Spitfire Vc BR344 (M o 3)

[Phatman]

Hi all,

First time posting so please be gentle........So I'm currently building a 1/32 Tamiya/Laminar flow Vc, and a few months back a picture of Spitfire BR344 onboard the USS Wasp caught my eye. Down the rabbit hole I go............. Well........as luck would have it Euro Decals does it, it is also covered by Paul Lucas in Colour Conundrum. All roads I find seem to point to a two tone blue/grey scheme (repainted on the Wasp) which all makes sense to me. (is it me or do you hear a but coming??) But, one thing is bugging me, every time I look at the picture I see three colours on the fuselage (not including the underside), the lightest shade at the roundel, a darker shade aft and an even darker shade fore, through the cockpit  (not including the engine cover which would be colour No 4???? Am I going mad, are my aging eyes deceiving me???? Help!!!!! Unfortunately I couldn't post a picture, but it is out there on the old interwebs

Edited February 13 by Phatman

[Troy Smith]

4 minutes ago, Phatman said:

it is also covered by Paul Lucas in Colour Conundrum. All roads I find seem to point to a two tone blue/grey scheme (repainted on the Wasp) which all makes sense to me. (is it me or do you hear a but coming??) But, one thing is bugging me, every time I look at the picture I see three colours on the fuselage (not including the underside), the lightest shade at the roundel, a darker shade aft and an even darker shade fore (not including the engine cover which would be colour No 4???? Am I going mad, are my aging eyes deceiving me???? Help!!!!! Unfortunately I couldn't post a picture, but it is out there on the old interwebs

this?

 

@Paul Lucas is on here

There have been numerous discussions on here and other forums as to what might have occurred and with what.   

 

HTH

 

 

[fubar57]

I've stared at that photo a lot and this is the first time I have noticed that the two Spitfires in the background both have two bulges on the upper cowl panel

[tempestfan]

@Graham Boak may also have a fact-based opinion - he contributed material to the MMP Malta Spitfire book if I'm not mistaken.

[Phatman]

52 minutes ago, Troy Smith said:

this?

 

@Paul Lucas is on here

There have been numerous discussions on here and other forums as to what might have occurred and with what.   

 

HTH

 

 

That's the baby! Thank you for putting the picture up 🙂

[JackG]

In the period photo there seems to be two columns of dark fog - more readily visible in the  sky and water background.  Could of been something during film processing like contaminated chemical or diluted?

[Phoenix44]

I agree there's perhaps 3 colours  with a darker colour on the cowling panel. The aircraft behind perhaps has a darker cowling panel too. I think the cowling panel is one that in other photos of aircraft being loaded, are for some reason off the aircraft. The aircaft on the left of that photo shows the panel painted as if it were painted by the panel rather than to fit in with the camoflage pattetn. This all suggests the panel might have been painted off the aircraft for sone reason? Or wasn't painted?

Edited February 12 by Phoenix44

[Phoenix44]

19 hours ago, fubar57 said:

I've stared at that photo a lot and this is the first time I have noticed that the two Spitfires in the background both have two bulges on the upper cowl panel

Yes, interesting! Can see then on some of the photos I've posted above.

[Graham Boak]

Paul Lucas's researches, printed in Scale Aircraft Modeller and reprinted in the second (IIRC) of this Colour Conundrum books, state that the aircraft of this delivery were painted in Temperate Sea Scheme, Extra Dark Sea Grey (which can appear blue in fairly short time) and Dark Slate Grey, which a a greenish colour.  The appearance of this scheme can vary considerably in b&w photographs but the one shown here are not untypical.  

 

Apart from discussing various aspects with Brian Cauchi, most of the information of which came from him, my main contribution to the book was in the derivation from secondary sources of the serials of the Spitfires sent to Malta, and which delivery they took part in.   As described in the appropriate appendix, which I now think includes a few errors but is generally still pretty accurate.  For colours see Paul Lucas.

