This is the place where the majority of the warbird (aircraft that have survived military service) discussions will take place. Specialized forums may be added in the new future
Post a reply

Re: is it just me? original vs restored?

Wed Jul 02, 2014 5:19 pm

Not enough time in the day to get heavy into this discussion.
Paints were changed at periods of the war. I've done a bit of research on this in regards to early war paint as the SNJ-3 was built in Dec of 41.
I have a Dupont Aircraft Paint book from 1943. No color cards but some interesting info including silver paint mixture info.
I have a 44 Hayes T/W O/H manual with other silver paint info.
Also found an article from 42 Industrial Paint Magazine with a revised paint formula for AN-TT-P-465 Yellow Zinc. I believe it was a Oct revision from a previous August revision.
Also found an article on the primer and paint processes used by Douglas in the 42 timeframe.

Zinc Chromates were applied by spray, dip and flow. Flow being out of a hose. Seen film of that at the Piper factory when primering the fuselages of cubs. Frame hangs over a pool and operator holds a 1/2" hose or so and lets it dribble onto each tube of the frame. Not to pretty.

Re: is it just me? original vs restored?

Wed Jul 02, 2014 5:25 pm

51fixer wrote:Not enough time in the day to get heavy into this discussion.
Paints were changed at periods of the war. I've done a bit of research on this in regards to early war paint as the SNJ-3 was built in Dec of 41.
I have a Dupont Aircraft Paint book from 1943. No color cards but some interesting info including silver paint mixture info.
I have a 44 Hayes T/W O/H manual with other silver paint info.
Also found an article from 42 Industrial Paint Magazine with a revised paint formula for AN-TT-P-465 Yellow Zinc. I believe it was a Oct revision from a previous August revision.
Also found an article on the primer and paint processes used by Douglas in the 42 timeframe.

Zinc Chromates were applied by spray, dip and flow. Flow being out of a hose. Seen film of that at the Piper factory when primering the fuselages of cubs. Frame hangs over a pool and operator holds a 1/2" hose or so and lets it dribble onto each tube of the frame. Not to pretty.

At Douglas they were also coating Aluminum sheets when sheets were arriving by running through a series of machines and rollers that cleaned, etched with acid based cleaner and applied the zinc by a roller as wide as the sheet while passing through. After drying time it was flipped and ran through for the other side. So roller was another method.

Re: is it just me? original vs restored?

Wed Jul 02, 2014 6:43 pm

In response to the post about invasion stripes on restored warbirds often/always being too precise...starting back in May, ahead of the 70th Anniversary of D-Day, and likely for the extent of at least this air show season, a few UK-based Spitfires received water-based (as per original) invasion stripes, done with brush and wobbly lines. Here's a quote that I thought lent well to this thread, from the Key Forum member Roobarb, who is a Duxford-based warbird restorer and expert painter, in regards to painting these specific invasion stripes in such a manner as shown below: "It's amazing how difficult it was to re-create a rough/authentic look without it looking child-like. One has to strike the fine balance between re-creating history and respecting the fact it is a multi-million pound precious Spitfire belonging to someone that isn't you."

MH434:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/dwhitworth/14166715271/

ML407:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/dwhitworth/14239302995/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/16239637@N05/14074978817/

PV202:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nickj1972 ... qWY-nCBS7w

Re: is it just me? original vs restored?

Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:07 pm

Regarding invasion stripes I have often wondered: They were used for months after the invasion. Was there time then to paint them accurately using masking tape and paper as well as more permanent paints? What about aircraft delivered to reception centers in the UK where they would have had their tactical markings and theater specific equipment installed. Were invasion stripes still painted on in a slapdash way there?

Re: is it just me? original vs restored?

Thu Jul 03, 2014 9:31 pm

John Dupre wrote:Regarding invasion stripes I have often wondered: They were used for months after the invasion. Was there time then to paint them accurately using masking tape and paper as well as more permanent paints? What about aircraft delivered to reception centers in the UK where they would have had their tactical markings and theater specific equipment installed. Were invasion stripes still painted on in a slapdash way there?



It's possible that aircraft delivered to reception areas between 5JUN44 and 7AUG44 may have had more care in painting, but the paint was still to be temporary in nature.
From 7AUG44 to 6DEC44 aircraft were to be marked only on the underside. Again, perhaps more care, but still crap paint. Topside markings started to be removed in the field in the beginning of August. Removing the temporary paint often left stains*, or worn spots in the pre-existing paint.

Re: is it just me? original vs restored?

Fri Jul 04, 2014 8:13 am

When I think of "real-looking" warbird finishes, one of the best I've seen is the Skyraider Naked Fanny. It's an ex-French AD-4NA, and thus never wore USAF SEA camo in service, but it certainly does look the part!

Image

Image
Post a reply