Coastal Command Camouflage and markings

[rossm]

Following on from the Coastal Command Halifax topic which appeared earlier I have decided to update my own Coastal Command colour and markings notes. I am therefore posting my thoughts here to get comments and try and iron out any errors or areas of contention so constructive criticism is welcome.

As it's as complex topic I'm breaking it down into several sections to allow me to get my thoughts clear. First up is just the topic of squadron code letters or numerals, what colour they were will be another topic as there's a lot more information to organise.

Coastal Command Squadron Code letters:-

I'm not sure when Coastal Command introduced a two letter combination denoting the squadron plus an individual aircraft letter but certainly by the start of WWII. If they followed other commands then they were introduced about the end of September 1938 and the combination changed on the outbreak of war.

Around November 1942 squadron code letters were removed and only an individual aircraft letter retained - Vic Flintham in Combat Codes gives the date for the original memo as 16th October 1942 while Paul Lucas in his MAM article on Sunderland markings gives different dates for memos but says the order was to come into effect on 1st November 1942. This presumably, despite a slight discrepancy in dates, explains the common photo of a Wellington VIII (A/HX379) dated 28th October 1942 with squadron code letters WN showing as a pale colour which was presumably due to them having been overpainted in white.

By mid-1943 the confusion on bases where different squadrons operated the same aircraft type seems to have led to the introduction of one numeral indicating different squadrons on a base, with the lowest numbered squadron getting '1', the next '2' and so on. Occasionally this broke down when squadrons were posted - e.g. 206 became '4' when it was posted to St.Eval where 53 was '1', 224 was '2' and 547 was '3'.The '1' was usually just a verical bar.

Sometimes the numerals became subscripts, notably on Halifaxes, or were different sizes as on some Liberators like Q/BZ877 (IWM photo CH 11800). Also the '1' for the lowest numbered squadron was sometimes omitted as on 179 Squadron Wellingtons at Chivenor (IWM photo FLM 1995) which have only the aircraft letter while the 407 Squadron aircraft in the backgound carry the '2' for their squadron as well. Other squadrons did carry the '1' though, including 172 Squadron when at Chivenor (photo in RAF Chivenor in the Britain in old photographs series, also IWM photo CA 143).

In mid-1944 (perhaps anticipating confusion with squadrons moving around for D-Day ?) squadrons returned to two code letters plus an individual aircraft letter. Although Paul Lucas suggests (due to having found correspondence in the PRO) the strike squadrons changed earlier I have not seen anything to support this and many photos of 404 Squadron Beaufighters show the numeral '2' and are dated May 1944. By the time they have D-Day stripes 404 seem to have changed to letters 'EE'.

As I said earlier, comments on the above are welcome. Once it's straight I'll move on to the colours of the letters. Eventually everything will appear on my web pages which the aforementioned Halifax post showed to be woefully out of date,

Ross

Edited January 9, 2011 by rossm

[Marcel]

Hi Rossm, many thanks for your topic, exactly what I need to know (going to build a CC Beaufighter). I can’t wait to read more - the codes, their colours and placement. Thank you once more.

[rossm]

Well the house move means I haven't really touched this for months but I'd like to have it 'peer reviewed' for errors and omissions please. Article for review

It's a very confusing topic so please feel free to point out any errors, omissions or inconsistencies - if possible please give a reference that I can use in any update,

Thanks,

Ross

[spitfire]

Not a review just a thanks for the information it is certainly more detailed than any info that I have.

Cheers

Den

[CliffB]

My thanks too Ross.

Your article has sorted out the undesurface colour of the CC Anson that I'm about to embark on - a great help

Cliff

[Alex Gordon]

Thank you,most enlightening.

[IanW]

>>In mid-1944 (perhaps anticipating confusion with squadrons moving around for D-Day ?) squadrons returned to two code letters plus an individual aircraft letter. Although Paul Lucas suggests (due to having found correspondence in the PRO) the strike squadrons changed earlier I have not seen anything to support this and many photos of 404 Squadron Beaufighters show the numeral '2' and are dated May 1944. By the time they have D-Day stripes 404 seem to have changed to letters 'EE'.<<

Excellant resource, thanks very much. Just to add a bit of detail here to the snip above, which might be relevant... the well-known photo of the 489 Sqn Beaufighter with the Mustang alongside (eg here http://www.burrowes.org/FamilyTree/E.F.G.B...r-Mustang.html) shows that the original squadron codes (1-S) have been over-painted with the new codes of P6 - this implies that the squadron was still using the old 2 letter squadron code at least for a short while after 6 June 1944 (as I believe they were moved to the forward fuselage to avoid over-painting with the invasion stripes) before using 'P6'.

Cheers,

Ian

[rossm]

>>In mid-1944 (perhaps anticipating confusion with squadrons moving around for D-Day ?) squadrons returned to two code letters plus an individual aircraft letter. Although Paul Lucas suggests (due to having found correspondence in the PRO) the strike squadrons changed earlier I have not seen anything to support this and many photos of 404 Squadron Beaufighters show the numeral '2' and are dated May 1944. By the time they have D-Day stripes 404 seem to have changed to letters 'EE'.<<

Excellant resource, thanks very much. Just to add a bit of detail here to the snip above, which might be relevant... the well-known photo of the 489 Sqn Beaufighter with the Mustang alongside (eg here http://www.burrowes.org/FamilyTree/E.F.G.B...r-Mustang.html) shows that the original squadron codes (1-S) have been over-painted with the new codes of P6 - this implies that the squadron was still using the old 2 letter squadron code at least for a short while after 6 June 1944 (as I believe they were moved to the forward fuselage to avoid over-painting with the invasion stripes) before using 'P6'.

Cheers,

Ian

Thanks Ian, it's nice to get more evidence. I can't get that link to work just now but I'll do some digging,

Ross

[IanW]

Hi Ross,

Sorry, try this one... http://www.burrowes.org/FamilyTree/E.F.G.B...er-Mustang.html

Cheers,

Ian

[rossm]

Hi Ross,

Sorry, try this one... http://www.burrowes.org/FamilyTree/E.F.G.B...er-Mustang.html

Cheers,

Ian

Ian,

I'm sure I've seen that picture before but never really looked at it. There are lots of interesting details (is that a bomb rack under the wing of the Beaufighter?) but I'm in danger of hijacking my own thread! When I've more time I'll incorporate it in my notes, thanks for the pointer,

Ross

[Work In Progress]

Ross

Your expertise is on Coastal stuff is so much greater than mine that I have nothing useful to add to your article, but I would like to say thanks for going to the effort. It is very clearly worded and laid out, which makes it easy to use. The fact that you have quoted your references also increases its vaue and usefulness.

[IanW]

(is that a bomb rack under the wing of the Beaufighter?)

Yes, not to get off-topic... but yes, that is a bomb-rack - I was looking through the ORBs the other night and it says that during May, 1944 the squadron's Beaufighters were fitted to carry 2 * 500lb and 2 * 250lb bombs.

Cheers,

Ian

[expositor]

allow me to add that the early to mid-war letter-number-letter codes were an admiralty designation with the first letter the posting or base, the number indicating the 'seniority' and mission of the unit at that base, and the last letter the identifier of that particular plane in its squadron. with the squadrons moving about with the changing priorities of an increasingly successful campaign, it was just easier(?) to return to the old RAF way of identification which often, though not always, remained despite the posting; or so i believe....