 

There seems to be little to no hard evidence that the aircraft were repainted once on board.  Wasp's records include no mention of any paints being taken on board when in the UK, and the Spitfire hues show little relation to the USN's aircraft colours.   Doubters might like to consider under just whose authority this would have been undertaken, given the highly politically sensitive nature of this operation.  Views of the hangar show just how difficult this would have been at the best of times, let alone on a darkened ship at high speed in a few days.  Let alone, as one claimant stated, redone multiple times due to changes of direction from above.  Changes in the scheme can indeed be identified, but these were done in the UK.  

[fubar57]

18 minutes ago, Phoenix44 said:

Yes, interesting! Can see then on some of the photos I've posted above.

 I just enlarge the photo and the aircraft in front has that area just out of frame. Odd that I've never paid attention to them before and I've built several Spitfire models

[Tail-Dragon]

Curious, I'd believed that the "Renfrew" scheme carried the upper colors (Temperate Sea Scheme) down the sides of the tropical filter intake, and where the upper scheme ended at the panel line of the intake, that indicated the desert scheme.

[Dave Swindell]

Note all the photo's in @Phoenix44's post above showning the wingtips removed were taken during loading on board Wasp at Glasgow ie after any repainting by UK MU's (eg so called Renfrew scheme) but before any of the alleged repainting on board Wasp.

[Paul Lucas]

Firstly, I have to admit that not once, in all the times that I have looked at that photo of BR344 coded '3-M', have I noticed the apparently darker nature of the colour of the segment of camouflage that runs through the cockpit. I don't think that it has anything to do with the dark smudge that is visible in the sky just above the Spitfire because the White letter 'M' appears to be unaffected.

 

As to why the segment of camouflage that runs through the cockpit should appear to be darker than what should be the same colour that is applied to the rear fuselage upon which the serial number appears I don't know. One possibility might be that some of the paint that was used on the rear fuselage might have been more heavily thinned than that used adjacent to the cockpit as overthinning is known to make colours go 'rogue' and dry to have a lighter observed colour than the intended design colour.

 

In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, I am going to stick with my interpretation that this was one of the Spitfires repainted aboard Wasp using materials obtained from the US Navy i.e. the Blue Gray used by US Naval aircraft such as the Wildcat that appears here as the light colour, and whatever might have remained of the trial colour that was supposed to resemble Deck Blue 20-B that appears here as the darker colour.

 

All of the Spitfires that can be seen being loaded onto, or aboard Wasp posted above are those delivered to Malta by Operation Oppidan/Bowery that was the second of Wasps deliveries. The 'Renfriew' scheme, thought to have been Dark Sea Grey and Dark Slate Grey, was a feature of the first delivery, Operation Newman/Calendar.

 

As can be seen in the photos, all the Spitfires visible have a light colour running through the cockpit. This is almost certainly Midstone and these Spitfires are therefore probably camouflaged in the Desert Scheme. A small number of the Spitfires that were put aboard Wasp for Oppidan/Bowery are known to have been given some form of 'Sea Camouflage' before being put aboard, but I think that these were a minority.

 

Unlike the Maintenance Command Report on Operation Newman, the Maintenance Command Report that I have on Operation Oppidan makes no mention of British paint being put aboard Wasp for application to the Spitfires and it is because of this that I suggest that the two US Navy paints mentioned above might have been used to to camouflage those Spitfires put aboard that were finished in the Desert Scheme.

[brewerjerry]

Hi

     a long time ago there was a usn wasp vet story i found on the internet, he mentioned painting the spitfires, i think he mentioned using ship store paints

  i lost the link and story in a computer crash a few years ago 

 unfortunately i cant remember more of what he wrote 

   cheers

     jerry 

[Graham Boak]

Ship store paint would affect the performance of the aircraft.  Try explaining that to Churchill or Roosevelt,  But these aircraft had already been repainted in the UK, once before delivery to Glasgow for loading and once after "Jumbo" Gracie had complained that it wasn't right.  Just who is going to authorise a repainting again using unsuitable materials under unsuitable conditions?  Certainly not Gracie.  Was the captain of the Wasp looking for a court-martial?  These photos do show a neat finish which would simply not have been attainable.  I grant you that aircraft on the first trip (Calendar) look pretty much like a rush job, which is probably why the whole idea arose, but these on the second trip  (Bowery) are much neater.

