Topside colours in US Export scheme

[cdk]

Hello to all,

over the last few years we can read and learn a lot about the underside colours for US export or lend lease aircraft. But what is with the topside colours?

15 years back, in January 1995, Dana Bell had an artikle in Fine Scale Modeller about the colours of the P40. For me, here for the first time, I read about DuPont colours for US aircraft which are built for Britain. Also in the last 15 years or so a lot of books with colourpictures came to light.

Dana Bell give the folloing matches for the topside coloues : DuPont 71-065 Dark Earth - Humbrol 29, DuPont 71-009 Dark Earth - Humbrol 118 (FS30219), DuPont 71-013 Dark Green - Humbrol 149 (FS34092).

Terrill Clements in his book American Volunteer Group Colours and Markings say that 71-013 is close to USAAF colour No.30 Dark Green. This Green is very much darker as Humbrol 149/FS34092.

In the moment I do a little bit reseach for a modelling project. One is a Boeing built Boston III AL361 in service with the RAAF as A28-15 and the second is a Douglas built Boston III AL891 also in the RAAF as A28-9.

With Gary Byk's book - Frend Bilong Australia Tru - on the hand, I was thinking all I want to know, I have. But I remember that Boeing used paint from Fullers. Gary Byk in his drawings give for the factory paint for Douglas and Boeing the DuPont paint.

Now I was looking over all my nice books for colour images of the Boston, not very scientific, I know. The Dark Earth is not so a great problem. All pic' s show a colour that can be like DuPont 71-009 or FS 30219, a little bit redder or paler like FS33303 or FS30277. The Dark Green is more a problem.

No pic show a green that I can say this is like FS34092. Many are much darker (Dark Green No.30?) or more like Olive Drab. Now are the most pic's are probably made with Kodachrome film. This film dominate a bit the red colour. So a green can turn to red ? On the other side pic's that show US aircraft in OD - Medium Green show MG as a green colour. In RAAF Camouflage and Markings Vol2 by J. Pentland is a picture, that show the remains from AL907, A28-8. This was a Douglas built Boston III. Vol 2 was first publisht 1989 and the Boston was rediscoverd in the 1970s. That is the timeframe when the picture was taken. The green in the picture looks very close to FS34128, this may be the colour for FS34092/DuPont 71-013 after 30 Years in the jungle. The brown in the pic is like FS36415, a bleeched DuPont 71-009.

We can also do this play with Lockheed Hudson. The result is the same.

So I will say it is time to have a closer look to the uppersurface.

Claus

N.B. Was DuPont a paint supplier for Douglas ? Every Info for my modelling project are greatly wellcome.

[Terry McGrady]

In The Crowood book on the DB7/A20 series page 38 has a facsimile of the painting instructions for the RAF A//C .

They were painted with Fuller paints not Dupont . Brown- Fuller TL-8713 enamel , Green Fuller TL-8714 enamel , Blue( Duck Egg)Fuller TL-8715 enamel.

the Roundels were painted in Fuller lacquers

Cheers

Terry McGrady

Edited January 8, 2011 by Terry McGrady

[cdk]

In The Crowood book on the DB7/A20 series page 38 has a facsimile of the painting instructions for the RAF A//C .

They were painted with Fuller paints not Dupont . Brown- Fuller TL-8713 enamel , Green Fuller TL-8714 enamel , Blue( Duck Egg)Fuller TL-8715 enamel.

the Roundels were painted in Fuller lacquers

Cheers

Terry McGrady

Thank you for the answer,Terry

can you see for what Boston III is the drawing? Boston III - DB7B, Boston III - DB7-3 or Boston IIIA - A20-C. Is it a drawing from Boeing, wich used Fullers for B-17 too.

My two Modell Bostons are DB7-3. AL668 - AL907 are Douglas built, AL263 - AL502 are by Boeing.

Claus

[Terry McGrady]

Thank you for the answer,Terry

can you see for what Boston III is the drawing? Boston III - DB7B, Boston III - DB7-3 or Boston IIIA - A20-C. Is it a drawing from Boeing, wich used Fullers for B-17 too.

