RAF World War Two camo

[SD45elect2000]

i haven’t finished any models this week . I am waiting for some masks to arrive. I see there are a lot of different ways to apply the camo including free hand with an airbrush, using white or bluetac. In any case my current preferred method is by using precut camo masks. I assume ( perhaps incorrectly) that the RAF camo was the same on each type of aircraft. For example if there were a row of spitfires would they all have identical or near identical camo patterns?

if you look at my recent finished models you should see several Spitfires with the same patterns.

I recently painted a Whitley freehand with an airbrush and although it looks very nice I was not happy with the results. I did not have a scaled drawing or a copy machine to make my own masks and none are available to buy. I think in 1;72 scale the edges are way too soft, maybe a freehand paint job would look ok in the larger scales.

So, the questions I have for the group are, did the RAF use stencils on all the aircraft that had camo? Were they the same on similar aircraft types, (I know about type A and B patterns). Should my Spitfires and Hurricanes all look the same?

Randall

[Ratch]

Hi Randall, there were A,B, C, and D schemes. A & B mirrored each other and C and D had the colours reversed. And yes, the RAF used rubber masks.

[peebeep]

I would recommend two books by Michael J F Bowyer, Fighting Colours and Bombing Colours, they're considered definitive and are compendiums of articles originally published in Airfix Magazine. Availability on the second hand book market appears to be good.

[SD45elect2000]

I would recommend two books by Michael J F Bowyer, Fighting Colours and Bombing Colours, they're considered definitive and are compendiums of articles originally published in Airfix Magazine. Availability on the second hand book market appears to be good.

 

 

OK this is good info. I did find the books on E Bay and also in the US so I expect I will have them late next week.

 

 

Ratch affirmed that I really should stick with some kind of mask at least in the smaller scale.

 

 

I've been building RAF planes for years; I now start paying attention to fidelity.

 

 

Randall

[Ratch]

I've got used to brush painting (and spraying) the pattern freehand.

[paul71]

to me there does seam to be some slight variations in the same pattern and i did read that but i cant remember where now iv read that many books that the pattern didn't always match up when the aircraft were assembled so im not too sure about the masks and what they used as I've not come across any pictures of them.

there were different patterns within a squadron on the same type of aircraft.

i will sort some pictures out and post them

[paul71]

2_TAF_Spitfires_332_411_and_56_Sqn_9jun44

as you can see with these there seems to be some slight variation in the pattern going down underneath the exhausts and towards the rear of the cockpit

[SD45elect2000]

I think I would have been happier with my Coastal command Whitley if The camo had hard edges.

Randall

[paul71]

hurricanes

the first hurricane has a different pattern to the next few but further up they look as though they have the same pattern again looking at the tails

different schemes again within the same squadron, if you look at aircraft 2,3 and 5 you can see slight variations in the same pattern around the cockpit

[paul71]

spitfire DWK has a different pattern than DWA and DWT

19 squadron different patterns and the second plane appears to have a different colour 19 on the tail

[paul71]

assembly lines

hurricane wings looks like mismatch on the flap except the last one but it could be the angel the picture was taken second to last could be a different pattern or colour

spitfire assembly showing different stages before and after painting

lancaster you can see slight variations in the pattern between the turrets and you can see how the rear of the rear turret was painted as it is turned to the side on one

mosquito

wing section showing two different patterns

mosquitos at hatfield looks like ther is pattern and pru aircraft together, first two wings same pattern next three could be pru wings

[SD45elect2000]

I've got used to brush painting (and spraying) the pattern freehand.

 

 

I have seen the outstanding results you get Ratch! My issue is how to match the pattern if you build another one or several.

 

 

I'm thinking that the different patterns applied to the airplanes were as simple as say Rodney is ready to paint his Spitfire, but Basil is using the (A pattern) stencils so Rodney grabs the other set (type B pattern) and paints his airplane. Later Geoffery damages his stencil and George makes a new one but it's not exactly like the old one.

 

 

The photo's above show them to be identical or at least very close.

 

 

I am starting to sound like a salesman for a laser cutter like the silhouette cutter to make my own stencils. Maybe that's exactly what I need? I am trying to avoid a hobby within a hobby...

 

 

 

 

Randall

[Ratch]

You may find this thread of interest

RAF WW2 Camouflage schemes - - The Airfix Tribute Forum - (tapatalk.com)

[SD45elect2000]

You may find this thread of interest

RAF WW2 Camouflage schemes - - The Airfix Tribute Forum - (tapatalk.com)

 

 

Yes, thank you. I'm not the only one asking these questions, that is gratifying.

 

 

Randall

[peebeep]

I wasn’t aware they used masks to achieve the scheme pattern, I understood it to be an approximation to pattern as it was done fairly freehand in factory and in station. It got more rough and ready on aircraft going and serving in the middle and far east fronts.

