Warbird Information Exchange

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.

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

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

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

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

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

_________________
Volunteer Coordinator/Curator - Military Aviation Museum - Virginia Beach, VA
"America's Flying Museum"
http://www.militaryaviationmuseum.org

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

Here's an RAAF scheme for a flight sim.



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.

_________________
James K

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

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

I don't have anything to do with the auction, but here's another.

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

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

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!
http://www.facebook.com/WarbirdRadio
Listen at http://www.warbirdradio.com

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.

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

_________________
Don't touch my junk!!

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.

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