Jump to content
D.B. Andrus

Late War RLM usage of 81/82, etc.

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, Troy Molitor said:

 All aircraft leaving the factory today have the CPCP ( corrosion prevention corrosion  control program) systems applied to all the wet areas.. These areas are basically the floor level down throughout the cabin sub floor area, rear spars, and entire wheel well areas.  The galley and lavatory areas are the most important.  For obvious reasons.  After an HMV ( heavy maintenance visit) the areas that were opened up cleaned and inspected have Dynatrol reapplied.

 

Hey Troy

 

Then this is a final assembly process on interior areas.

That's probably why I've never heard of it.

I thought you meant the exterior of the airplane.  :whistle:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, mattlow said:

 

I don't really agree. 

 

It is difficult for us to really debate as there's not really a structure, we're darting around as various aspects catch our attention.

 

Back to the explanation, I think the main thing that you are premising your argument on is that paint was re-formulated 'late in the war'.  Most of the paints we discuss aren't late in the war in terms of introduction (though of course the two in the original thread title are) and even in terms of 81/82 we're not sure of their origins, so they may not be as late as the term would suggest.  As I think you said, the progenitors of these colours were possibly being developed for/on the Eastern Front for a couple of years..?

 

I also think if you look at Vincent's responses to my barrage of questions, you'll see that he doesn't think 81/82 were formulated as a combo and relied upon RLM 76 as a base/primer coat (as did 74 and 75). I am not wedded to the notion of a combo 81/82, I merely suggested it was possible and would be very useful (Vincent's explanation seemed to place no barrier to the creation of 81/82 combo paints, even if there is no documentation showing they existed).

 

EDIT: His sources appear to be two sets of painting instructions.  "as to the source, it is the paint manufacturer's instructions that were delivered to Finland when stocks of RLM74,75 and 76 were purchased in 1943 to support the deliveries of the G2 and G6, as well as the instructions given with the stocks of RLM65 purchased in 1942 (? from memory)" and  "The He-162 document states that metal fuselage parts are to be painted entirely in 7122.76 (logical) and then RLM82 on top of the 7122.76 then RLM81 on top of  RLM82. The document gives no paint references for the 81 and 82, suggesting that only the hue is important to the RLM" Second quote is where Vincent is pretty much agreeing with your premise that 81/82 were not combo paints... end edit. I have no idea what either document is and haven't seen either soI suppose I am taking Vincent's comments at face value here (though I'd love to see the originals/transcripts).

 

It therefore stands to reason that if 81 wasn't a combo paint and we see aircraft with a thin layer of 81 over bare metal your suggestion is entirely probable - why not, if you've got shiny aircraft that need dulling down before leaving the relative safety of a forest factory, 81 sans primer is better than nothing. If I got carried away along a certain line of thought it didn't mean your suggestion was discounted.

 

Matt

 

Thank you Matt.

 

However I'm bowing out from this aspect of what has been a fascinating thread (until the last few pages) as both the tone and the content of these final pages (your measured comments above aside) have become, in my view, an increasingly dismissive monologue. I've constructively asked Vincent a lot of valid questions (about his sources of evidence, his making the evidence fit the facts (rather than the other way around), and his selective use of evidence to support his case (he's delighted to draw upon his own pair of Fw parts but gave both Jerry Crandall and Mark Proulx short shrift on p6 when they made contributions about their parts - and they haven't returned) and he has simply ignored all of these points. And been impolite too.

 

As an academic, I've always been deeply suspicious when an idea that cannot be questioned (because the advancer believes they know they are correct) is advanced. All  ideas should be subject to constructive and polite challenge, and either emerge stronger (or amended) as a consequence.

 

Mods - no intention here to cause any offence. To me this is simply like being in a pub where the chap at the bar is getting louder and louder... I'm moving into the snug as we say here.

 

Padraic

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Padraic Conway said:

he's delighted to draw upon his own pair of Fw parts but gave both Jerry Crandall and Mark Proulx short shrift on p6 when they made contributions about their parts

 

That is where you are wrong my friend (or apply a very selective reading) : i never wrote these parts proved anything. All i ever said was that one of the part, while visually looking like a brand new color, showed no trace of the green being an overpaint nor showing a different pigment nature from regular RLM76.

 

And that is it.

 

And i'm not impolite but i find your attitude "i'm an academic therefore i'm right" to be midly irritating. You're maybe the "academic" but brought nothing of value to the discussion.

 

The "experts" have left the discussion ? Fine, i'll do the same - i'm not making a living by publishing books on the subject and will be happy to continue my researches on my own

 

You might not realize it but when you're native english speaker, you might find it difficult to understand people who write in english as a foreign language. You think you do but you don't, hence your accusations of me being impolite. I see that all the time in the work where an italian and a german will understand each other better in english than they will of a native speaker. You are using all the time expressions and words i have no idea of and i'm not going to search for each of them.