My two Modell Bostons are DB7-3. AL668 - AL907 are Douglas built, AL263 - AL502 are by Boeing.

Claus

Hi Claus ,

In the drawing , the serial is WB252, MASN 3300 , ordered as a DB- 7B , Detail Spec 339, Contract A-87, built

By Douglas , one of 150 built between April 1941 and June 1941.

Drawing is Douglas

HTH

Terry

Edited January 9, 2011 by Terry McGrady

[John]

Hi Claus ,

In the drawing , the serial is WB252, MASN 3300 , ordered as a DB- 7B , Detail Spec 339, Contract A-87, built

By Douglas , one of 150 built between April 1941 and June 1941.

Drawing is Douglas

HTH

Terry

WB252's a Firefly! W8252 is a bit more likely.

John

[Nick Millman]

Douglas used Fuller enamels but I'm not sure Boeing did. The under surface colours appear to be different with the Fuller enamel having a more strongly blueish appearance (duck egg blue!) and the Boeing paints being closer in appearance to RAF Sky.

I do have reliable measured colour values for the Du Pont upper surface browns and green from the original swatches but have not prepared or published rendered chips and comparisons yet. When I started comparing the colour values that had been given for these hues in the past (FS, Pantone, Methuen, etc.) I found disparities between them that were impossible to reconcile - probably the results of attempts to match subjectively and visually under different forms of illumination and perhaps from colour photos. The paints are very much deeper and more strongly saturated than MAP colours and the dark green has a different character entirely to MAP Dark Green, being more of a forest green in appearance than an olive green. One thing I can confirm and that is that the dark green is not like 34092 at all - the difference calculation to that is over 15 where <2.0 = a close match but I guess "scale colour" may come into this. The full scale paint does look very dark indeed but colour photographs reveal how it faded under uv exposure. I have nothing on the Fuller paints yet.

I am tempted to comment on your "a green can turn to red?" query at length but it would probably get too "anal" for the AGB to bear. Suffice it to say it depends entirely on the pigments used to make the green. Only recently I was reading in a letter how Japanese veterans had mentioned a particular dark green paint turning "reddish" (as they described it), meaning it became more olive brown when exposed to the Southern sun for several months.

Gary Byk's book is excellent but unfortunately relied on the then-current Sky Grey under surface theory. The best colour photographs (in original prints) reveal this not to be the case, and the Douglas factory drawings militate against it too. Many 2nd generation and up reproduced and digitalised colour images can't cope with and "wash out" the subtle yellow-green and/or blue in the under surface colour, giving the impression of a light grey.

Regards

Nick

Edited January 9, 2011 by Nick Millman

[Terry McGrady]

WB252's a Firefly! W8252 is a bit more likely.

John

Hi John ,

You are right I knew I should have cleaned my specs

Cheers

Terry

[cdk]

Hello,

thank's for the reply's,

Dana Bell in his primer "US Export Colors of WWII" give for B17E Fuller paints. So it was my guess that Boeing used it for the Boston to. The well known picture showing B17 E 41-9141, painted in Temperate Land Scheme, in formation with 41-9131 in US Olive Drab / Neutral Grey give the impression that Fullers Dark Green is the same as OD. Olive Drab and British Dark Green can in colour pic's look very similar, so Fullers Dark Green was eventually a better match as the DuPont ones ?

Today I was able to have a look in an old Camouflage and Markings booklet. It was No.20 for the Havoc in USAAF service. In the section " Markings for Impressed Aircraft " we can read: "The colours required for the British were manufactured in the USA by the Dupont company, and whereas their "Dark Earth" and "Dark Green" were very true to the British shades, their "Sky" tended to be more a creamy white than the duck-egg blue found on British aircraft." Unfortunally they is no distingish between Douglas and Boeing in that booklet.

Nick, is it possible to give me, for a better impression for the colours, a example for the Green and the underside ? I have FS, RAL, JPMA, Humbrol or Revell as a guide.

