Dave Fleming Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 BTW, and off topic, that book is well worth a flick through: Swanborough did an excellent job of sorting out unusual shots even of hackneyed subjects. Fairey Gordon in ME camo and Type C markings, anyone? Which is the one I was thinking on rather than the Vildebeest! Sorry! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 'Fraid I don't understand the relevance of the 42 Sqn aircraft to the discussion as that was a UK-based unit. Far East Command defined its own markings requirements, hence the black port undersides on Day Fighters. That said, I fully accept that the poor quality of the available pics of 36 and 100 Sqn Vildebeests make interpretation of the undersides virtually impossible. Thanks for applying a little academic rigour to the discussion: I freely concede I was wandering slightly off-topic. But, from the pics I have looked at so far, I have not been able to establish the underside colour of any camouflaged Vildebeest so I thought it worth mentioning. BTW there's another pic of 2 36 Sq Videbeests on p.157 of SAM Feb 1994 (in Geoff Thomas's treatise on Far Eastern camo and markings). Useful in that they're viewed from slightly above. Fin flashes and Type A1 fuselage roundel, no serials or individual codes visible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenshirt Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 I do have a rather old-fashioned approach. The members of the Services will have obeyed the orders they were given, and that includes working to established procedures. (I'm aware that younger, and particularly it seems American, modellers appear to have difficulty with this concept.) If there was a laid-down scheme, and the paints were available, then procedures will generally have been followed. Or signals would have flowed backwards and forwards about what they were doing, and we would have a better grasp of events from these. Possibly these have not yet been discovered. Graham, I find this behavior of us Americans to be a recent development. It seems to reflect a general shift observed over here that the younger crowd is more "me" focused and expects things to be as they believe they should, not necessarily as they are. Probably true of all generations as my parents complained of that behavior from myself; albeit as a son of a Navy Chief and eventually a 30-year Naval Officer myself, I find it hard to believe I was much of a rebel in my youth I have direct experience with unit Commanders being relieved for not following orders related to painting of their aircraft, over the last 25+ years. Specifically, painting them more than specified to "pretty them up" when we only have authority to paint them sufficient to maintain corrosion control integrity and basic camouflage. Too much paint "hides" corrosion and can result in failure of the metals early; our leaders take it seriously and actually inspect squadron aircraft and records annually to ensure compliance. So I agree that it's reasonable to expect, with a war on (or looming) that if the AM sends an order, there's an expectation it will be complied with. Regards, Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhaselden Posted March 22, 2011 Author Share Posted March 22, 2011 Thanks for applying a little academic rigour to the discussion: I freely concede I was wandering slightly off-topic. But, from the pics I have looked at so far, I have not been able to establish the underside colour of any camouflaged Vildebeest so I thought it worth mentioning. That's fair enough - and sometimes, we have to look wider for other precedents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 On a not dis-similar note, pre-war, 36 Squadron applied codes and 'B' roundels to their aircraft, but not camouflage - so presumably the 'Munich' era camouflage schemes were not applied to the Far East squadrons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhaselden Posted March 22, 2011 Author Share Posted March 22, 2011 On a not dis-similar note, pre-war, 36 Squadron applied codes and 'B' roundels to their aircraft, but not camouflage - so presumably the 'Munich' era camouflage schemes were not applied to the Far East squadrons? Dave, That's very interesting. Are there any published pics of these markings? KR Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Aereo Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Very interesting, this is the first time I see this photo with a clear green, the previous ones had all a light bluish gray instead.Is this a direct scan of the original? Cheers, Occa That's just a photo I found online but the colours are the same as the one visible in what apparently is a good reproduction in an American book I have somewhere on my shelves. I think the original comes from the Ethell collection, by the way. Does anyone have any fresh news on the colour research that was going on at the FAA Museum on the preserved Martlet..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Does anyone have any fresh news on the colour research that was going on at the FAA Museum on the preserved Martlet..? When I was down there they were playing their cards close to their chests, pending issue in due course of another book like they did for the Corsair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 (edited) Dave,That's very interesting. Are there any published pics of these markings? KR Mark Combat Codes, by Andrew Thomas and Vic Flintham, p54 (Original Issue) has a pic of K4599/VU-J (They give VU-G for K4161) They also quote RA-T for K6384 of 100. I'd need to have a dig to find Andrew's earlier articles in Aviation news, which had many more photos of pre-war codes. Edited March 22, 2011 by Dave Fleming Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Aereo Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 When I was down there they were playing their cards close to their chests, pending issue in due course of another book like they did for the Corsair. Thank you Seahawk, it will be interesting to see what comes out of all their scraping and sampling.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prop Duster Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Graham,I find this behavior of us Americans to be a recent development. It seems to reflect a general shift observed over here that the younger crowd is more "me" focused and expects things to be as they believe they should, not necessarily as they are. Probably true of all generations as my parents complained of that behavior from myself; albeit as a son of a Navy Chief and eventually a 30-year Naval Officer myself, I find it hard to believe I was much of a rebel in my youth ... Regards, Tim Thank You Greenshirt; your sentiments are in tandem with mine. Although, I was in the "class of 66" and in the Army, we too would grumble- express doubt of the wisdom of higher ups, etc. We did however do whatever was ordered, because it was an order. I'm sure our British colleagues in days gone by, would recognize that our following of orders, if not agreeing with our style, as being similar to theirs. p.s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevehnz Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 This thread just popped up on Wings over New Zealand