FAA martin maryland

[expositor]

hello all,

i have a couple of questions about the paint scheme of the maryland in the FAA, especially the one which found the bismarck. as it was allegedly one of the earlier planes exported to england, sometime in mid-1940, would it have had sky undersides and at the time of the bismarck chase a year later, would not the FAA have at least painted over the earth with one of the sea greys?

i know the subject of the use of sky before late 1942 is another can of worms, but i can't get around dana bell's 'aircraft color primer #1' with the picture of the lockheed hudsons with what looks like us navy light gray on the undersides. i've looked about the internet and read many a piece about misinterpreting color photos, but bell's cover photo is just too clear to discount out of hand. i'm certainly no expert, but i use the intensity of the yellow to judge the other colors; but then that can be questioned if the only yellow is on the propeller blades, as some mfg's might have used lemon yellow instead of the chrome or orange-yellow color. to return to the cover of bell's work, the yellow of the fuselage cockade is pretty well chrome yellow and not shifted to the orange, leading me to believe the grey underside color is in fact 'gray' and not sky....but i could be seeing things. if that's so, is it not possible that those aircraft were built around the time the RAF was just changing their underside color standard to sky and eau-de-nil? when did the MAP call for sky on lend-lease aircraft? is it conceivable that there was a time lag between the approval in the spring of 1940 in england and the official call for it to be used by american manufacturers? could the maryland in question have been painted pale blue instead, like the early martlets for example?

any help is greatly appreciated, as this 'research,' for a dimbulb like me, has been a bit baffling....

many thanks,

jim

Edited November 22, 2010 by expositor

[Dave Fleming]

I've certainly seen it illustrated as Temperate Sea Scheme (Extra Dark Sea Grey, Dark Slate Grey over Sky). Perfectly possible it would have been repainted before being used by the FAA.

Edited November 22, 2010 by Dave Fleming

[Test Graham]

At the start of the war, land-based FAA aircraft were in Temperate Land Camouflage, so there would be no reason to overpaint the Maryland. You will find reference to this policy in discussions of the Roc and Skua. It is an interesting question as to when this policy was changed to have all operational aircraft in TSS - I don't know the answer offhand.

[Nick Millman]

This Maryland was AR720, one of the aircraft taken over from the French contracts and a photograph of it in FAA service suggests it was still in the factory scheme. Several of the ex-French contract types had undersurfaces which were distinctly more blueish in appearance than Sky but whether this was just an early attempt to match to "duck egg blue" or something more to do with the French contracts I cannot say at this time, intriguing though it is.

The requirement for "duck egg blue" was circulated to US contacts at the same time as to British units and did not lag but the issue has been much confused by the mid-1940 date for its introduction to Fighter Command being assumed to be its first use by the RAF. It was introduced on certain bomber and recce types much earlier as "Camotint". For example, in April 1940, in respect of the Blenheim IV, it was clarified that "the pale blue-green which has been called Camotint is now defined as Standard Sky". The later introduction of Sky in Fighter Command during the BoB has tended to mask this earlier introduction of "Camotint", "pale blue-green", "duck egg blue". "duck egg blueish-green" and "Sky" (all the same colour) for other types of aircraft.

As to the Hudson photo it is impossible to be objective about what colour it is. FWIW to me it looks more towards a sky blue but I note that the Hudson behind looks more like standard Sky.

Edited November 23, 2010 by Nick Millman

[Test Graham]

A digression, but the earlier use of Sky by other types rather weakens the argument that it was not available in sufficient quantity for Fighter Command in June 1940. It doesn't contradict it completely, of course.

[Seahawk]

At the start of the war, land-based FAA aircraft were in Temperate Land Camouflage, so there would be no reason to overpaint the Maryland. You will find reference to this policy in discussions of the Roc and Skua. It is an interesting question as to when this policy was changed to have all operational aircraft in TSS - I don't know the answer offhand.

I'm with Graham, not only because of painting instructions at the start of the war but also because camouflage demarcations can still be made out in a slightly murky (and undated) picture of AR720 (the Bismarck aircraft) in Sturtivant & Burrow's "FAA Aircraft 1939-1945": Temperate Sea colours tend to blend into one colour in B+W photos.

