RAF Black and White - and Eau De Nil

[nheather]

Hi,

 

I mostly collect and occasionally build 1:35 Armour but recently, I started to collect 1:72 early WWII British aircraft.

 

Wondering about the black used on bombers and the black/white undersides used on fighters.

 

Was this pure black and pure white - and if so, would you paint with those or use a very dark grey and a very light grey.

 

Also, Eau De Nil - when was it used - is it simply a colour before Sky, was it only used on certain aircraft types?

 

 

[Selwyn]

Black and white undersides on fighters was a aircraft identification scheme used up to early 1940

it was replaced by Sky undersides for the Battle of Britain. As there was a shortage of Sky paint to repaint these aircraft undersides, some aircraft received Eau de nil underside colour as a substitute until enough Sky was available. A Sky blue paint was also sometimes used as a Sky substitute for the same reason. Black and white was used again for a short period after The BoB IIRC.

 

Selwyn

[Graham Boak]

White was a pure white but the black was a paint called Night which contained a small amount of Ultramarine.  What you would choose to use is a matter of individual taste, but ideally dead black is rarely suitable for model purposes as being too stark, so a very dark charcoal grey might be preferred.  It would be very easy to go too far in toning down a pure white, but again this is a matter of taste.

 

Eau de Nil was not a colour in the RAF Stores Vocabulary.  It may well have been used for the interiors of military office vehicles as being easy on the eyes, but has no recorded use in or on aircraft.  The original and early use of Sky (or its substitutes) is a very involved story, involving spy flights prewar by an Australian entrepreneur called Sidney Cotton, early use of a light underside colour on Blenheim bombers, initial PR work, and an awful lot of unsupported anecdotes.  The best (fullest) account was been given by Paul Lucas in his book for Guideline on RAF camouflage and markings up to the end of 1940, but it has one distinct flaw, and that is the (unsupported?) assumption in the artwork that a lot of fighters used Eau-de-Nil on their undersides in lieu of the proper Sky, said to be unobtainable in quantity.  That fighters in this period had a range of underside colours in this period is well recorded.  Paul and Neil Robinson (and perhaps others?) studied the available remains of Battle of Britain fighters, still in their original paint as recovered from crash sites, and listed  what they found.  Several colours were found, including several which they identified as Eau-de-Nil.  Looking further at this table, it seems that all the samples with Eau-de-Nil came from squadrons that were based around the Humber at the time of the introduction of Sky.  Which leaves all the units in the rest of the country...

 

It would not be desirable/permitted to use a paint that was not intended for, and accepted for, use on aircraft.   However, it would be possible, given the confusion apparent at the time, for units/bases to have produced their own mixes and hence that some of these could have ended up close, or even identical, to Eau-de-Nil.  So it is reasonable to accept that a few specific units actually wore such a colour, and potentially some others did for which we have no record otherwise.  It is not reasonable to argue for its widespread use in a majority of cases.

 

Gallons of ink, and oodles of electrons, have been expended on the matter of Sky in the BoB.  No doubt more will come.  However, I would be careful in the use of anything else except on aircraft that had been delivered to the service before early July 1940.  Which was a large number.  

 

But if you are looking into modelling in this period, get Paul Lucas's book.  Other than in specific details, there has been nothing before or after to match.  The Ducimus booklets will do as a lesser guide.

 

EDIT: A black port wing was reintroduced in November 1940, but the other wing remained in Sky.

[Ossington 2]

ISTR somewhere that the black/white demarcation was as much for the German's benefit than ours. In order to hide our fidelity with radar, when we were always at just the right place and time to enable an intercept, it gave the illusion that our craft could be guided via radio from ground based observers in the pre-war manner. Is this true? 

Now the Germans had radar and knew we had it too, but they took years to finesse the system and presumably thought that we matched their incapability of control structure. 

[dogsbody]

This may be useful:

 

 

 

 

 

Chris

[Troy Smith]

2 hours ago, nheather said:

Eau De Nil - when was it used - is it simply a colour before Sky, was it only used on certain aircraft types?

as has been mentioned, it was not aircraft paint.

 

the book by Paul Lucas examined remains of aircraft in a couple of museums and visually matched the colours.   