with some very clear pics of a 100 sqaudron 'beest, dropping torpedoes in 1941 in Singapore. Best I let the experts comment before I make a clot of myself. Steve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhaselden Posted March 23, 2011 Author Share Posted March 23, 2011 (edited) Thanks for the heads-up on those pics, Steve. They are fantastic!! I'm pretty certain the torpedo drop pics are of 36 Sqn aircraft - the close up of OE-T clearly shows 36 Sqn's crest on the fin. Note on the aircraft that ended up on its nose the shadow pattern application of lighter camouflage colours on the upper surfaces of the lower wings. Edited March 23, 2011 by mhaselden Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Russell Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Briliant find - super pictures. Note on the aircraft that ended up on its nose the shadow pattern application of lighter camouflage colours on the upper surfaces of the lower wings. This really does look like a 'Shadow Compensated' scheme and is as likely to be TropSS as any other! In that picture note also the central colour of the upper wing roundels - if that's red the other colours are very interesting. Time to call in a colour scientist..... I reckon the great virtue of these threads is that you usually end up knowing more (or different) to when you started! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Yes, gorgeous pictures. Thank you very much for the link. The b+w rendition doesn't look over much like any scheme I'm familiar with. I've not seen what faded Sea Green would look like, but I see TropSS as basically being a darker scheme overall. If anything, taking account of the shadow shading coming up to a high demarcation, then (twisting my own arm behind my back) I suggest it looks more like TLS. The lightest colour being Light Earth, then we have some resemblance to the colour contrasts seen on early Middle Eastern aircraft such as Gladiators. If so there doesn't seem to be much contrast between the Dark Green and Light Green, but this may be an effect of the film. Ah well, another colourful suggestion torpedoed below the waterline? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M. Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 This thread just popped up on Wings over New Zealand with some very clear pics of a 100 sqaudron 'beest, dropping torpedoes in 1941 in Singapore. Best I let the experts comment before I make a clot of myself.Steve. Just a wee correction to your post Steve. As has been pointed out, it does note in Dave's posting that 100 Squadron were using the aircraft from No.36 for their training. I and several other Kiwi modellers (and at least one Brit from Hull) will be watching this thread with much interest! Cheers, Pete M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Russell Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 (edited) I suggest it looks more like TLS. The lightest colour being Light Earth, then we have some resemblance to the colour contrasts seen on early Middle Eastern aircraft such as Gladiators. If so there doesn't seem to be much contrast between the Dark Green and Light Green, but this may be an effect of the film. This has been thought before, probably from different evidence. I photographed this at a model show in mid-2009 Edited March 23, 2011 by Ed Russell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 The model appears to be in TLS without shadow shading. As commented in the thread, this was long thought to be the scheme carried, so no surprise to find an earlier model in it. If Airfix had done a Vildebeest in the 60/70s, there'd have been one like it on my shelf. Dark Earth did fade towards Light Earth, if left long enough, but the picture showing both upper and lower wings makes it clear that the lightest colour seen is not simply faded Dark Earth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Russell Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 The model appears to be in TLS without shadow shading.. Yes I agree, and reading the blurb shows this was the modeller's intention. Hmm.. we are defintely progressing with the help of those new pictures. I suppose there are more out there somewhere..... I'm not sure how I'm going to do my models! Can we please have a definite opinion in this thread before my Azur and A-Z models arrive! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Tropical Land Scheme? (Dark Green/Mid stone over Light Green/Light Stone) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Tropical Land Scheme? (Dark Green/Mid stone over Light Green/Light Stone) Not sure I'd heard of that before but I could certainly go for that. As Graham says, the scheme looks too light to be Tropical Sea Scheme. The fact that camo demarcations are so clearly visible seems to rule out Temperate Sea Scheme. The contrast between the upper surface colours is too great for me to really believe in Dark Earth/Dark Green. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Interesting (i.e. nasty) thought there Dave. I've not seen colours mentioned with shadow shading on Tropical Land Scheme, but I suggest that the lighter colour on the upperwing is a bit dark to be Mid Stone. I'm a little cautious about TropLS, only having seen photos convincingly interpreted as it on Hurricanes in the ME and Ceylon. And given the apparent confusion on colour exchanges (A/B/C/D patterns) on other Hurricanes, we do tend to be in the situation of "It's there if you believe in it, otherwise not". However, at least we can rule out confusion with Desert scheme here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 (edited) I wonder if there is a TropLS in the pre-war colours, must go back and have a look at Lucas' original article in SAM on the development of RAF schemes. I wonder if the Celyon pic may be a different scheme to the original ones. Edited March 23, 2011 by Dave Fleming Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevehnz Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Just a wee correction to your post Steve. As has been pointed out, it does note in Dave's posting that 100 Squadron were using the aircraft from No.36 for their training.I and several other Kiwi modellers (and at least one Brit from Hull) will be watching this thread with much interest! Cheers, Pete M. Hmmm, must ave been to excited busy looking at the pictures to bother with the words. Note to self, read the whole thing before jumping in boots & all. It has occurred to me that the photo of the machine doing a face plant was taken later than the torpedo dropping machine & in a different area so may well have had a different camo scheme, (mightn't it?) Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhaselden Posted March 23, 2011 Author Share Posted March 23, 2011 This has been thought before, probably from different evidence. I photographed this at a model show in mid-2009 Ed, That's a really lovely model - much better than I could ever hope to achieve. However, it's wearing RA squadron codes and, as has been observed before, available photographic evidence suggests 36 Sqn wore OE and 100 Sqn carried NK codes. I wonder where the modeller found the information for painting/marking his kit? Kind regards, Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now