 

 

As the late Edgar Brooks used to point out, frequently, on other forums, rubber mat masking was in use, but when and where are questionable. In fact the old Ducimus published Camouflage and Markings series of monographs included a factory drawing for masks in its Spitfire edition. There has been a lot of debate whether or not the use of masks was extensive. My own feeling is that it may have been used extensively in factory paint shops, but even then, with experience the painters probably dispensed with them. Official orders permitted 1" overspray (soft edge if you like) and competent personnel would have been able to achieve this comfortably working freehand. They may also have been used by maintenance units, but as with factories, experienced painters may have dispensed with them. Personally I would dispute the idea of rough and ready, adherence to the patterns would have been closely monitored, irrespective of theatre and only in the most extreme circumstances will you find examples of rushed painting.

[SD45elect2000]

I wasn’t aware they used masks to achieve the scheme pattern, I understood it to be an approximation to pattern as it was done fairly freehand in factory and in station. It got more rough and ready on aircraft going and serving in the middle and far east fronts.

As the late Edgar Brooks used to point out, frequently, on other forums, rubber mat masking was in use, but when and where are questionable. In fact the old Ducimus published Camouflage and Markings series of monographs included a factory drawing for masks in its Spitfire edition. There has been a lot of debate whether or not the use of masks was extensive. My own feeling is that it may have been used extensively in factory paint shops, but even then, with experience the painters probably dispensed with them. Official orders permitted 1" overspray (soft edge if you like) and competent personnel would have been able to achieve this comfortably working freehand. They may also have been used by maintenance units, but as with factories, experienced painters may have dispensed with them. Personally I would dispute the idea of rough and ready, adherence to the patterns would have been closely monitored, irrespective of theatre and only in the most extreme circumstances will you find examples of rushed painting.

 

 

One inch overspray is almost impossible in 1/72 scale. I just measured one of my airbrushed models using a .02 mm nozzle and still the overspray was well in excess of 3 inches.

 

 

That said, my masked models are not identical either, but they are close.

 

 

I'm holding up finishing models because I cannot make a decision..

 

 

Randall

[peebeep]

One inch overspray is almost impossible in 1/72 scale.

 

 

That's my own view, especially if taking into account scale viewing effect. Even at a fairly modest distance a feathered edge on a real aircraft gives the appearance of a hard line. I'd also regard it as marginal at 1/48 with the caveat that it is possible to portray feathered edges by raising masking off of the surface of the model.

[SD45elect2000]

 

 

I'm imagining an airbrush large enough that it takes all 4 of them to hold it.

 

 

Randall

[SD45elect2000]

I’m waiting for the two books on RAF paint to arrive.

I have 8 spitfires and two mosquitos waiting for paint.

[paul71]

after doing some looking at pictures and films its clear there is some differences within the same patterns so i started to look at it differently, and not assume what we think it should be and how things should have been done and since there isn't a good paper trail of how they did things available right now, so i look at it in there time frame and not ours.

The hurricanes of 111sq early MKI clearly show there is a difference in the same pattern on different aircraft some having clear straight lines and some more of a curved line. the aircraft were a new type not being a biplane and had a new type of camo pattern been used ( simply they were no longer a silver colour) are we seeing the experiments of which would work on an actual squadron in this photo, just like the experiments they did with ships.

As for early in the war mass production of this type aircraft was still new and with the BoB raging over head aircraft were needed fast to fill the gaps, as a new aircraft life could be just days, whether a paint line was just in the right place wouldn't have been a big concern and would give you the slight variations of that time.

As for later in the war things do seem to be of a better standard and all looking the same from the factory with variations to be more likely to have come from damage repaired within the squadron or if a bit worse sent away to a repair centre.

I did find film with a Lancaster wing been painted in it on youtube its by british pathe and is called Lancaster bombers - first pictures (1942) and its 6min 24sec in, as ratch says they used a rubber mask but was this just to put a line on so they would know where to paint to therefore again giving a small variation on the actual painted wing as i cant see a mask or how it would fit as the way they are painting the wing in the film.

As i say these are just my thoughts on how they did things at the time after looking at different pictures and films

[Ratch]

Always look for references of particular aircraft (or any subject) you are modelling. Some you will find references for and should try to copy if you want to be accurate. If you cannot find references, who can say you're wrong .

[SD45elect2000]

In fact the masks don’t go on the same way every time anyhow, I have that imperfection covered. I do like working from photos or reference material like Ratch suggests.

My RAF comp books should be here next week maybe tomorrow even, then I got some reading to , many thanks for the suggestions on these books!

Randall

[Scott-344627]

It is my understanding that at least in the Supermarine factory, they had mats that they would lay on the aircraft and paint the camouflage patterns so the camouflage would have a hard rather than a feathered edge.

[Ratch]

My own references are:

AIRCAM AVIATION SERIES No.S.1 BATTLE OF BRITAIN ISBN 0 85045 075 6

Scale Aircraft Modelling COMBAT COLOURS Number 2 ISBN 0-9539040-4-0

AIRfile RAF Trainers Volume 1: 1918-1945 ISBN 978-0-9569802-4-3

AIRFIX magazine guide 6 RAF Fighters of World War 2 ISBN 0 85059 204 6

AIRFIX magazine guide 11 RAF Camouflage of World War 2 ISBN 0 85059 215 1

[paul71]

thanks for the references ratch i will look into them, the more i look into this the more questions i seem to have, i have loads of books and magazines most of them put away though just not enough room for them to be all out, but nothing really covers how they were painted