This says nothing about where the aircraft remains were found or when (wartime, or dug up 30 years later, 

eg had they been buried, what kind of soil  and it's worth noting that paint binders can yellow, so a pale blue in time could become a deeper green... .like Eau De Nil....

 

the Wingleader Hurricane photoarchive book has this in the sampler

https://www.wingleader.co.uk/shop/hurricane-mki-wpa3

 

On 6 June 1940, with the Battle of France drawing to a close, a major decision was taken to do away with Dowding’s black and white undersurfaces on fighters and camouflage them as effectively as possible from underneath. This involved the removal of all roundels and painting the entire undersides in ‘Sky’, a pale duck egg green/blue. Supplies of this paint were in very short supply so many squadrons mixed their own. One groundcrew member recalled starting with a carefully measured mixture of blue, white and yellow, but about halfway down the line they started running short of blue. This meant that Hurricanes at the beginning of the line had a good match for the Sky colour whereas those at the end had a very pale green, almost white. The factories were officially informed of this change around 11 June but it was emphasised that the change should not hold up production, so existing airframes would remain in the black and white scheme. The effective result of all this is that June 1940 saw a mixture of old and new schemes in the skies above the UK, and right up until September 1940, the ‘Sky’ undersides could be any shade from off-white to a turquoise blue/green. The background photo shows fragments of fabric from the underside of the fuselage of P3966 which left the factory on 10 June 1940. It probably had the Sky undersides applied at 10 Maintenance Unit before being delivered to 85 Squadron on 13 July 1940. You can clearly see the Sky paint which has been applied over the original Aluminium paint. The red paint is the dope that was applied to the fabric. Incidentally, this red dope was the same that was applied to the gun port covers, so it’s worth noting how dull red it is compared to restored aircraft flying with shiny bright red covers.

 

I did an experiment in a (stalled*) build

 

I got some Vallejo Prussian Blue and Yellow,  as RAF bases would have had White, (for the B/W undersides, and Roundel Blue and Yellow.

And added small amounts ....

In the image below, over the MAP paint chips,  the main Spitfire wing is Xtracrylix Sky,  and the Hurricane wing has various test patches, the wing in the right shows near white and the effect of adding small amount of blue and yellow.  the left wing shows more intense shades. 

The right Spitfir wingtip has 3 shades, note the middle blob is pretty close the Sky Blue chip under it. 

 

Pure supposition, and not very scientific,  but the above was just to demonstrate how easy it to make a range of colours with available paint that then also could "match" things like Sky Blue, Eau De Nil, and other such postulated paints,  which due to the things like Xtradecal and poor profiles have become 'fact'  but not how easy it is to make a range of at the same time similar but quite different colours with small  changes in paint rations, as was also observed with mixed grey, and that's just two colours... 

 

And a story, a while back at The Aviation Bookshop, on one of their sale weekends, I got chatting to a chap looking at the models, and in the course of this Hurricanes came up, and he said he'd been involved in crash digs, and how he'd been in the team that dug up the first hurricane lost in the BoB, 

P3359, http://www.bbm.org.uk/airmen/Clenshaw.htm

 

Anyway, as a modeller colours came up, and he said, looking at the wall of kits boxes,  "Sky is like this",  points to box with Skyish colour, but the belly panel of P3359 was more like this, points to a much more turquoise shade (and AZ box maybe) , the point here the the chap had seen real parts, of known Hurricane, and mentioned and could give an idea of how the shade varied from standard Sky,  benefits of being a modeller...  

 

Now, a light turquoise is not really like any of the "substitute" colours,  but is very easily possible from an infield mix.

 

He wasn't really friendly, but maybe that is just the world of poor social skills, so I didn't talk a lot more, which I regretted. (plus the bookshop is a completely and utterly distracting,  something like 2000 aircraft books and a wall of interesting kits....)  but at another sale weekend a year or two late I saw him again, and asked some more, the belly panel is in a private collection though. 

 

If this is of interest,  I suggest having a go an my experiment above,  just start with white, an add a little of each colour to change the shade, and brush out, and it does not take much (see the brush outs)

 I found the colours also dried darker,  but this is with tiny amount of modern acrylic.

