DTD Technical Circular No.360

[rossm]

This document seems to be the master reference for late war RAF camouflage and markings but it's contents seem to be a mystery. There is a reproduction of "This leaf issued with A.L.No.8 October 1944" -which may be a leaflet interpreting DTD360 ? - in the book British Aviation Colours of WWII and that's all I can find about it.

I'm particularly interested in the Coastal Command aspects, the "leaf" quoted above makes no mention (as far as I can see) of the standard EDSG/Sky scheme for Mosquitos and Beaufighters, implying all CC aircraft should have white undersides unless on special duties. Also the book as a whole does not appear to document the change on Mosquitos and Beaufighters from red to sky to black squadron codes. I'm assuming that all this must have come about via DTD360 ?

Does anyone know if there's a copy in the National Archives ?

[Super Aereo]

This document seems to be the master reference for late war RAF camouflage and markings but it's contents seem to be a mystery. There is a reproduction of "This leaf issued with A.L.No.8 October 1944" -which may be a leaflet interpreting DTD360 ? - in the book British Aviation Colours of WWII and that's all I can find about it.

I'm particularly interested in the Coastal Command aspects, the "leaf" quoted above makes no mention (as far as I can see) of the standard EDSG/Sky scheme for Mosquitos and Beaufighters, implying all CC aircraft should have white undersides unless on special duties. Also the book as a whole does not appear to document the change on Mosquitos and Beaufighters from red to sky to black squadron codes. I'm assuming that all this must have come about via DTD360 ?

Does anyone know if there's a copy in the National Archives ?

Something I had been wondering about myself often, but, IIRC, the white undersides already present on some of the Beaus were changed to Sky on insistence by the Strike Wings, who felt the white to be too conspicuous.

Paul Lucas mentions an issue 2 of DTD 360 which would have sanctioned the EDSG/Sky scheme, but I cannot say I have seen it witth my eyes...

[Edgar]

This is turning out to be "one of those." In the D.T.D. listing, 360 is shown as "not issued," which is not an auspicious start. Try Kew's search function, for "D.T.D." and there are a few entries, but, again, none look promising. "Air Publications" comes next, which directs you to a master file, and, after flogging through 9,400+ files, not one contains a single mention of an A.P., which leads to the next idea, but "A.P.," or "AP" leads to umpteen files on armour-piercing. One file gave me hope, since it seems to suggest that all A.P.s went to the Imperial War Museum, but, put "Air Publications" into the IWM's site, and it assumes that you're enquiring about "Air AND Publications."

At Kew, there are some D.T.D. six-monthly report files, which might have something, but, whatever you're planning to do, I would not recommend holding your breath as one of the options.

Edgar

[Super Aereo]

OT: it never ceases to amaze me how a lot of Luftwaffe "aficionados" seem to think that WW2 RAF camouflage and markings were by and large very simply codified and adhered to. As pointed out in another thread I could not believe my eyes when I saw IWM footage of an entire squadron of thimble-nosed Beaufighters in overall Night being filmed in glorious colour in Greece in late 1944. Whichever way one looks at this from the point of view of orders and regulations, it makes no sense. Oh well, it makes life interesting, I guess... END OF OT

[rossm]

This is turning out to be "one of those." In the D.T.D. listing, 360 is shown as "not issued," which is not an auspicious start. Try Kew's search function, for "D.T.D." and there are a few entries, but, again, none look promising. "Air Publications" comes next, which directs you to a master file, and, after flogging through 9,400+ files, not one contains a single mention of an A.P., which leads to the next idea, but "A.P.," or "AP" leads to umpteen files on armour-piercing. One file gave me hope, since it seems to suggest that all A.P.s went to the Imperial War Museum, but, put "Air Publications" into the IWM's site, and it assumes that you're enquiring about "Air AND Publications."

At Kew, there are some D.T.D. six-monthly report files, which might have something, but, whatever you're planning to do, I would not recommend holding your breath as one of the options.