Claus

[Nick Millman]

Hi Claus

The Douglas and Boeing Bostons have rather different under surface colours so I doubt it was the same paint. The Boeing paint appears closer to Sky than the Du Pont colour. The Du Pont Sky was definitely not a "creamy white" but it may give that impression in some reproduced colour photographs which is where I think these ideas came from. It is reliably very close to FS 25622.

There are no useful comparisons in FS595B or RAL for the Dark Green. If you drop me a pm I'll send you some colour photos scanned from the original prints but they are not for reproduction anywhere - strictly for your personal reference use only! Or the next thing people will be posting copies with the colours "corrected" (as with the Corsairs) and round and round we will go again.

Regards

Nick

[Troy Smith]

On 09/01/2011 at 20:09, Nick Millman said:

There are no useful comparisons in FS595B or RAL for the Dark Green.

 

 

On 08/01/2011 at 22:19, cdk said:

Dana Bell give the folloing matches for the topside coloues : DuPont 71-065 Dark Earth - Humbrol 29, DuPont 71-009 Dark Earth - Humbrol 118 (FS30219), DuPont 71-013 Dark Green - Humbrol 149 (FS34092).

Terrill Clements in his book American Volunteer Group Colours and Markings say that 71-013 is close to USAAF colour No.30 Dark Green. This Green is very much darker as Humbrol 149/FS34092.

 

Now I was looking over all my nice books for colour images of the Boston, not very scientific, I know. The Dark Earth is not so a great problem. All pic' s show a colour that can be like DuPont 71-009 or FS 30219, a little bit redder or paler like FS33303 or FS30277. The Dark Green is more a problem.

No pic show a green that I can say this is like FS34092. Many are much darker (Dark Green No.30?) or more like Olive Drab.

 

After some searching and thread reading on here,  and now having The Official Monogram US Army Air Service & Air Corps Aircraft Color Guide, Vol 1, 1908-1941 , Robert D. Archer, which has extensive color chips,   if any more on No.30 Dark Green being like DuPont 71-013 Dark Green?

Any of the other chips as a possible 'Dark Earth' ? 

 

 @Dana Bell  @Casey  @John @Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies @LDSModeller   maybe able to add more on this?  

 

Any more thought on the DuPont 'Dark Earths' 

Doing some research for VVS P-40's supplied in the UK scheme, 

see here for examples of P-40 B, E and K in this scheme

http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/lendlease/p-40/p-40.html

note the profiles do have reference photos in the individual pages

 

Thanks in advance

 

[Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies]

1 hour ago, Troy Smith said:

 @Dana Bell  @Casey  @John @Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies @LDSModeller   maybe able to add more on this?  

 

 

Between Dana Bell's US Air Force Colours* 1926-1942 (*note spelling!?!?!?) and Nick Millman's PDF on US equivalent paints I arrived at this which I used for the 71-013 and 71-035 paints I released a year or two ago. I'd already made 71-021 available a while back based entirely on Nick Millman's input.

 

 

 

[Casey]

I do not have real DuPont samples of those colors.

 

There is one question that is stuck in my mind - what is the color match tolerance hobbyist is interested in.

 

If it is 'accuracy' then the difference goal should be 0 I use objective measurements when I do my color hobby work. But not many have the devices to measure it and I found that no paint vendor would publish their color source *and* achieved difference anywhere, so quite often it is just a leap of faith.

 

On the other hand, the models we are making were real things, and they varied in reality. Got dirty, exposed to elements, in-field patched... 

 

And very common weathering techniques easily pushes the color outside of 'close match' range, so I feel the starting color is just a form of sand mandala exercise.

 

But I like it that way. It is exactly the same feeling as making cockpit details that will not be visible to anyone but *I* know it will be there.

[Jackson Duvalier]

I'm honestly seriously impressed with the levels of autism scale modelling can evoke.

 

The way it works for me: I'll do hours of research regarding what the Berry Brothers plant manager had for lunch on 6 January 1941 (how hung over was he really?) and whether the paint was stirred deosil or widdershins, and did the umber pigment come from the Chilean source or Alberta (as Albertan Umber is widely known to impart a more reddish cast).  Then I'll say "F all this" and wind up spraying on some Tamiya Flat Earth and Deep Green and be happy enough with it.