While I'm typing, I'm wondering how the now colour was specified, is there a lost of of how to make a 'Sky' mix with existing common paint perhaps, Sky was already around as Cotton's Camotint,  so did they send out chips...

 

Note how easy it is easy to make shades like the ones in the drawing posted by @dogsbody by the white/blue/yellow combinations.

 

 One final point, the place you really want Sky paint is at the factory, so I'd suggest by the end of June 1940 new aircraft were in in Sky. 

Dates for Spitfires were given in the 1982 Ted Hooton Spitfire article.

 

in the case of Hurricanes, 

Hawker

P3870 was taken on charge 21 June 1940

Gloster

P3112 delivery 21 June 1940

 

which gives an idea of when this may have been coming out of the factories,  and Maintenance Units would also have been repainting aircraft as they came through.

 

 

*build stalled as I found out how poor available Acrylic "matches" for really obscure RAF paints were,  uncommon paints like Dark Green and Dark Earth for example....  which were hardly used on anything.    For those not getting the sarcasm,  these were standard upper surface colours.

[brewerjerry]

59 minutes ago, dogsbody said:

This may be useful:

 

 

 

 

 

Chris

Hi chris

              looks like a book i might buy

    which one is it ?

       cheers

          jerry

[Troy Smith]

2 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

But if you are looking into modelling in this period, get Paul Lucas's book.  Other than in specific details, there has been nothing before or after to match.  The Ducimus booklets will do as a lesser guide.

 

@nheather

these are all scanned here

https://boxartden.com/reference/gallery/index.php/Camouflage-Markings

 

Note the RAF ones are still some of the best primers available, dealing with what changes occurred when and why,   they were published not long after the declassification of various wartime documents in the late 1960's  ISTR

[Graham Boak]

11 hours ago, Ossington 2 said:

ISTR somewhere that the black/white demarcation was as much for the German's benefit than ours. In order to hide our fidelity with radar, when we were always at just the right place and time to enable an intercept, it gave the illusion that our craft could be guided via radio from ground based observers in the pre-war manner. Is this true? 

Now the Germans had radar and knew we had it too, but they took years to finesse the system and presumably thought that we matched their incapability of control structure. 

The black/white underside was entirely for the benefit of the RAF.  The early radar wasn't very good, and could only see out to sea.   Once an aircraft passed inland radar was blind, and so were the RAF  controllers on the ground.  They relied upon ground reports from the Observer Corps and the police, which is why being able to clearly distinguish friendly from enemy was so important.  There's a good argument that the true advantage the RAF had in the BoB was not its aircraft nor its radar, but its control system, far superior to anything else in the world at the time.  However initial experience in France convinced the pilots that the b&w underside was too serious a penalty.  By the time the Germans were flying regularly in large numbers over Britain, the b/w undersides were gone.

 

The Germans knew we had radar, but knew little about it.  An ELINT mission by the Graf Zeppelin found the emissions from British Chain Home radars but discounted them as a "overtone" from our National Grid, as no-one would actually build a radar system at such a low frequency. 

 

[Graham Boak]

There's more in bear in mind.  As late as November, the RAF MU responsible for issuing paint to RAF units did not recognise the colour Sky, and sent a memo to the Air Ministry asking what was meant, and what should they send.  They said that they had been sending one colour - but the signal was corrupt at this point.  The two obvious colours were Sky Blue and Sky Grey.  As it was in November that fighter units would be indenting for Sky paint for the new tailbands and spinners, so the evidence is that they were sending out Sky Blue, hence the large number of fighters in this period with different tones on these items and the undersides.  I take from this that any earlier request, during the BoB period, would also be answered with Sky Blue, and that this may have been more common on fighters than generally recognised.

 

There is more than one comment about RAF units having to mix their own paint - which is itself some kind of confirmation that it happened - but are there more than two?  (OK, three?  Really?)  How does anyone know how common this was, as often claimed?  Remember that the retention of the b/w underside was permitted until paint supplies arrived.  Be very careful about anecdotal stories: those told after the war are likely to suffer from distortion, exaggeration, and from back-support from other tales.  Anybody want to dig up Spitfires from a hole in Burma?  Of course, once aircraft from the factories began arriving on the units, any difference from the true Sky would have been clear, but who would have cared? 

