, 71chally said:

I say this is as a regular visitor, I don't think the preserved Phantom at FAAM will be a lot of help, XT596 does look to be proper Extra Dark Sea Grey and I think would have been repainted sometime in it's life, probably early on as a correction to the delivery paint, as I touched on earlier.

The second one at RNAS Yeovilton is a modern repaint from an RAF finish, assuming the spec was exact it will still be some what fresher and glossy than '596.

 

The second (Navy Wings) Toom - XV586 - is indeed a modern re-paint, but I understand they were careful to use the correct spec paint etc.  So it is probably a decent representation of what a fresh RN Toom was supposed to look like, if nothing else!

 

 

Compare the nose section of XV591 at the RAF Museum Gosford; allowing for differences in lighting, I'd say they are the same (if anything, Cosford's less authentic since it is missing a number of stencils etc.) _{[not to mention the fact that the display boards manage to 'forget' to mention that this was a Royal Navy aircraft, instead blah'ing on only about the RAF.  See also the Buccaneer S1 cockpit not far away, which is displayed in a completely inauthentic grey & green camouflage that no S1 ever wore...)]}

 

I have no idea whether these photos help, but it's hard to have too many Toom pics!