To answer Graham's question, use of Temperate Land Scheme for operational aircraft was implicitly discontinued by DTD 144 issued March 1941 which stipulated Temperate Sea Scheme for operational aircraft (and aircraft used for both operational and non-operational duties) . However aircraft used for non-operational duties were to be finished in accordance with the RAF scheme for non-operational types. (Source: FAA Camo and Markings by Stuart Lloyd.) The FAA Marylands were intended as high-speed target tugs and thus presumably non-operational types.

The undersides colour for FAA Marylands is tricky: I've always instinctively thought sky but more recently have realised I don't have any good reason to rule out the light blue colour apparent on many early arrivals from the US. Maybe that's why my Maryland is still in the box.

[Nick Millman]

As an aside, and apologies for the slight digression, but I think the "can of worms" is often created by people who have never seen the original aircraft in life "re-interpreting" colours by what they see or think they see in colour photographs. In many cases these images are not even original prints but scanned, formatted, compressed, copied, transmitted, published and re-published digital images. Sometimes when comparing these interpretations to the official requirements or paint colour standards the response is that those were not followed for whatever reason.

That is all well and good but tends to ignore the body of work compiled by an earlier generation of observers who did see the real aircraft and were sufficiently interested in the subject of colour to make contemporaneous notes and sketches about them, such as M J F Bowyer, Ian J Huntley, C Rupert Moore and Bob Jones, to name just a few. And these chroniclers did record anomalies, M J F Bowyer for example noting the existence of both more-blueish and more-greenish variations of Sky and attempting to differentiate them by designation, or C Rupert Moore noting and matching the non-standard colours of the Lancs in the Tallboy attacks. Variations aside, none of these observers recorded "non-standard" colours on US export types arriving in Britain, except those seized from foreign contracts like the ex-Norwegian Hawks. Bob Jones stated unequivocally, for example, that Tomahawks arrived in Britain "in the US equivalents of Dark Green, Dark Earth and Sky".

Variations in hue get conflated with different hues and paint colour standards are queried on the evidence of a perceived variation in the appearance of the applied paints, in some cases on aircraft several months in service or from aforesaid multi-generational colour images.

The "cans of worms" seem to have grown in proportion to the internet and the proliferation of colour imagery, both of real aircraft and of models demonstrating personal interpretations. Recently there has been a tendency that seems to feel strongly that the pleasures and enjoyment of speculation should not be spoilt by the introduction of inconvenient facts. This is sometimes combined with an assumption that anything documenting colours in the past is automatically "out of date" or "obsolete" and has been overtaken by the "latest thinking" or (dread of dreads) "consensus". It is an interesting phenomenon.

The problem with Sky seems to be that the variations in its appearance when applied as "duck egg blue", either in the US or UK, are being catalogued as completely different colours.

[Steven Eisenman]

My references seem to indicate that AR720 would have been part if the French (F-3) order that was completed and already in transit when taken over by the British. So the aircraft most likely was painted in the UK.

The serial numbers for these aircraft were allotted in the UK, after their arrival.

There are very good pictures of AR725 (part of the same order) taken on an RAF field.

This aircraft has the cuffed props, as used on the French aircraft

Note the odd horizontal wavy pattern.

[Nick Millman]

Just to clarify that. They had not all left the USA at the time. There are photographs showing five aircraft from this contract "completed in July 1940 with British equipment" awaiting delivery in the USA and they are already painted with RAF markings and black undersurfaces. The 50 "ex-French" aircraft AR702 to AR751 were delivered directly to the British via Canada between July 1940 and January 1941 with AR720 going to the Admiralty on 28 Oct 1940.

The AR aircraft were originally allocated serials AH205 to AH279 by the BAC in Washington. Those serials were never applied and instead the AR serials were allocated by Air Ministry in London on arrival. The French numbers in the course of delivery were 216-345 and the British took over nos 284 to 345 in the USA. At the time some of these aircraft were already in crates at the French Commission's Weehauken depot awaiting shipment and were purchased directly by the British whilst the rest of the aircraft were still to be completed. However they were supposedly all fitted with British equipment and painted before delivery. The "missing" seven aircraft have never been accounted for.

The aircraft which were on board Jean-Louis Dreyfus (actually in transit to France and diverted to UK) included 26 Marylands from the following batches 235, 237-249, 251-258, 261, 262, 267, 270, 271 and 279-282 but these were all stored crated at Burtonwood after arrival in July 1940 and were eventually allocated serials in the BJ421-BJ428 and BS760-BS777 range. In addition there were 6 "escapers" allocated additional RAF serials.