 

Then there is the independent evidence from ground observers that some units had distinctive underside colours: the best source for this is probably Mike Bowyer's Fighting Colours from PSL, as in a series of Airfix magazine articles.  He however bases much of this on the 1941 Sky being a different colour to the 1940 Sky, which isn't true, but would reflect seeing a lot of non-Sky around.  By the late 60s there was a definite belief that some Hurricanes had a darker blue underside, and when Hawker's aircraft returned to Dunsfold from the BoB film it carried a darker blue of its film appearance, as I saw on a number of occasions.  (Most memorably when a Swedish team arrived for what was the usual Friday afternoon Harrier display for various interested parties.  Supposedly they said "We've seen the Harrier at various air displays, but we understand you've got a Hurricane...)  Could memories of this colour match the "turquoise" underside dug up later?  Could be... 

 

[Selwyn]

14 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

White was a pure white but the black was a paint called Night which contained a small amount of Ultramarine.  What you would choose to use is a matter of individual taste, but ideally dead black is rarely suitable for model purposes as being too stark, so a very dark charcoal grey might be preferred.  It would be very easy to go too far in toning down a pure white, but again this is a matter of taste.

 

Eau de Nil was not a colour in the RAF Stores Vocabulary.  It may well have been used for the interiors of military office vehicles as being easy on the eyes, but has no recorded use in or on aircraft.  The original and early use of Sky (or its substitutes) is a very involved story, involving spy flights prewar by an Australian entrepreneur called Sidney Cotton, early use of a light underside colour on Blenheim bombers, initial PR work, and an awful lot of unsupported anecdotes.  The best (fullest) account was been given by Paul Lucas in his book for Guideline on RAF camouflage and markings up to the end of 1940, but it has one distinct flaw, and that is the (unsupported?) assumption in the artwork that a lot of fighters used Eau-de-Nil on their undersides in lieu of the proper Sky, said to be unobtainable in quantity.  That fighters in this period had a range of underside colours in this period is well recorded.  Paul and Neil Robinson (and perhaps others?) studied the available remains of Battle of Britain fighters, still in their original paint as recovered from crash sites, and listed  what they found.  Several colours were found, including several which they identified as Eau-de-Nil.  Looking further at this table, it seems that all the samples with Eau-de-Nil came from squadrons that were based around the Humber at the time of the introduction of Sky.  Which leaves all the units in the rest of the country...

 

It would not be desirable/permitted to use a paint that was not intended for, and accepted for, use on aircraft.   However, it would be possible, given the confusion apparent at the time, for units/bases to have produced their own mixes and hence that some of these could have ended up close, or even identical, to Eau-de-Nil.  So it is reasonable to accept that a few specific units actually wore such a colour, and potentially some others did for which we have no record otherwise.  It is not reasonable to argue for its widespread use in a majority of cases.

 

Gallons of ink, and oodles of electrons, have been expended on the matter of Sky in the BoB.  No doubt more will come.  However, I would be careful in the use of anything else except on aircraft that had been delivered to the service before early July 1940.  Which was a large number.  

 

But if you are looking into modelling in this period, get Paul Lucas's book.  Other than in specific details, there has been nothing before or after to match.  The Ducimus booklets will do as a lesser guide.

 

EDIT: A black port wing was reintroduced in November 1940, but the other wing remained in Sky.

"Eau de Nil was not a colour in the RAF Stores Vocabulary."

 

Sorry Graham it was.

It was also in the Army and Navy stores vocab as it was the designated colour to be used on the explosive type hazard band on munitions (actually since Victorian times!) So the colour was seen on Royal Navy and Army shells and  Grenades and such like. So although not a colour used on aircraft it would be readily available through the supply system  if in an emergency you needed a colour to substitute for Sky.

 

Incidentally, Eau De Nil is still  in the Stores vocab as it is in the NATO hazard system the designated colour for smoke munitions.

 

Selwyn

[Graham Boak]

Where was its number in the RAF Vocabulary?  And, more significantly, what was its type of paint?  (DTD number)?  A paint that is in use by the Army and Navy is not necessarily suitable for use on aircraft, other than perhaps for small decorative features.

