Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Tue May 13, 2025 3:02 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Classic Wings Magazine WWII Naval Aviation Research Pacific Luftwaffe Resource Center
When Hollywood Ruled The Skies - Volumes 1 through 4 by Bruce Oriss


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 8:45 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 11:06 pm
Posts: 1757
Hi Paul - I have been an avid reader on WWII history for the last 10 yrs. With everything I have read, I can't recall anything about why some planes of that era have camo paint and other are plain aluminum.

Some folks have told me that the army air force stopped painting planes once the war was leaning toward the favor of the allies. I'm not convinced that saving a few bucks on paint was more important than protecting the lives of the pilots and planes.

Thanks for your help...and I love this website.

Dave Masse.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 9:10 am 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 7:26 pm
Posts: 4969
Location: PA
I am pretty sure the removal of paint was to save weight on the aircraft.

Cheers,
Nathan

_________________
Shop the Airplane Bunker At
www.warbirdbunker.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 9:10 am 
Offline
Co-MVP - 2006
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 10:39 am
Posts: 4468
Location: Midland, TX Yee-haw.
One of the reason's I've heard is that the bare aluminum was actually a great camoflauge...in the snow. The crews would often times take turpentine on a rag and wipe the paint off the aircraft upon the first snowfall of the season. I believe U.S. P-51 Ace, Bud Anderson, describes that with a tear in his eye during some of his speeches. He loved his crews and how they worked so hard to keep him flying.

Gary


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 9:11 am 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 5:42 pm
Posts: 6884
Location: The Goldfields, Victoria, Australia
Paul Krumrei wrote:
Some folks have told me that the army air force stopped painting planes once the war was leaning toward the favor of the allies. I'm not convinced that saving a few bucks on paint was more important than protecting the lives of the pilots and planes.

Hi David,
The folks are correct; but the 'saving' wasn't in cash, so much as time (production) and then speed and weight (performance) of the aircraft.

In fact it was generally the crews in the field who were keen to strip paint for a performance increase at the latter stages of the war, prior to production churning them out without paint. As far as I know, no British produced aircraft left the factory without paint, but both RAF and RAAF units (in Europe and the Pacific) did strip the paint off Spitfires for instance.

It's a huge area, but as a general question camouflage paint isn't that important in the situation of air superiority the allies had achieved from late '44 onwards. A good example of the logic is the earlier use of the D Day stripes where it was realised that friendly fire was far more a risk than enemy attack - so black and white stripes to highlight 'friends' was chosen.

Hope that helps,

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 9:18 am 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 3:08 pm
Posts: 4542
Location: chicago
I've never seen a bare Spitfire. Anyone have any pics?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 9:32 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 12:38 pm
Posts: 1274
Location: Oshkosh, Wisconsin
Beyond the savings in weight and increase in performance of bare metal, I've always understood that by late '44 the Allies were well on the way to establishing air superiority over Germany, and camo was no longer all that necessary. The rather wild camo schemes of the 56th FG were more for individual squadron identity than anything else.

Does anyone know the dates when the first bare metal aircraft started appearing in the ETO? I know that the P-47D-22 "Silver Lady" was the first bare metal Jug in the 56th, and the earliest date reference I can find for it is May '44.

Zack

_________________
Curator - EAA Aviation Museum, Oshkosh, WI
"Let No Story Go Untold!"
http://www.timelessvoices.org


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 9:42 am 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 5:42 pm
Posts: 6884
Location: The Goldfields, Victoria, Australia
Django wrote:
I've never seen a bare Spitfire. Anyone have any pics?

Yes, thanks, not easy to put up at the moment though, sorry. (Copyright, access.)

Here's an RAAF scheme for a flight sim.

Image

http://www.pacificghosts.com/flightsim/ ... pit8.shtml

There'll be a bare-metal Spitfire scheme in the BBMF this year.

http://www.bbmf.co.uk/fighters.html

Scroll down to MK356.

Image

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 10:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 9:41 am
Posts: 540
I don't have anything to do with the auction, but here's another.

http://cgi.ebay.com/1-72-HELLER-SUPERMA ... dZViewItem


Django wrote:
I've never seen a bare Spitfire. Anyone have any pics?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 10:43 am 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 5:42 pm
Posts: 6884
Location: The Goldfields, Victoria, Australia
famvburg wrote:
I don't have anything to do with the auction, but here's another.