 

After the pre-shading, and the post-shading, and toning down for scale effect, and compensating for the display lighting, and correcting for tonal crush, and applying the washes, and the pigments, and the oil filters, not to mention the several layer of clear coats, I'll wind up with something no person still alive can honestly gainsay.  Not that some bloke at the next IPMS meet won't try to, but I've yet to see anyone holding colour swatches next to my models.

 

I guess my point is that I try to accept imperfection as that's all we get to work with on this plane of existence, but I have a certain admiration those who are seriously trying to determine just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, and I do take their pronunciamentos under advisement.

[Troy Smith]

5 hours ago, Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies said:

I'd already made 71-021 available a while back based entirely on Nick Millman's input.

Is this still nearest matched by FS 35622  as suggested here? 

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234907859-best-match-for-du-pont-71-021/

 

OR was there a revised color suggested?   I've made up some Vallejo FS 35622 for a IAF Skyhawk,  so would make life easier if it was 

 

Thanks for the FS 595 for 71-009, 71-013 and 71-035, very helpful.  

 

2 hours ago, Casey said:

There is one question that is stuck in my mind - what is the color match tolerance hobbyist is interested in.

 

 

2 hours ago, Casey said:

And very common weathering techniques easily pushes the color outside of 'close match' range, so I feel the starting color is just a form of sand mandala exercise.

 

Interesting question.  personally I'd like to try starting in as near the 'right' place as I can, and take it from there.  I don't have a spectrometer, but do still have good colour vision,   As I have said before, if I liked  using enamel  paint, I'd just go Colourcoats and be done with it.

At the mo I find if I brush acrylics, I actually finish some models,   and I enjoy the colour research, and I've got better at mixing colours.   I'm not very happy that in far too many cases the supposed acrylic paint 'matches' vary from just about OK to  

'do you actually have any of the references'  on this.....  

 

I suppose a lot of this goes back to being 9 and knowing that Humbrol 30 was a weird blue green, while Airfix M3 was olive green (and at that age thought Airfix to be the font of all knowledge)  but they were NOT THE SAME COLOUR despite what the shop assured me.  

I was very interestedin colour, and markings as well, from a young age, flags, birds, then planes ....

I have remains of kits from then painted in both,   so this not some false memory.   I was pretty cross at the time...

the green under the chipped off roundel on the Hurricane wing is H30, the repaint is Airfix M3 (as is the other lighter green in the photo)

 

50620938 by losethekibble, on Flickr

 

Again, I will post this from this

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235078859-accuracy-of-ammo-by-mig-jiménez-raf-wwii-colours/page/3/#elControls_4045174_menu

 

as it is the most usefl and significant post I have read about the real life colours,  bea in mind the poster, @Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies  has researched the original pigments and manufacturing processes, 

 

"I'm going to point out some facts about real-life paint manufacture and either the reader will understand and "get it" or will not understand and are in no position to contradict me.

 

1) Usually camouflage colours are fairly low saturation colours because these blend in better with nature. They're seldom bright and bold. Low saturation colours are normally manufactured by adding coloured pigments to a base made from inexpensive white or white and black pigments.

 

2) Colour pigments are expensive. The expense varies depending on the specific pigment, but they're expensive.

 

3) The only way to over-saturate a colour so much is to substantially over-dose your base with the expensive colour pigments. I'm not talking about a few percent more or less - that causes minor differences which you only confirm the presence of with one swatch adjacent to another - I'm talking more in the order of a double dose to get something you obviously look at and think "woah".

 

4) In the case of colours like dark olive, these are mostly white, black and ochre (which is relatively inexpensive for a colour pigment) sometimes further tinted with a bit of red or green (which are often very expensive).

 

5) There can certainly be variances in a manufactured paint, but these tend to be greatly overstated, i.e. used as a ready made excuse for all sorts of mistakes. Ultimately, the only way a manufactured paint can end up so oversaturated is to have dumped in a vast amount of the expensive pigments, if not adding in new additional pigments in large quantities not expected in the recipe. Frankly, it's difficult to see how any manufactured paint could end up so drastically off target, particularly in the over-saturated sense, by any business that wasn't actively trying to bankrupt itself by roasting through obscene quantities of pigments like chrome green which were already expensive at the start of the war and in particularly short supply during.