 

I will shortly remove my contributions to this discussion as you find them offending

 

Yours

 

Vincent

Edited by Vincent/MDC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys,

 

Can everyone take a step back?  I think I speak for most of the people viewing this thread, I'm a "non-expert" who just finds this subject to fascinating.   I would really appreciate it if everyone could lose the hurt feelings and just remain in this thread (or at minimum, don't go back a delete previous posted comments).    I've gained invaluable info from pretty much every post in this thread and was hoping it would continue as a general repository for pictures and knowledge on this subject.  Not gonna happen if all the smart guys storm away due to hurt feelings or perceived slights.  

 

Can you please revisit your decisions?  This thread is pretty special....

Edited by John1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, John1 said:

Guys,

 

Can everyone take a step back?  I think I speak for most of the people viewing this thread, I'm a "non-expert" who just finds this subject to fascinating.   I would really appreciate it if everyone could loose the hurt feelings and just remain in this thread (or at minimum, don't go back a delete previous posted comments).    I've gained invaluable info from pretty much every post in this thread and was hoping it would continue as a general repository for pictures and knowledge on this subject.  Not gonna happen if all the smart guys storm away due to hurt feelings or perceived slights.  

 

Can you please revisit your decisions?  This thread is pretty special....

 

Do not worry, the real experts will come back since i'm stopping contributing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't remove your contributions Vincent.

 

I suppose getting to page 17 without a 'meltdown' was an achievement... :)

 

I read most of Ullmann's Luftwaffe Colours  1935-1945 yesterday and am still reeling somewhat, especially from the detail and plethora of numeric designations of the lacquers and the lacquer groups some of your explanations above have been very useful in making sense of what they actually mean (which is why they're valuable stuff).

 

If I come across anything else which I think is useful, I'll post it here. Maybe others will chip in. I hope you'll leave your contributions Vincent and I hope you continue to watch and maybe contribute Padraic.

 

Matt 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Vincent/MDC said:

 

Do not worry, the real experts will come back since i'm stopping contributing

You really took the time to remove all your posts / pictures because of a difference of opinion with one member?   

 

I guess it sucks for the rest of us who actually benefited from your content.   Hope you feel better by doing this, I just need to find a head-shaking emoji now.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, John1 said:

You really took the time to remove all your posts / pictures because of a difference of opinion with one member?   

 

I guess it sucks for the rest of us who actually benefited from your content.   Hope you feel better by doing this, I just need to find a head-shaking emoji now.  

 

 

The research material i have costed me both a lot time and a lot of money. If when sharing it i'm been called insulting or whatever, then i prefer to leave that space for people whose first language is english. They will provide all the needed informations, don't worry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Vincent/MDC said:

The research material i have costed me both a lot time and a lot of money. If when sharing it i'm been called insulting or whatever, then i prefer to leave that space for people whose first language is english. They will provide all the needed informations, don't worry

 

Vincent!!  We had 249 replies and 6,842 views on this thread. You fell out with one person, I think the rest of us were more than happy with the material that was being presented.. the very fact you have access to primary sources is what made your contribution so useful.... You English is as good as many folk who were born and bred here... 

 

This s a big shame... :(

 

Matt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mattlow said:

This s a big shame... :(

 

You tell that to Conway who not only compares me to a loud drunk in a pub but also accuses me to have gotten his favourite experts out of the thread.

Enough is enough !

Edited by Vincent/MDC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vincent

 

As initiator of the thread and as one who has appreciates all that have contributed I ask you to stay. If that is not possible in your view, please leave your posts intact as there is valuable research and insight therein. All Luftwaffe camouflage aficionados relish information that comes from one that has access to primary sources and has the skill to interpret such material. The most noble of efforts is to pass along one's efforts to those less informed, myself included, regardless of feedback that one finds disagreeable.

 

I hope you will reconsider, my friend.

 

Best Regards

 

D.B.

 

Vincent

 

En tant qu'initiateur du fil et en tant que personne ayant apprécié tout ce qui a contribué, je vous demande de rester. Si cela n’est pas possible à vos yeux, laissez vos messages intacts, car ils contiennent des recherches et des idées intéressantes. Tous les aficionados du camouflage de la Luftwaffe raffolent des informations émanant de personnes ayant accès à des sources primaires et capables d’interpréter ces informations. Le plus noble des efforts est de transmettre ses efforts à ceux qui sont moins informés, moi-même inclus, indépendamment des réactions jugées désagréables.

 

J'espère que vous allez reconsidérer, mon ami.

 

Meilleures salutations,

 

D.B

 

S'il vous plaît pardonnez Google Translate, c'est le meilleur que je pourrais trouver.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I am back here on this so informative topic, only to see the the "forum´s menace" has struck again... Initially I wanted to thank all for this valuable exchange of information and help, but now I am somehow shocked to see Vincent remove his contributions.

I feel sad that a fine thread has gone down the drain. As another no-native speaker I think I can understand the problems of people interacting in a language that isn´t their mother tongue. Too bad this sometime gets personal, with consequences for all of us who enjoyed the information shared here alot, especially yours, Vincent! Don´t know what to say, I feel sad.

 

@ Vincent: I hope you might be able to have your posts restored. What a loss for many of us because of this!

Edited by Wurzacher
Trying to catch up with some spelling errors...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously?  I didn't always agree, but in the end found Vincent's contributions educational and enlightening.  What a waste.

 

Gaz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...