The Heller kit depicts a post-war XVI. There's plenty of post-war silver / natural metal allied aircraft (including Spitfires, Mosquitoes, Tempests etc.) but they don't really relate to the wartime question.

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 11:11 am 
Offline
Senior Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 12:22 am
Posts: 3875
Location: DFW Texas
I found this blurb...
"Our combat crew had the job of removing paint from our B-17. The paint weighed 65 pounds and we removed the paint with 100 octane fuel. Unusual duty for a combat crew.
Eldon Bevens, Ball Turret Gunner, 390 BG 570 BS"

It is at the bottom of this page....cool photos to boot!

http://www.8thafhsoregon.com/USA/Boeing/index.aspx


and this..

"Paint adds weight! At FO WR, camouflage added approximately 90-125 lbs per A/C which roughly equated to 8-12 mph additional drag to a camouflaged A/C as opposed to a "clean skin." These are "on average" figures. Once you have a "clean skin" A/C, the additional weight due to insignia, signs, warnings, "anti-glare panels," etc. is difficult to calculate, although it is minimal compared to total camo."

http://forum.armyairforces.com/m_123916/mpage_6/tm.htm

_________________
Zane Adams
There I was at 20,000 ft, upside down and out of ammunition.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Join us for the Texas Warbird Report on WarbirdRadio.com!
Image http://www.facebook.com/WarbirdRadio
Listen at http://www.warbirdradio.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 7:01 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 12:39 pm
Posts: 1817
Location: Irving, Texas
When I flew C-130s our performance manuals had what was called a performance factor to be used in figureing speeds and distances. The standard factor was a camo paint job with non-skid paint on the walk-ways. Without the paint you would subtract a certain number from the standard to get an accurate speed. If you added an extra antenna for instance you would add a certain number to the speed. Gloss verses a flat paint also had a different factor number. I can't remember the factors but they could be substantial for a camo bird verses a bare aluminum aircraft.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: ???
PostPosted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 7:12 pm 
Offline
Co-MVP - 2006
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 11:21 pm
Posts: 11471
Location: Salem, Oregon
Quote:
I found this blurb...
"Our combat crew had the job of removing paint from our B-17. The paint weighed 65 pounds and we removed the paint with 100 octane fuel. Unusual duty for a combat crew.
Eldon Bevens, Ball Turret Gunner, 390 BG 570 BS"
It is at the bottom of this page....cool photos to boot!
http://www.8thafhsoregon.com/USA/Boeing/index.aspx

Did you see this???
http://www.8thafhsoregon.com/archive/Oregon-Chapter/Dallas-O-Brooks.pdf[/code]

_________________
Don't touch my junk!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 7:57 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 12:39 pm
Posts: 1817
Location: Irving, Texas
When I flew C-130s our performance manuals had what was called a performance factor to be used in figureing speeds and distances. The standard factor was a camo paint job with non-skid paint on the walk-ways. Without the paint you would subtract a certain number from the standard to get an accurate speed. If you added an extra antenna for instance you would add a certain number to the speed. Gloss verses a flat paint also had a different factor number. I can't remember the factors but they could be substantial for a camo bird verses a bare aluminum aircraft.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 8:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 7:18 pm
Posts: 187
I had a similar discussion with MSgt Jim Herron who I worked with at Dover AFB many years ago. He had been the radio operator on B-24 "Home By Christmas". They brought it to Africa from the states with a camo paint job. He told me that when their B-24 arrived in North Africa in early 1944, all of the B-24's were painted. He said shortly after that, the B-24's all began to arrive unpainted. He said the Air Corps was in a hurry to get replacements to North Africa didn't want to wait for paint. Jim said they became proud of the fact that they had a painted B-24 because they were considered "veterans" and only the "newbies" had bare aluminum aircraft.
Sadly though, he said because of the great number of losses, most of the B-24's were bare aluminum when they finished their required number of missions and were scheduled to return to the states to help on a war bond drive.
Sad for him was the fact that as they were preparing to return to the states, another crew, whose B-24 was out of service, borrowed their "Home By Christmas" for a mission. "Home By Christmas" went down on that mission and my friend, Jim Herron, and his crew came home by boat.
John


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 293 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group