Correction: AR703 photographed at A&AEE in November 1940 has a "wavy" demarcation between upper and lower surfaces suggesting perhaps that the original black undersurfaces were re-painted. It apparently retained French instruments and "the original cupola" so was clearly not "completed with British equipment".

Edited November 22, 2010 by Nick Millman

[Steven Eisenman]

It seems that there were a few from this order taken over in Weehauken, New Jersey. Now if I remember correctly, there was a painting facility in the area for other aircraft going to the UK. It is possible that the photograph of those black bottom, cuffed prop aircraft were at the New Jersey facility. They appear to have the "normal" style of camouflage as opposed to the odd style of AR725. They also have the full fin size flash on the fin, as opposed to the smaller three even segments on AR703 and AR725. These anomalies limited to the few in New Jersey?

I know it is a poor quality picture and all the picture warnings taken into consideration, and given the picture appears to be on Ortho film, but AR703 looks very monochromatic. And the wavy line seems to be, perhaps, a one off?

Then again we can get on another discussion about the presence or absence of the pointed radio mast.

[Nick Millman]

It's possible then that the crated aircraft at Weehauken might have been delivered still in crates and painted in the UK whilst the uncompleted part of the order (or some of them) were painted TLS with black undersurfaces in USA. Subsequently some of these were then re-painted with Sky undersurfaces replacing the black in the UK. AR703 could have been photographed without the upper surface camouflage having been completed but there are a lot of A&AEE photos that show types with apparently monochromatic upper surfaces, including British aircraft, all apparently photographed on the sort of 10/10ths and several miles deep cloud covered, dreary, dreaky days we are experiencing now.

If this is the case then the photo of AR720 possibly shows an aircraft in TLS with the Sky undersurfaces applied in the UK.

[Steven Eisenman]

Nick;

Any explanation or guess as to the camouflage style on AR725? I believe on cane see that in front of the roundel the darker color is vertical, but as it goes back it appears as a wavy area above and below the mid horizontal of the airframe.

[expositor]

hello gentlemen,

great discussion, and thanks for all the contributions. i only asked these questions in light of the the approx dates of the application of sky by grumman for example as the first g-36's were completed in june, 1940 with the blue undersides and the issuance of du pont's line 71 color cards in early 1942(?), and the fact that the maryland in question was undertaking ocean patrols in 1941 as opposed to tug or hack work over britain. even the early sunderlands were painted in TLS over black in 1939, but by 1941 at least the earth brown had been overpainted or replaced by sea grey. my understanding is that not until around april, 1941 that coastal command and FAA had finally settled on the colors to be used on aircraft flying over the ocean, lloyd's interesting work not withstanding....

nick, you're the expert, but that extremely clear cover photo of bell's still looks plain old gray to me, without a hint of tint of any other color; granted that the rear cover photos, especially the pby and the g-36, were poorly scanned. that said, i've looked at several sites with color cards showing sky to be quite pale as far as tint goes, and recall a paint color for early spitfires i bought at polk's in nyc when i was a teenager that was a blue-green off-white, that at a distance could be considered a very pale grey....so, sky bottom it is.

any chance for sea grey rather than earth on the upper surfaces...?

thanks again,

jim

[Seahawk]

.. the fact that the maryland in question was undertaking ocean patrols in 1941 as opposed to tug or hack work over britain.

The Maryland was not undertaking ocean patrols. Faced with an overriding operational necessity, this one FAA Maryland was used once for a vital reconnaissance mission. I doubt whether time permitted any recamouflaging for that one mission nor would its subsequent return to "tug and hack work" justify it.

Following from "It's Really Quite Safe", the autobiography of Cdr Hank Rotherham, the station's Commanding Officer and observer on the Bismarck mission, an epic navigational feat in its own right, given the weather: "The resident squadron at Hatston was the Fleet Requirements Unit which provided aircraft for fleet exercises, such as target towing for the heavy high-angle guns and dive-bombing attacks for the short-range weapons. There were also two Martin Maryland aircraft which had been taken over from the French (and still had French instrumentation) which were used for high-angle gun exercises."

[Nick Millman]

Steven; the "dark" colour on AR725 appears to sweep down from mid-cupola, through the roundel, then sweep back up in front of the serial. The second "dark" segment starts at the top of the fuselage to the rear of the roundel and sweeps back to drop down through the 2 & 5 of the serial, creating a snaking, horizontal segment of the "light" colour along the rear fuselage. The top "dark segment" also runs through the fin and rudder creating a half-and-half effect with the lighter colour above. Part of the "dark" colour appears darker to the rear of the roundel. A very similar pattern may be seen on AR733, pranged in North Africa suggesting that it was a "pattern" rather than a one-off.

