• Modelers Alliance has updated the forum software on our website. We have migrated all post, content and user accounts but we could not migrate the passwords.
    This requires that you manually reset your password.
    Please click here, http://modelersalliance.org/forums/login to go to logon page and use the "Forgot your Password" option.

AC weathering

ausf

ausf

Master at Arms
This may be a sore topic, or at least widely open to personal tastes, but I'm trying to wrap my head around this.

The way I understood it, if you wanted to weather a WWII AC, choose a front line, in the trenches Jug or an atoll based, coral dusted Corsair.

But I've been reading Max Hasting's Retribution (Japan '44-45). That's where I got that bit of info about hail over Burma stipping paint off of Beaufighters.

Yesterday I was reading about carrier based planes and that salt was quick to corrode paint and because the AC paint was so flammable, they stopped carrying it onboard. I'd imagine that opens up some heavy weathering possibilities.

It also said that US AC production was so high at that point, planes that were even slightly damaged were pushed overboard, as was any airframe that was 8 months old.

One air group (I believe off the Essex) had 99 near carrier ditchings during a tour. All rescued by trailing destroyers, whose crew promply removed all the pilot's flight/survival gear for souvenirs and held him until the carrier paid ransom of geedunk (ice cream) and two movies (that they haven't seen).

So, can I get nasty with an Avenger, or should I stick to tanks? :hmmm
 
From what I understand, the three tone flat paint schemes (dark blue, intermediate blue, over white) were quite susceptible to the corrosive environment of the pacific. The Gloss sea blue was much more durable and didn't show the effects of wear. This is the rule of thumb I've used, but I am far from an expert. Of course Korean war corsairs are often beat up and they were gloss sea blue. In the end it's your model - do whatcha want and have some fun! :skipper
 
That's a loaded question for sure.

It really depends on the aircraft you're doing. Like I just finished the Spirit of St Louis and he has minimal weathering on it.

On the other hand we have aircraft workout out of the forward fields in Western Europe and surely they would have been blowing up dirt all over the place. Desert fields you'd see sand blasting effect on the props and everything in the wash of the props.

BUT, the Iwo Jima Mustang I did a couple of years ago I read a statement from one of the maintenance guys out there at the time. Said they kept those VLR Mustangs in mint condition, polished and shined because there was nothing else to do.

Avenger, was it carrier or land based? Short answer is yes, get'er dirty IMHO.
 
I wish I knew the answer ... After all your model ... In model RR ing We set the time & era via the dio so what ever your base looks like should jump into your AC ... :hmmm :ro: :dude
 
ausf said:
This may be a sore topic, or at least widely open to personal tastes, but I'm trying to wrap my head around this.

The way I understood it, if you wanted to weather a WWII AC, choose a front line, in the trenches Jug or an atoll based, coral dusted Corsair.

But I've been reading Max Hasting's Retribution (Japan '44-45). That's where I got that bit of info about hail over Burma stipping paint off of Beaufighters.

Yesterday I was reading about carrier based planes and that salt was quick to corrode paint and because the AC paint was so flammable, they stopped carrying it onboard. I'd imagine that opens up some heavy weathering possibilities.

It also said that US AC production was so high at that point, planes that were even slightly damaged were pushed overboard, as was any airframe that was 8 months old.

One air group (I believe off the Essex) had 99 near carrier ditchings during a tour. All rescued by trailing destroyers, whose crew promply removed all the pilot's flight/survival gear for souvenirs and held him until the carrier paid ransom of geedunk (ice cream) and two movies (that they haven't seen).

So, can I get nasty with an Avenger, or should I stick to tanks? :hmmm
Click to expand...


I think that if you can find an Avenger or any Navy aircraft with a close up picture, you will find discoloration and wear.
Navy aircraft are reputed to be well primed to resist corrosion but the paints did not appear to last well.

and there was that bit about clearing the deck for impending aircraft :S

Cheers, Christian B)
 
moon puppy said:
phantom II said:
and there was that bit about clearing the deck for impending aircraft :S

Cheers, Christian B)
Click to expand...

And what's that? :idonno
Click to expand...


Sorry, thought it was self explanatory .

When something lands ( damaged ) that can't be readily cleared, it is smarter to just shove it off the deck than taking a chance at loosing other birds waiting to land .

I believe the Navy thought of aircraft as being expandable items when at sea.
 
I would say that most ship born U.S. Navy aircraft were pretty well maintained. The exception being during prolonged repeated operations were sorte turn around was high in the heat of battle.

h1bf3421.jpg


h9f6588b.jpg


hf1a2c88.jpg


Those operating from the many coral inlands will show considerable wear, that may be due to a shortage of paint, but maintaining the paint would have been done as time allowed. The coral dust and exposure to salt air did take a toll on the aircraft.

So I guess how much you weather will depend on just what plane you trying to depict.

B)
 
phantom II said:
I believe the Navy thought of aircraft as being expandable items when at sea.
Click to expand...

According to Hastings, beyond expendable. Like I said, no matter what the condition, once a plane hit 8 months, it became an artificial reef. Hint of trouble landing on the deck, ditch. Night operations, make sure your canopy hood is unlocked so you can get out. It was better to lose the AC than turn on deck the lights and expose the carrier.

I don't have the numbers off the top of my head, but King had a blank check after Pearl Harbor to build a Navy. It almost approached absurd levels, more than all other combatants combined. With a plane rolling out of a factory at a rate of every 93 seconds, no sweat pitching it into the sea.
 
I suppose that's one reason you don't see the personalization of the Navy aircraft like we see on the land based birds.
 
The Navy also used their carriers as aircraft transports when coming back from overhauls and between bases. The CVE's where originally designated as auxilary aircraft escort vessels (AVG), then auxilary aircraft carriers (ACV) with primary duties as pilot training and aircraft transport. They finally received combatant status as CVE's in 1943.

Cheers,
Rich
 
I see in Wiki there's an AKV designation, Some were carriers some were cargo ships.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_auxiliaries_of_the_United_States_Navy#Aircraft_Transports_.28AKV.2C_T-AKV.29

I was thinking that it would be a lot of flying to get the number of aircraft out in the pacific that was needed.
 
moon puppy said:
I see in Wiki there's an AKV designation, Some were carriers some were cargo ships.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_auxiliaries_of_the_United_States_Navy#Aircraft_Transports_.28AKV.2C_T-AKV.29

I was thinking that it would be a lot of flying to get the number of aircraft out in the pacific that was needed.
Click to expand...

Looking over that list, two I'd hate to be assigned to: Ammunition and Gasoline Tanker.
 
Aircraft models without shadow lines, darkened recessed panel lines, grease and oil spots and some missing paint just look like toys to my eye. To paraphrase J.G. Wentworth "It's your model, do it like you want to." B)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dewertus
Korea 1950-53 - F4U-4B VF-53; ACADEMY 1/48 - DONE!
Replies
2
Views
809
moon puppy
moon puppy
Back
Top