[Selwyn]

1 hour ago, Graham Boak said:

Where was its number in the RAF Vocabulary?  And, more significantly, what was its type of paint?  (DTD number)?  A paint that is in use by the Army and Navy is not necessarily suitable for use on aircraft, other than perhaps for small decorative features.

Probably in one of the section 33's as all the separate  33 lettered sections covered the many different types of paints and coatings used for many different items in the RAF inventory. Certainly not in the list of aircraft specific paints, (33B IIRC?) as you alluded to. I have no idea what DTD number it was, but changing the underside colour  was an emergency expedient, and had to be done quickly, so I would surmise  nobody was that bothered about suitability at the time. Remember at this point in time  they were painting blue RAF vehicles with paints that was obtained for camouflaging buildings and hangars. everything was in short supply. you used what you had. And lets face it most of the aircraft with the alternative coloured undersides would not have lasted in service long enough for a proper repaint anyway.

 

It still happens, In the  Falklands war the White coloured Shrike missiles  stood out under the dark camouflaged Vulcan wings so needed to be toned down. Were they bothered about the correct paint standards? (missile finishes are as stringently specified as aircraft finishes)   err no.  A good friend of mine was given some cash, sent down to Halfords in Lincoln to buy some spray paints to do the job, The correct DTD standard? Probably not!

 

Selwyn

 

[PLC1966]

DMC  33A Ground Environment Paints, 33B Air Environment Paints

[PatG]

Perhaps relevant, or maybe not, but the 'Observer Corps' presentation Mk.IIa Spitfire (P7666) in a well known photo taken around November/December 1940 shows a lighter colour on the spinner and tail band as in lighter than its Sky type S undersides, which could be? 

 

I'm no expert so cannot add much other than to say that over the years I've seen references to Sky, Sky Type S, Sky Blue, Sky Grey, Duck Egg Blue, Duck Egg Green and Eau De Nil which all supposedly refer to the same RAF underside colour of the 1940/41 period.

 

As all the period photos are b/w the scope for individual interpretation is such that I just go with what appears to give the correct contrast.

 

Pat.

[Graham Boak]

If you look back a few postings, you'll find that I refer to exactly this.  In colour photos the spinners and tail bands match Sky Blue.  This is lighter than Sky, and so fits the appearance in b&w photos.  The acual colour, as described in official records, isn't known for certain, but if it isn't Sky Blue it sure as damnation looks like it!

[brewerjerry]

2 hours ago, Selwyn said:

........

 

 

It still happens, In the  Falklands war the White coloured Shrike missiles  stood out under the dark camouflaged Vulcan wings so needed to be toned down. Were they bothered about the correct paint standards? (missile finishes are as stringently specified as aircraft finishes)   err no.  A good friend of mine was given some cash, sent down to Halfords in Lincoln to buy some spray paints to do the job, The correct DTD standard? Probably not!

 

Selwyn

 

Hi

     reminds me of the dockyard painters in devonport trying to make up south atlantic grey,

  

they mixed different batches of paint and colour to make the colour, but then i  suppose that is what a tradesman does

 

the frigates were all a slightly different shade of grey 

 

   cheers

     jerry

Edited February 4, 2023 by brewerjerry
typo

[dogsbody]

19 hours ago, brewerjerry said:

Hi chris

              looks like a book i might buy

    which one is it ?

       cheers

          jerry

 

Scale Aircraft Modelling Colours: Combat Colours Number 2 The Hawker Hurricane 1939 to 1945 in RAF, Commomwealth and FAA service

 

 

 

Chris

[V Line]

Many moons ago Nick Millman posted on the matter of aircraft paints and referred to the various base colours from which the final shades were mixed. As far as I recall there was a list of the base colours supplied by Messers Goodlass and Wall. Clearly, if such mixing was done at station or M.U. level there would inevitable have been variances, particularly if there was a lack of clarity on what was required.

[Graham Boak]

2 hours ago, Selwyn said:

Probably in one of the section 33's as all the separate  33 lettered sections covered the many different types of paints and coatings used for many different items in the RAF inventory. Certainly not in the list of aircraft specific paints, (33B IIRC?) as you alluded to. I have no idea what DTD number it was, but changing the underside colour  was an emergency expedient, and had to be done quickly, so I would surmise  nobody was that bothered about suitability at the time. Remember at this point in time  they were painting blue RAF vehicles with paints that was obtained for camouflaging buildings and hangars. everything was in short supply. you used what you had. And lets face it most of the aircraft with the alternative coloured undersides would not have lasted in service long enough for a proper repaint anyway.