Jim; the problem is that the Bell booklet is laser (?) printed and my print of the cover may not be exactly the same as yours! On mine the cowling undersurface colour approaches the appearance of Sky Blue, the Dark Earth looks slightly olive and the Dark Green looks like a blueish sea green even though the roundel colours and the dreaded face-flesh "control tone" looks ok! If you were local you could look through my collection of original negative prints to see how the Sky/duck egg blue hues apparent in those often appear more "grey" when scanned and printed out. I have one of a Tomahawk in the desert scheme where the Azure Blue is worn away in places to reveal a decidedly blueish-green hue underneath but it doesn't come out well in scanned copies. You can see a few on my blog but even those do not do justice to the originals. The P-51 being cleaned by the lady is very clearly Sky/duck egg blue rather than a "grey" in the original print but looks more ambiguous in the scanned copy (P-51 pic). For whatever reason the subtle blue-green chroma seems to be degraded in the scanning process. When you add-in the tendency of the paint to "chalk" in service the perception of light greys is quite understandable. That is where Occam's Razor comes in and other factors can be considered on balance, like the RAF requirement, the "duck egg blue" US factory annotations and the contemporaneous eyewitness records of aircraft arriving in UK.

I think TSS is at least a possibility - I have looked again at A.926 of December 1940 and see that I misquoted it earlier. It reads:-

"7. Colour schemes of flying boats, float planes, amphibians and Fleet Air Arm aircraft - (i) Upper surfaces - Upper surfaces of all flying boats, float planes amphibians and Fleet Air Arm aircraft are to be camouflaged in the temperate sea scheme (except pilotless target aircraft in TLS); and

6. Colour schemes of landplanes, except Fleet Air Arm aircraft - (i) Upper surfaces - the upper surfaces of all landplanes, except Fleet Air Arm and night fighter aircraft, but including target (pilotless) aircraft, are to be camouflaged in the temperate land scheme . . . "

(my emphasis)

The question then is whether this aircraft had been re-camouflaged when the new requirements were issued after its earlier transfer to the Admiralty in October 1940? There seems to have been plenty of time to do so prior to the May, 1941 mission - more than a year. Do you have the photograph of it? If not I can post it here.

Edited November 22, 2010 by Nick Millman

[tonyot]

Hello,

I did a modelling article about this very Maryland in Model Aircraft Monthly some time ago using a photo of the actual aircraft which appeared in an old issue of Flypast as my main reference. My model (the awful old Fonderie kit) was painted in Dark Earth and Dark Green with Sky undersides which had a wavy demarcation and it had a white code `W'. This photo, which was taken after the Bismark sortie seemed to show a third darker camouflage colour on the upper surfaces randomly applied in between the Dark Earth and Dark Green so this `may' have been Extra Dark Sea Grey added for the Bismark sortie...but this is a big `might', considering the short notice of the sortie! I`ll try and dig this photo out.

On my model I left the undersides free of roundels but in a photo taken during a visit by the King to congratulate 771 NAS following their Bismark sortie a Maryland in the background (with straight demarcation between upper and lower surfaces) had A Type roundels under the wing tips.

In case you are interested here is a photo of my model;

All the best

Tony O

Edited November 22, 2010 by tonyot

[Nick Millman]

It's a really beautiful model but the photo I'm thinking of which is captioned as being AR720 (with a FAA pilot embarking) shows a straight demarcation along the lower nose and roundels under the wings! It's a IWM pic with that identification but as the serial can't be seen in the photo I guess there must be a question as to whether it really is AR720.

I still think that as this aircraft was transferred to the Admiralty in October 1940 and TSS was required for all FAA aircraft by December 1940 it was possibly repainted from TLS to TSS with Sky undersurfaces added. Martin factory shots show the same straight demarcation on later Marylands so the wavy demarcation on AR720 (if it was AR720) may indicate the RAF/FAA re-paint.

A formation shot in the ME shows some with black, some with Sky and some with part-black and part-Sky undersurfaces. An in flight shot of AR711 has light undersurfaces with a straight demarcation but much higher and to a different style altogether.

[Steven Eisenman]

A note to anyone doing the Maryland I using the Special Hobby kit. the SH kit only has the props for the Maryland II. For a Mk. I, you can get metal cuffed props from Bill Koster.