Edgar

Thanks for looking Edgar. As the document is quoted in AMO A.864/44 (in the RAF Museum book) it must have some substance but I get the impression it must have been regularly updated so maybe it was a six monthly thingy.

I was trying to make sense of Coastal Command camouflage and markings and doing better than my last attempt but still stuck for official indications of changes like Beaufighters and Mosquitos going from red to sky to black codes. Still, many of the other changes seem to have been by direct order (in the form of a memo?) rather than in the AMO publications like A.513/41 which was released in July and apparently followed in August by the order introducing white undersides on Whitleys, Wellingtons and Liberators.

It's a bit too difficult and expensive to spend the rest of my life on a paperchase in Kew when I live in Cornwall so I really do appreciate your looking even if the results were not hopeful.

I will eventually publish what I have discovered but our house move has gone from 'glacial' to 'ballistic' in the last couple of days so my attention is elsewhere for a couple of months,

Ross

PS - I don't mind the OT bit about the black Beaufighters with thimble radomes as my reaction was "Well you learn something every day" even if, at my age, that sometimes should be 'relearn'!

[lampie]

S'cuse my ignorance on this guys, but could you tell me what D.T.D stands for please?

Nige

[gingerbob]

Director/Directorate of Technical Development.

[lampie]

Thankyou!

[Edgar]

Sorry, clean forgot about this one (I have age as an excuse.)

There are three DTD 360s (that I've found,) dated February 1943, November 1943, and June 1945, with a "First amendment" 2-3-44 (which gives a Sky underside for "Coastal Aircraft Special Duties",) and "Fourth amendment" 19-6-45. Haven't found 2 & 3, though.

And, yes, I did copy them, so let me know if you still want them.

One little quirk is the Feb 43 circular advocating Light Mediterranean Blue for fighters going to Malta (desert-bound fighters remaining Azure,) with that instruction disappearing from the November 43 order.

Edgar

[brewerjerry]

Hi

Strange ... no AP's at kew

considering the number of AP's I looked at some years ago

I hopefully will visit in september so it maybe interesting ...

Jerry

[rossm]

Thanks for looking at this again Edgar. Since the original post I have found a partial way round the IWM search issue. Using a comma separator acts like an AND so searching for air,publication gets 328 results, many of them APs but nothing useful although there are some with 'no description available' and a list (not online) of APs received by Duxford from a library,

Ross

[Edgar]

Hi

Strange ... no AP's at kew

That's not quite what's being said; it's finding them that can be all fun and games. Kew has a new search engine, which, in some ways, is a great boon, but can be a flaming nuisance. Type in "A.P." and you get 10,761 references, even if you restrict it to AVIA & AIR 1939-1965; putting in "AP" you get 4930, and trying "Air Publication" brings 9290. It can take quite some time to go through that lot, and you'll be told that A.P.s are in AVIA 70; they aren't. Printing them out, and reading at your leisure, is no longer an option; when I started, I found 850 Spitfire references, but, at 20-30 to a page, it was manageable. Now you'll get two or three (five if you condense it down,) but I have too much respect for rainforests (and my back) to print out several hundred.

Edgar

[brewerjerry]

Hi Edgar

doh ...sorry my mix up,

so it will be fun when i get to kew, should be the end of the first week of september.

my first visit for over 10 years and realistically probably my last

Jerry

[Edgar]

If it's the Saturday, I might be able to make it on the same day (if you don't mind me getting in the way.) There are now several tables, by the far windows, equipped with pillars, to accommodate (flash-disabled) cameras, so copying won't cost you anything. Laptops are also permitted, now. If your Reader's ticket has expired, bring two proofs of identity (passport is favourite for one) to get a new one.

Edgar

[brewerjerry]

If it's the Saturday, I might be able to make it on the same day (if you don't mind me getting in the way.) There are now several tables, by the far windows, equipped with pillars, to accommodate (flash-disabled) cameras, so copying won't cost you anything. Laptops are also permitted, now. If your Reader's ticket has expired, bring two proofs of identity (passport is favourite for one) to get a new one.