 

It still happens, In the  Falklands war the White coloured Shrike missiles  stood out under the dark camouflaged Vulcan wings so needed to be toned down. Were they bothered about the correct paint standards? (missile finishes are as stringently specified as aircraft finishes)   err no.  A good friend of mine was given some cash, sent down to Halfords in Lincoln to buy some spray paints to do the job, The correct DTD standard? Probably not!

 

Selwyn

 

Decades ago, I was told the same story except about Woolworths in Lincoln, about the dark grey on the underside of Vulcans.  Winfield Household enamel.  I didn't believe it then, I don't believe it now, and wouldn't now even if we didn't know exactly which entirely appropriate colour was used.  If this colour was available for the underside of Vulcans, I'd have thought that there'd be spare for a few Shrikes.  However, as you suggest above, would this have been too important?  Its not as though it was the entire aircraft.   

 

The problem with inappropriate paint is that it doesn't last and causes more drag - a bit like covering the surface of the wing with sandpaper.  (Fairly fine sandpaper...)  Really not a good idea, and any engineering officer or good Warrant Officer would not permit it.  Not where there were other ways of doing the same job.  Given that the same colour was already in widespread use on Blenheims, there's something a bit weird about the entire shortage story.  Clearly there must have been some problems but were they only local?  Just how many units actually managed to find Sky?  Clearly not from the official source...  Lots of unknowns still, but we can cast doubt on "bar stories" where there is reason to do so.  I feel that odd results from mixing is much, much more likely to have happened - not to say unavoidable?  We still have no idea how much guidance was given beyond "duck egg blue" - which is a better description for Sky Blue anyway!

[brewerjerry]

Hi

    just a thought

 

but apparently the average life of a pilot in the 1940's was about four weeks, so presumably the timescale is relevant to their aircraft before it was lost

 

  would groundcrew have worried to much about the correct paint if it was only going to last about four weeks 

 

  maybe post BoB period painting aircraft was followed more closely

 

   cheers

      jerry 

[Graham Boak]

13 minutes ago, brewerjerry said:

Hi

    just a thought

 

but apparently the average life of a pilot in the 1940's was about four weeks, 

 Not in July, which is when the paint was being applied.  Using Averages for specific periods is fraught with problems.

[Selwyn]

1 hour ago, Graham Boak said:

Decades ago, I was told the same story except about Woolworths in Lincoln, about the dark grey on the underside of Vulcans.  Winfield Household enamel.  I didn't believe it then, I don't believe it now, and wouldn't now even if we didn't know exactly which entirely appropriate colour was used.  If this colour was available for the underside of Vulcans, I'd have thought that there'd be spare for a few Shrikes.  However, as you suggest above, would this have been too important?  Its not as though it was the entire aircraft.   

 

The problem with inappropriate paint is that it doesn't last and causes more drag - a bit like covering the surface of the wing with sandpaper.  (Fairly fine sandpaper...)  Really not a good idea, and any engineering officer or good Warrant Officer would not permit it.  Not where there were other ways of doing the same job.  Given that the same colour was already in widespread use on Blenheims, there's something a bit weird about the entire shortage story.  Clearly there must have been some problems but were they only local?  Just how many units actually managed to find Sky?  Clearly not from the official source...  Lots of unknowns still, but we can cast doubt on "bar stories" where there is reason to do so.  I feel that odd results from mixing is much, much more likely to have happened - not to say unavoidable?  We still have no idea how much guidance was given beyond "duck egg blue" - which is a better description for Sky Blue anyway!

But this is not hearsay I actually know the chap.

 

Selwyn

[nheather]

Was the ‘black’ used on the ‘half and half’ day fighter scheme the same as the ‘black’ used for bombers?

[Phoenix44]

15 hours ago, Selwyn said:

But this is not hearsay I actually know the chap.

 

Selwyn

I would be utterly amazed if a missile was simply sprayed with a Halfords spray can. And that the RAF didn't have any far more suitable paints available.