 

6) I'd venture that most of the "there was a war on, you know" type apologists for such spectacular errors probably don't have any actual experience of what is and isn't possible when mixing different proportions of 2,3 or 4 pigments when 2 of those are usually black and white just to make your base to tint. You simply cannot end up with a Humbrol 30-esque bluish green using only the ingredients to make olive - i.e. you'd actually have to sabotage it by introducing if not blue then an obviously bluish green. Same goes for that bright green Spitfire above - you can't achieve that with black, white, ochre and a touch of red - you'd need to fire in a lot of bright green pigment in to get that saturated on an overly-light base. It would be more tan-like just using the basic olive green ingredients which only turns obviously olive when tinted enough with black. Put another way, with a fixed number of pigments in various ratios you WILL end up somewhere within a certain envelope, and usually when colours like this bright green are discussed it's because it's well outside that envelope.

 

The point of all the above? In essence it's harder to make a credible explanation for how such a colour might have been arrived at in a real-life paint manufacturing environment than it is to demonstrate that someone would have had to go to a lot of trouble to get it so far wrong. That is harder to rationalise than just getting it closer to correct."

 

This has been a rearl join the dots piece of information for me, which is why I keep quoting it... 

 

So real paint would vary, but not hugely.  Certain pigments and paints could and did fade and weather enough to cause noted problems.

 

Discussion on a public forum allows others to follow this, and take what they want from it....  it maybe all too much for some, and helpful for others....

 

 

[Casey]

6 minutes ago, Troy Smith said:

Usually camouflage colours are fairly low saturation colours because these blend in better with nature. They're seldom bright and bold. Low saturation colours are normally manufactured by adding coloured pigments to a base made from inexpensive white or white and black pigments.

 

I read this post many times and I fully agree with what Jamie wrote there. I'd also add earthy pigments to the list there, like umbers, ochres and siennas.

 

The biggest issue I am facing with historical color matching is the inability to use historical pigments. Lead White which is one of those inexpensive whites is a definitely nope today... So instead of simple Lead White I have to use a mixture that is 'not quite same'. Then there are lead chromates which are a nope for same reason, real cadmium paints, Hinomaru flag color (which is cinnabar - Merucy Sulphide). Or even indian yellow which was cow urine - and for similar reason some may frown at use of Bone Black color, because it is not vegetarian.

 

Luckily, math helps me there

 

[Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies]

9 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

Is this still nearest matched by FS 35622  as suggested here? 

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234907859-best-match-for-du-pont-71-021/

 

OR was there a revised color suggested?   I've made up some Vallejo FS 35622 for a IAF Skyhawk,  so would make life easier if it was

 

FS35622 is still considered the closest FS595 colour, but you'll likely want to desaturate it a little for a representative 71-021. It's certainly in the right ballpark though.

 

[LDSModeller]

16 hours ago, Casey said:

I do not have real DuPont samples of those colors.

 

These are actual DuPont Paint Swatches off an RNZAF P 40E-1,  ex RAF Order, arriving New Zealand

1942.

 

DuPont Dark Green 71-013

DuPont Dark Earth 71 -009

DuPont Sky Type S Grey 71-021 - A very Pale Blue with Greenish Tinge

 

Regards

 

Alan

[Casey]

5 hours ago, LDSModeller said:

 

These are actual DuPont Paint Swatches off an RNZAF P 40E-1,  ex RAF Order, arriving New Zealand

1942.

 

DuPont Dark Green 71-013

DuPont Dark Earth 71 -009

DuPont Sky Type S Grey 71-021 - A very Pale Blue with Greenish Tinge

 

Regards

 

Alan

Do you have spectrophotometer readouts of those? Picture says not much to me

[LDSModeller]

3 hours ago, Casey said:

Do you have spectrophotometer readouts of those?

 

No I don't, never really looked into it to be honest