Edgar

Hi Edgar,

It should be the friday and saturday depending on flights, ( I either do Duxford or Paris sunday, its tough choice ... aircraft ... or french women ......)

Thanks for the additional info, my ticket is well expired.

Is the old 'CISCO' type cafe still open ? ... ministry food ... :-)

I will contact you towards the end of the month.

Cheers

Jerry

[Steve in Ottawa]

In the early versions of this document or its predecessors, were the early war RAF markings (i.e., Type A, A1, B) also named as National Marking I, II, III?

I am editing an RCAF HWE Hurricane article for RT, and I don't want to make that assumption without digging into it with this group first.

[Dave Fleming]

I think the national marking I, II etc came in with the switch to type 'C' in Robertson nomenclature

Edited June 30, 2016 by Dave Fleming

[Steve in Ottawa]

Thanks, Dave; I didn't want to assume that was the case (or otherwise) until consulting with the lads here.

So, that being said does anybody know if the early war markings were given some way to identify what was what? I don't think I've seen the equivalent early war version of the DTD 360 document, so I really don't know one way or the other.

[Nick Millman]

Thanks, Dave; I didn't want to assume that was the case (or otherwise) until consulting with the lads here.

So, that being said does anybody know if the early war markings were given some way to identify what was what? I don't think I've seen the equivalent early war version of the DTD 360 document, so I really don't know one way or the other.

FWIW according to Aircraft Design Memorandum No.332 (Issue 2) of July 1939 identification markings were to be applied in accordance with the requirements of S.I.S No. 4/Mod. 861. I have not seen that document but presume it might contain details of dimensions, etc.

AMO A.154 of 17 April 1939 describes the markings in full but does not use any form of designation coding for them and was amended by Air Ministry letter on 27 Nov 1939 which forwarded an attached revised Para 4 dated 14 November 1939. Again full descriptions of the markings with no coding. The letter also refers to various markings amendments in Air Ministry Signals X, 119 of 22 Sep 39, A.949 of 30 Oct 39, A.726 of 5 Nov 39 and A.345 of 10 Nov 39.

Nick

[Dave Fleming]

Away from my notes, but even up to late 1940 I think they were just described by their colours

[Greenshirt]

ISTR a note here (by Edgar Brooks?) stating that our relatively modern use of I, II, III or A, C1, etc is just that. Something historians and ultimately modelers created to keep track of the Nation Markings changes. That same thread described the first use of the nomenclature either post war or even as late as the 60's. Not something I felt I needed to keep as a reference, so cannot pull it up handy.

Perfectly happy to be corrected, memory without a reference is faulty.

Tim

[Graham Boak]

The nomenclature A, B, B2 etc is certainly postwar, being invented in the late 40s (?) by Bruce Robertson as a way of clarifying the various changes.

The nomenclature National markings type I, II, III apparently is found in at least some official documents, and has been used much more recently by Paul Lucas as being more historically correct. I'm not sure how many others have adopted this, and in view of the comment above I'm not sure how widely applicable it should be anyway. A little digging through Lucas's various writings may clarify the matter, as he does tend to quote the documents he is using.

Personally, I find the Type I etc notation at least potentially far more confusing, and certainly more long winded, than Robertson's invention. There is perhaps a parallel with the use of code names for Japanese aircraft in WW2 and their true designations. We now know the correct designations, but authors and readers continue to use the more widely recognised short terms. I don't expect to see the end of the "Oscar" or "Betty" in my lifetime.

[rossm]

The Type I, II, III certainly appear in AP2656A of October 1944 and refer to the Bruce Robertson B, C and C1 respectively. As Nick and Dave have previously said the earlier roundels appear to be described just by their colours.

[Steve in Ottawa]

Great comments, all. Thanks for the perspective and info on this important question. I certainly use A, A1, etc., as does pretty much everyone else on the planet, but for the sake of historical accuracy I want to also include a sidebar note to briefly discuss that these are not what the RAF used to describe these markings.

Always appreciate the collaborative tone and the generous sharing of information regularly seen in the responses in this forum.