picture request

[paddy]

if anyone comes across "ORIGINAL" pictures, not colourised, of Spitfires in the Desert i would love to see them
My theory is that prop blast and high speed mixed with sand and high temps equals death to paint. of course people look at restored aircraft and other peoples models but i think the paint finish would have been a lot worse than is usually depicted.

its doubtful that the RAF roundels have been sand blasted off the wings but its interesting and bears consideration.

look at the surface finish here and the prop blades

Again surface detail and finish tells a story ? This could be colorised but i tend to think its original looking at the interior green on the armour plate as this is something colourisers always get wrong.

Any thoughts ?

 

[moon puppy]

I've read about the effects of coral sand working on the Cactus Airforce finishes. Surfaces sand blasted from the blast. Funny you posted a photo of the back of the prop there, @phantom II and I were just talking about that the other day.
Is this your next subject? Battle worn Spitfire?

 

[paddy]

I have a Tamiya Spit MkIX to build. it might make a change from bikes and cars. I am thinking desert Camo ?

Don't take everything at face value.....

note the Kiwi on the tail

 

[paddy]

What is that oval thing in front of the Fin it looks quite wrong in the sharper picture which i think is the colorized doctored version? it looks like the shape and size of the tail wheel well ?

The back of the prop does all the work.

 

[moon puppy]

I don't know the beaufighter at all but it almost looks like it would fit around either the rudder or stabilizer, maybe a root flaring?

 

[Steve Ski]

That is an odd-shaped thingy, but you could be right, Paddy. I like your inquiry into the sand effects on AC, so I know this is gonna be good, however you work it. No pressure, but I know you won't let us down, HA!

 

[Heavens Eagle]

I have seen photos of the back of P-47 and P-51 props that the black paint is feathered off like those on the Beaufighter. I have not seen any photos of the paint chipped like in the Spitfire photo.
It is always good to see untouched and "restored" photos. They are always helpful, especially when you know for sure what was done. At best, all of them are just a rough reference guide. It helps to have some idea of what the colors are supposed to be, but the photos are always just a best guess.

 

[phantom II]

My best guess at the panel . Look at the vertical tail surface where it meets the fuselage. That fairing has been removed . I think that's what you see on of the backbone. That would be a likely place to keep that panel while you do the inspection.
UV rays are tough on paint . Basically turns it to chalk and I doubt they had the water to ever wash anything. My two cents .
Love that Spitfire picture. I have never noticed that the door frame is unpainted . The crowbar is also absent. That paint finish would make any US Marine mechanic envious when they had Phantom . . . Just saying .

 

[paddy]

This also shows come authentic surface detail

this just made me smile of course most of these photos were set up and carefully posed however...........Here we see a pilot patiently waiting for his aircrew to finish painting the roundel on the Fuselage so he can go and bash Rommel

the challenge i think will be in the painting and painting really isn't my thing
I think you need to look beyond the base colour and i suspect very little of it remains on large parts of the aircraft but you minds eye fills in what ikt expects to see. When you seperate a small paert of the picture what you are left with could well be completely diferant to what you saw viewing the whole pic.
Having established that you then need to create a better than matt surface almost a rough surface. If you zoon in where the guy is standing on the right wing the camo has almost disapeared.

 

[moon puppy]

There's a lot to analyze Paddy, could be the camo disappears under the dirt off these guys boots. Just the way the light reflects off the dirt could make the color disappear, but the color is still there? It's really hard to see a lot of wear on the painted surfaces of these Spits. Could be the quality of the paint job at this point was just superior?
Didn't someone share recently the training video of how to apply paint on RAF aircraft?

 

[paddy]

Blimey my typing is terrible
Yea i watched the film, my thinking is these aircraft were basically not just constantly sandblasted but baked as well. I remember my brother frying eggs on his chieftain tank in Cyprus in the 1970's .....so Tunisia would have been even hotter i suspect. I agree even degraded negatives will give the effect of a blotchy finish so expect its going to involve a lot of "interpretation" and artistic licence. Even if i could see the perfect picture it would still be a mission for me to reproduce it with paint

 

[moon puppy]

Depends on how deep you want the sand blasting. Down to bare metal or just primer exposed.

 

[phantom II]

There's a lot to analyze Paddy, could be the camo disappears under the dirt off these guys boots. Just the way the light reflects off the dirt could make the color disappear, but the color is still there? It's really hard to see a lot of wear on the painted surfaces of these Spits. Could be the quality of the paint job at this point was just superior?
Didn't someone share recently the training video of how to apply paint on RAF aircraft?

 

[phantom II]

That painting video was a reflecting the way it was done at the factory or maybe a depo repair. Factory paint was also overpainted with other paint schemes depending where the aircraft was at that time .
Also note ; a quick look at that picture reveals three replacement or repaired flight control surfaces . The guy leaning on the gun barrel reveals the tube missing from the exhaust to the engine compartment . Lots of good details here.
The leading Spit also shows issues where the ground crew has been walking.

 

[paddy]

I was right about the Guy getting in the Spit not being colorised as i found another from the same set marked "not colorised"

And just for fun...how do we know the picture above is RAF and the one below SAAF ?

Another interesting point is the Vokes filter top v the Aboukir filter below. The Aboukir filter was an "in theatre" mod ,made in Aboukir , of the Vokes that increased speed by about 10pm over the vokes

Shame these are all MkV and i have a MkIX

 

[moon puppy]

But you got your money shot right there, sand blasted wing root.

 

[Sharkmouth]

Other than being Mk IXs, not particularly useful.

 

[paddy]

Brave to put about 1 ton of engine and engine bearers on a couple of rusty oil drums

Poor old EN364 suffered an undercarriage collapse in Dec 1945 in the Picture and was scrapped as the war had finished.

 

[jknaus]

What is that oval thing in front of the Fin it looks quite wrong in the sharper picture which i think is the colorized doctored version? it looks like the shape and size of the tail wheel well ?

The back of the prop does all the work.

It looks like the tail plane fairing has been removed and is sitting on the spine. For some maintenance activity?

 

[RichB]

I was right about the Guy getting in the Spit not being colorised as i found another from the same set marked "not colorised"

View attachment 187863

And just for fun...how do we know the picture above is RAF and the one below SAAF ?

View attachment 187862

Another interesting point is the Vokes filter top v the Aboukir filter below. The Aboukir filter was an "in theatre" mod ,made in Aboukir , of the Vokes that increased speed by about 10pm over the vokes

Shame these are all MkV and i have a MkIX

The top picture and the others from that series are 417 Sqn RCAF when based in Tunisia. They transitioned to Mk VIII's before Operation Husky flying them until March 1945 when they received Mk IX's.

In response to your question, SAAF used orange on the fin flash and roundel in place of red.

Cheers,
RichB