HMS London 1941&1942 colours

[thekz]

Gentlemen!

I was not satisfied with the HMS London 1941 camouflage drawings published in various sources, and decided to draw my own version. In the process some questions arose which I would like to discuss with you.

Firstly, the photos on which I based it:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The usual story - there is less information about the starboard side.

 

This is what I got:

 

 

 

 

Now the questions:

1.    Colours. Everywhere I've seen a description of this circuit the colours MS1-B6-507C are mentioned. I didn't start with the photos for a reason. It seems to me that in all photos the middle colour is closer to dark than to light. Therefore I assumed the MS1-B5-507C colour scheme.

2. The dark spot on the stern, port side. It is sort of lighter than the other dark areas and almost blends in with the middle colour. Is it possible to assume the presence of a fourth colour. MS2 for example? In my opinion, for 1941 camouflage such variation of colours is quite typical.

3. Very large spot of medium colour on the starboard side. Here I had only a photo of not too good quality. But it would be logical to assume the presence of small dark spots inside it (as on the left side). Maybe again a hypothetical ‘semi-dark’ MS2?

 

@dickrd, @Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies I'm especially interested in your opinion!

Edited May 5 by thekz

[dickrd]

I think that as a first step you need to decide if you are trying to reproduce the first or the second scheme that London wore in 1941.  There are a number of small differences. Your photos are from both schemes. I have labelled them for ease of reference:

 

 

Your drawing of the starboard side is essentially the first scheme but your drawing of the port side is essentially of the second scheme. 

[thekz]

5 minutes ago, dickrd said:

I think that as a first step you need to decide if you are trying to reproduce the first or the second scheme that London wore in 1941.  There are a number of small differences. Your photos are from both schemes. I have labelled them for ease of reference:

 

 

Your drawing of the starboard side is essentially the first scheme but your drawing of the port side is essentially of the second scheme. 

Thanks for participating. I would agree with you about the port side. I had this thought myself. But about the starboard side, I looked carefully again and I can't find any significant differences between these photos. Help me!
And about what scheme I want to restore - to begin with, the one that will turn out better. After all, to build a model, you have to stop at one scheme. That is my ultimate goal.

 

[thekz]

 

There is also this photo, where maybe a little different colouring of the starboard side. But somehow it is indistinct).

[dickrd]

Nice photo which I think rather clearly illustrates why the repaint was needed!

 

On the starboard side the obvious significant differences are towards the stern:

 

 

My photos K & J also answer your Question 3 above: no extra small dark spots in the large patch there.

 

Less clear, but I also think there was a difference at the bow between the two schemes:

 

 

 

The photos of the bow area are of poor quality so I would accept that there is an element of doubt about both my suggestions 

[Vlad]

Great to see more of this kind of detective work, doing a great service to the community!

 

I agree with Dick on the stbd bow. The shadows cast by the knuckle and angle of the hull complicate it, but I think 1st scheme has large 507C section and 2nd has none.

 

Port stern I also think that is just shadow, hull shape, or repaired paint. The contrast is so low and unclear I don't see a 4th colour there.

 

Is it easy to fill colour and compare how B6 looks? If multiple sources agree it might be right (or it could be repeating same mistake). Check also relative contrast between each shade on each picture, Jamie had a way to do that converting RGB to true reflectivity. I tried it myself, will see if I can dig up how.

Edited May 6 by Vlad

[thekz]

1 hour ago, Vlad said:

Is it easy to fill colour and compare how B6 looks? If multiple sources agree it might be right (or it could be repeating same mistake). Check also relative contrast between each shade on each picture, Jamie had a way to do that converting RGB to true reflectivity. I tried it myself, will see if I can dig up how

All right. This will give our research some science 
The reflection data is taken from the last column of this table

 

We work with the left side - there are more quality photos on it. Here's what we got:

 

It's a bit dark. That's why I corrected the levels so that dark and light colours look like on the photo:

 

Here is the result. I still think B5 is closer to the truth)

[thekz]

Maybe dear @dickrd can share some photo that would help draw the port side camouflage of the first scheme? 
Because the one isometric photo I have is not enough 
Considering that judging by the photo the paint on the sides was not holding well this variant turns into a very interesting object for a determined modeller 

[Vlad]

I'm really not sure. The exposure and apparent contrast is so different from one picture to another. Personally I think your black and white rendition with B6 looks better and matches pictures D and E well (but not F and G). I would choose B6 if it is mentioned in references and there is no evidence to the contrary.

Edited May 6 by Vlad

[dickrd]

11 minutes ago, Vlad said:

I'm really not sure. The exposure and apparent contrast is so different from one picture to another. Personally I think your black and white rendition with B6 looks better and matches pictures D and E well (but not F and G). I would choose B6 if it is mentioned in references and there is no evidence to the contrary.

 

I am unaware of any contemporary source documentation that lists the colours. I'm not sure what these 'references' might be but they can only be the guesses of people looking at black and white photos or people copying what other people have suggested in earlier books .  Perhaps @thekz can tell us where he has seen these colours listed ("Everywhere I've seen a description of this circuit the colours MS1-B6-507C) and we can judge their credibility.

 

 

 

[dickrd]

8 hours ago, thekz said:

Maybe dear @dickrd can share some photo that would help draw the port side camouflage of the first scheme? 
Because the one isometric photo I have is not enough....