[Chuck1945]

Graham, if repainting occurred, I don’t think unsuitable shipboard paint was used, rather, that the Wasp may have had some aircraft paint for trialing a new darker variation of the USN Blue-Gray paint. Dana Bell I believe has made mention of the trials with samples allocated to a couple of carriers.

[Phatman]

38 minutes ago, Paul Lucas said:

Firstly, I have to admit that not once, in all the times that I have looked at that photo of BR344 coded '3-M', have I noticed the apparently darker nature of the colour of the segment of camouflage that runs through the cockpit. I don't think that it has anything to do with the dark smudge that is visible in the sky just above the Spitfire because the White letter 'M' appears to be unaffected.

 

As to why the segment of camouflage that runs through the cockpit should appear to be darker than what should be the same colour that is applied to the rear fuselage upon which the serial number appears I don't know. One possibility might be that some of the paint that was used on the rear fuselage might have been more heavily thinned than that used adjacent to the cockpit as overthinning is known to make colours go 'rogue' and dry to have a lighter observed colour than the intended design colour.

 

In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, I am going to stick with my interpretation that this was one of the Spitfires repainted aboard Wasp using materials obtained from the US Navy i.e. the Blue Gray used by US Naval aircraft such as the Wildcat that appears here as the light colour, and whatever might have remained of the trial colour that was supposed to resemble Deck Blue 20-B that appears here as the darker colour.

 

All of the Spitfires that can be seen being loaded onto, or aboard Wasp posted above are those delivered to Malta by Operation Oppidan/Bowery that was the second of Wasps deliveries. The 'Renfriew' scheme, thought to have been Dark Sea Grey and Dark Slate Grey, was a feature of the first delivery, Operation Newman/Calendar.

 

As can be seen in the photos, all the Spitfires visible have a light colour running through the cockpit. This is almost certainly Midstone and these Spitfires are therefore probably camouflaged in the Desert Scheme. A small number of the Spitfires that were put aboard Wasp for Oppidan/Bowery are known to have been given some form of 'Sea Camouflage' before being put aboard, but I think that these were a minority.

 

Unlike the Maintenance Command Report on Operation Newman, the Maintenance Command Report that I have on Operation Oppidan makes no mention of British paint being put aboard Wasp for application to the Spitfires and it is because of this that I suggest that the two US Navy paints mentioned above might have been used to to camouflage those Spitfires put aboard that were finished in the Desert Scheme.

The other thing that is bothering me is the underside colours, why?? Well....... it's to do with that demarcation line (if you can call it that) between the upper and the lower.  The underside colour comes up too high for most standard painted Spitfires, if it were Azure (as well as Sky) it would have to have been painted with RAF stock. If it was repainted on the Wasp and there wasn't any British paint available what colour is it? U.S.?? If it was USN did they repaint the whole of the underside or just the rear fuselage??? Aaarrrrgggghhhhh, too many questions!!! Sorry.......... btw Will someone just hurry up and invent a time machine!!!!

[brewerjerry]

31 minutes ago, Chuck1945 said:

Graham, if repainting occurred, I don’t think unsuitable shipboard paint was used, rather, that the Wasp may have had some aircraft paint for trialing a new darker variation of the USN Blue-Gray paint. Dana Bell I believe has made mention of the trials with samples allocated to a couple of carriers.

Hi

     link to old BM thread with Dana comment 

   cheers

      jerry 

 

extracted

"I still suspect the US Navy camouflage color named Dark Blue - an interim color used between the days of Blue Gray and those of the Sea Blues.  Dark Blue was considered superior for hiding aircraft on carrier decks.  Significantly, it was tested onboard USS Wasp.