Tony, nice work on what I understand to be a "female dog" of a kit.

[Seahawk]

Hello,

I did a modelling article about this very Maryland in Model Aircraft Monthly some time ago using a photo of the actual aircraft which appeared in an old issue of Flypast as my main reference. My model (the awful old Fonderie kit) was painted in Dark Earth and Dark Green with Sky undersides which had a wavy demarcation and it had a white code `W'. This photo, which was taken after the Bismark sortie seemed to show a third darker camouflage colour on the upper surfaces randomly applied in between the Dark Earth and Dark Green so this `may' have been Extra Dark Sea Grey added for the Bismark sortie...but this is a big `might', considering the short notice of the sortie! I`ll try and dig this photo out.

On my model I left the undersides free of roundels but in a photo taken during a visit by the King to congratulate 771 NAS following their Bismark sortie a Maryland in the background (with straight demarcation between upper and lower surfaces) had A Type roundels under the wing tips.

In case you are interested here is a photo of my model;

Tony O

The pics of Tony's model prompted me that in the pic of AR720 in FAA Aircraft to which I referred earlier the aircraft has been recoded "T", something that had happened "by 8/42". This suggest that it was taken after, maybe some time after, the Bismarck sortie. Again, I contend that the fact that camouflage demarcations are visible in a small murky shot argues against use of TSS on this aircraft, however possible it might have been (and especially by 8/42).

Agree Tony's point re underwing roundel and Nick M's point about straight camouflage demarcations. And, to be as picky as only an armchair modeller knows how, the nacelle ones were slightly lower than depicted on Tony's model.

The pic Nick refers to appears on p.98 of Sturtivant's British Naval Aviation - The Fleet Air Arm 1917-1980 among many other places.) Given that, according to FAA Aircraft only 2 Marylands, AR717 and AR720, seem to have seen much service with the FAA (the 3 others allocated in 1940 were returned fairly quickly to the RAF and 2 more allocated in 1943 don't seem to have done much), the chances of its being AR720 seem to be 50:50. Sturtivant does not claim it is AR720.

For completeness, AR717 was initially X (12/40) but later U (photo Wings Over Scapa, p.35), AR720 was initially W (by 1/41) but later (by 8/42) T. The picture of AR717 as X shows it with C Type roundels and tail flash, a fussily squiggly upper/lower demarcation along the rear fuselage and a higher, slightly wavy demarcation on the nacelles (about where Tony's model shows it). Apart from a patch on the fin, no upper surface camouflage demarcations are visible so I wouldn't argue against TSS there.

Like Nick says, lovely model, Tony!

Edited November 22, 2010 by Seahawk

[Nick Millman]

Re the "monochromatic" appearance of AR703 I've just been reading some notes on early Beaufighter 1F colour schemes where in the Autumn of 1940 they were factory finished for a time with Sky undersurfaces but upper surfaces in plain grey primer so that when delivered to Air Servicing Units (ASU's) they could be finished in TLS or TSS dependent upon whether they were destined for Coastal Command. The idea was to save production time but it was found in practice that this method actually delayed delivery and it was abandoned when the IC and VIC were introduced onto the production line.

It's tempting to add 2 and 2 to make 5 here regarding the re-painting of Marylands (and perhaps other types) prior to delivery to units.

The 1F's sent to the ME were operated in TLS until the desert scheme was introduced and even then some had the upper surfaces re-painted but the under surfaces left Sky. NV237 'A' of 603 Sqn engaged in anti-shipping sorties over the Aegean was operated in the TLS with "Fighter Command" type Sky fuselage band and Sky code letter. Beaus are not often modelled in TLS so these and the "hybrids" might make interesting alternative schemes for models.

[davidelvy]

A digression, but the earlier use of Sky by other types rather weakens the argument that it was not available in sufficient quantity for Fighter Command in June 1940. It doesn't contradict it completely, of course.

I'm not sure it does weaken the argument. If Sky/Camotint was used for a small number of specialist aircraft it would probably not have been ordered in large quantities. It is not inconceivable that when it was decided all day fighter aircraft should be painted in that colour any available stocks would have been depleted quite quickly.

[Test Graham]

We are not considering a small number of aircraft, as would have been the case if only the PRU was considered. The Blenheim fleet was sizable in itself, and if the use on day bombers was extended to Ansons and Hudsons, as is reasonable as these types were seen in Sky, then the overall numbers are at least comparable.