 

Sadly I do not have a broadside photo of the first scheme. But if I put these two photos one above the other the many differences in the design of the pattern between the two are a think fairly clear:

 

 

For what it is worth, my thinking at the moment is that the lightest colour in the first scheme was MS4 and the lightest colour in the second scheme was 507C. I am still working my way through what I have got before I offer any suggestions as to what the other colours might have been.  

Edited May 6 by dickrd

[thekz]

6 hours ago, dickrd said:

Perhaps @thekz can tell us where he has seen these colours listed ("Everywhere I've seen a description of this circuit the colours MS1-B6-507C) and we can judge their credibility.

 

This from book Maciej S. Sobanski "Krazowniki type "London" i "Dorsetshire"" Tarnowskie Gory 2015

 

 

[dickrd]

Well it's pretty obvious where the Polish book got it's 'information' from!

 

Raven is interesting.  He lists MS1, 507B, B5 and 507C for the first 1941 scheme and MS1, B6 and 507C for the second.

 

It’s probably easiest to focus on the second scheme of which there are many more photos. If it were my model for this scheme I would go with MS1, B5 and 507C. Whatever that middle colour was I think it was darker than B6. To my eye, in general it presents on London in a very similar way to the way B5 presents on ships where we know for certain that there was B5. This for example is Anson sporting MS1, B5, MS4 and 507C (MS4 RF 32%: B6 RF 30%): 

 

      

 

Edited May 9 by dickrd

[thekz]

Thus, with the corrections, the second scheme would look like this:

 

 

Also interesting to hear your guesses as to when this colouring was applied.

I tried to draw the left side of the first scheme, but the available photos are obviously insufficient. Let's leave it until better times)

[dickrd]

20 hours ago, thekz said:

Also interesting to hear your guesses as to when this colouring was applied.

 

 

Obviously it has to be after your 6th May 1941 photo (which was taken on the Clyde) and before the first positively dated photo in my collection of London in the second scheme which is 22nd September 1941.

 

Also I think that photos A8229 & A8230 are both incorrectly dated by the IWM:  

 

 

 

London emerged from her winter 1941/42 refit at the end of January 1942 with Type 273 radar on the searchlight tower aft of the aft funnel/immediately forward of the mainmast and with Oerlikons. Looking at the movements of London and Ashanti the IWM photos are either September or October 1941 with the earliest possible date being 18th September 1941.   

Edited Sunday at 07:56 AM by dickrd

[Pete_W]

Just a quick line, that while I have nothing to add to the thread, I do love this kind of discussion and nothing beats a well drawn ship's profile. Great work

 

P

[thekz]

Look, @dickrd, maybe we should go ahead and draw another 1942 scheme?
The port side seems clear and even the  Profile Morskie version seems quite acceptable:

 

 

 

 

But the starboard one is a mystery! There is a photo like this:

 

It shows the camouflage of the bow very well, but does not agree with the Profiles version. I have no information on the stern. Or were there 2 different schemes here too?

Also the Polish author's idea about light areas of the deck looks exotic. Is it possible to confirm it somehow?
 

 

[dickrd]

Before going on to 1942, @thekzcan I suggest a few further small tweaks to your excellent port side drawing of London's second 1941 scheme? 

 

On the first image below I have indicated some places to compare with your drawing.

 

And also, like @Vladabove, I really don't think there was that extra dark at the stern and that it was just a trick of the light or something in the photo you were referencing. 

 

 

 

[dickrd]

6 hours ago, thekz said:

 

 

....It shows the camouflage of the bow very well, but does not agree with the Profiles version. I have no information on the stern. Or were there 2 different schemes here too?

Also the Polish author's idea about light areas of the deck looks exotic. Is it possible to confirm it somehow?
 

 

 

 (Edited) There were two versions of the 1942 scheme as well! Your photo and PM depict the first version with three colours. It was later simplified to two.  The first version does not tally with Profile Morskie's on the starboard side. This May 1942 photo shows the area your photo does not:

 

 

You are correct in your thinking re the 'exotic' nature of the deck depiction. Everywhere was dull/darkened although by the time of this photo (August 1942) perhaps the darkening of the deck around B turret has weathered at bit lighter but no different really to areas of the forecastle:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited Monday at 12:24 PM by dickrd

[dickrd]

@thekz

 

Some nice views of her darkened decks in this scheme to be seen here also: 

 

Edited Monday at 07:34 AM by dickrd

[Vlad]

Are we happy with the Morskie colours MS1, B5 and 507C for the 1942 camo? Looks plausible from the pictures.

[chaosdeath131]

I never noticed london having 2 schemes, the colours MS1, B5 and 507C for the 1942 camo are also unexpected to me.

[dickrd]

After looking at the film properly and then looking more closely at my 1942 photos I have realised that there were two versions of the 1942 scheme as well!  The first was three colours, the second only two. ( I have corrected my earlier post.)

 

  

Edited Monday at 12:16 PM by dickrd

[thekz]

1 hour ago, dickrd said:

After looking at the film properly and then looking more closely at my 1942 photos I have realised that there were two versions of the 1942 scheme as well!  The first was three colours, the second only two. ( I have corrected my earlier post.)

 

  

 

 

[Pete_W]

Just to add, although I assume this is known to most here, that the Raven 1942 book has profiles for both schemes, showing both sides. The three colour scheme having been worn at the start of 42, but with her in the two colour scheme by August 42.  I can post the profiles if needed

 

P