Cheers,

Dana "

 

Edited February 12 by brewerjerry

[Graham Boak]

Have either of you actually read Paul's work?  He has searched and found the original instructions and the correspondence between the interested parties.  Which he quotes from.  Not supposition and bar chat and "might have beens", however worthy the originator.  I notice that you don't address the practical and political problems of what is suggested.

 

As for the supposed stock of a new blue paint for USN trials, how is the captain of the Wasp going to explain why these trials were not carried out because the stocks of paint were used painting someone else's aircraft even though they didn't want them painted that colour?

[brewerjerry]

Hi

   Paul states above in his post

 

"In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, I am going to stick with my interpretation that this was one of the Spitfires repainted aboard Wasp using materials obtained from the US Navy i.e. the Blue Gray used by US Naval aircraft such as the Wildcat that appears here as the light colour, and whatever might have remained of the trial colour that was supposed to resemble Deck Blue 20-B that appears here as the darker colour."

[Paul Lucas]

As I understand the situation, the trials with the 'Dark Blue' took place before Wasp was detached to Britain. Therefore 'donating' any remaining material to the British might have been seen as a convenient way of getting rid of an unwanted surplus.

 

I discussed this idea in as much detail as I was able on pages 47-49 of Colour Conundrum Compendium No.1, or if the reader has the original magazine, SAM Vol.39 No.6, August 2017.

[Graham Boak]

So the trial stock for and used on a few F4Fs had enough spare for 50 Spitfires?  It seems unlikely.  However, this may make some sense for the first trip but less so for the second.  Enough trial stock for 100 Spitfires?  Or half stock for the second trip where two colours are still visible, neither looking anything like the comparatively rough paintings on the first?   It doesn't make sense.

[gingerbob]

12 hours ago, Phatman said:

Will someone just hurry up and invent a time machine!!!!

 

Haven't you heard?  They did, in about 75 years.

[Olmec Head]

Hesitating to join a Malta Spitfire thread, I though that I might!  One aspect I think not yet covered around possible USN repaints is the wrap around on some Malta Spitfire leading edges, being carried down rather than the standard demarcation.  I think that Brian Cauchi considered that it might be indicative of USN practice.  

[Paul Lucas]

The paint applied to the Spitfires during the first delivery was British, put aboard for the purpose at Port Glasgow.

 

When the Spitfires for the second delivery were put aboard, most seem to have been finished in the Desert Scheme with Midstone, a light colour passing through the cockpit.

 

By the time that they left the ship, some Spitfires, such as BR344, but not all, had a dark colour passing through the cockpit. This suggests that some repainting could have been done aboard. If so, what could have been used?

 

Ship paint? Unlikely.

 

Aircraft paint? There must have been a quantity of Blue Gray for Wasp's own aircraft. We now know that Wasp had trialled a Dark Blue colour in the months prior to being deployed to Britain.

 

Would there be enough of either of these materials to paint the entire upper surface of 50 Spitfires with one colour, which was the practice in Malta at that time? Possibly not.

 

So did they use the limited quantities of these two colours to maintain the disruptive camouflage pattern on the upper surfaces of the Spitfires? Not enough paint? Thin it down a little bit more than usual to make it go further. Add a little black to make it go further. Do both? 

 

The end result would probably have been the sort of two tone blue-grey finish that is shown in Ron Lowry's painting of BR301 UF-S that was first published in Robert Bracken's 'Spitfire - The Canadians' and later in Brian Cauchi's book. What the source material was for this painting, I have no idea, but BR301 was amongst the Spitfires delivered during Operation Bowery, Wasp's second delivery.

 

Shortly after this, AHQ Malta changed its camouflage policy so as to require a two tone disruptive scheme on the upper surfaces that resulted in what I have referred to colloquially as the 'Malta blue/slate grey scheme'. Coincidence?

 

 

 

Edited February 13 by Paul Lucas