[expositor]

hello all,

thanks nick for the clarification and the nice pic of the two 'birds.' the only pics of the maryland i have access to is the one in thetford's, and the one mentioned in sturtivant's book. i was pretty well set on sky for lend-lease aircraft until reading several sites over the past three years or so which mentioned that the old airfix instructions calling for underside grey or blue might not be wrong. i just wonder if the change to the DFS has also contributed to the general confusion. as you've intimated before, many who should know better make unequivocal statements of unproven or assumed fact that confuse the ignorant...like me.

can i further impose on your time by asking what your take is on the use of pale blue by grumman at the same time, summer 1940, as martin and lockheed were using sky, if we assume (now i've done it....) that the standard should have been available to all the mfg's sometime that previous spring?

seahawk, though i've read more than a bit about the bismarck chase, all just mentioned that it was found by an FAA maryland, which i just assumed meant that the type was being used for patrols; i never knew it was an ad-hoc usage of one of the FRU planes. as i look at that photo though, i would interpret the scheme as containing sea grey as opposed to dark earth, but each to his own eyes; and my four might not be the best....

tony, i came across your terrific model online a while back, which actually caused me to begin this thread. after all the conflicting stuff i'd read, i just hoped for a clarification (thanks again nick) before i attempted a 1/72 emulation of your beautiful work; which i'll probably never finish, let alone start....

cheerio,

jim

[Nick Millman]

Most of it comes down to the semantics of colour descriptions which is where an awful lot of arguments begin. Grumman were matching to "duck egg blue" as per the factory drawings and as required by the British with a paint colour that some might describe as pale blue and some did. It was not the same as MAP Sky. You can take a look at the actual Grumman paint here and make your own mind up what to call it! If you think about all this in terms of "duck egg blue" rather than Sky it will, hopefully, make more sense.

Grumman Martlet

You can see the repair patch on the wing painted in MAP Sky and I have added rendered chips of Du Pont 71-021 Sky Type S Grey and MAP Sky Blue for comparison. Best to think of these US "duck egg blue" equivalents as a "family" of pale blue greens - related but not identical. Also the colours are relative to each other. The Grumman colour looks distinctly pale blue in comparison with MAP Sky alone but when compared to MAP Sky Blue it begins to looks more green. Compared to MAP Sky the Du Pont 71-021 paint is paler and more blueish, against Grumman's "duck egg blue" it could easily be taken for Sky.

Perception is everything. Some people describe these colours as more towards light blue whilst others describe them as more towards light green. If you Google "duck egg blue" as suggested you will see that many interpret it towards a pale blue. This is where measured colour values come in because the similarities and differences, as well as the actual hues, may then be quantified.

[Seahawk]

Most of it comes down to the semantics of colour descriptions which is where an awful lot of arguments begin. Grumman were matching to "duck egg blue" as per the factory drawings and as required by the British with a paint colour that some might describe as pale blue and some did. It was not the same as MAP Sky. You can take a look at the actual Grumman paint here and make your own mind up what to call it! If you think about all this in terms of "duck egg blue" rather than Sky it will, hopefully, make more sense.

Grumman Martlet

You can see the repair patch on the wing painted in MAP Sky and I have added rendered chips of Du Pont 71-021 Sky Type S Grey and MAP Sky Blue for comparison. Best to think of these US "duck egg blue" equivalents as a "family" of pale blue greens - related but not identical. Also the colours are relative to each other. The Grumman colour looks distinctly pale blue in comparison with MAP Sky alone but when compared to MAP Sky Blue it begins to looks more green. Compared to MAP Sky the Du Pont 71-021 paint is paler and more blueish, against Grumman's "duck egg blue" it could easily be taken for Sky.

Perception is everything. Some people describe these colours as more towards light blue whilst others describe them as more towards light green. If you Google "duck egg blue" as suggested you will see that many interpret it towards a pale blue. This is where measured colour values come in because the similarities and differences, as well as the actual hues, may then be quantified.

So you were allowed to take a picture!

When I visited, the stripping of the Sea Blue Gloss was more advanced. I lack your eye for colour and your understanding of how colour works but my immediate subjective reaction on seeing the underside of the Martlet's starboard wing was how close the underside colour was to my recollection of the shade Humbrol used to market in the 1960s as "Duck Egg Blue". But, had I had a brushed-out sample of that paint to hand, that impression might have been proved wrong.