Jump to content
D.B. Andrus

Late War RLM usage of 81/82, etc.

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Wackyracer said:

Ummmm….actually no.

 

The first link takes you to RLM 76 Lichtblau. The next two links take you to Grunblau and Blaugrun, both marketed as German Late War with no reference to RLM 76. The later two greens in your link are also provided w/o RLM designation.

 

Mark Proulx

 

Edited by Mark P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Vincent/MDC said:

 

 

I believe what needs to be proven is that new designations were introduced and as long as this is not done, i will stick with what is known, that is the latest introduced reference was RLM83 and that every observed hue on parts and photos results from application issues of the existing references or mixes of existing reference. I will surely not use my own garage of parts to prove the existence of new references

 

But i think this thread has reached its conclusion as far as I'm concerned, so signing off

 

And here is the problem: you are starting your exploration here with a conclusion -  'I believe what needs to be proven is...' and also that 'every observed hue on parts .. results from application issues of the existing references' .

 

My background is in academia, teaching undergraduate students how to conduct research. Gathering evidence with an open mind is an essential component of this process (as it is here), and we should all be open to new ideas and possibilities (although I agree with you that these need to be adequately supported by the evidence), especially when these don't support our beliefs. Selectively employing some evidence, yet ignoring evidence that doesn't fit a pre-existing idea, simply leads to the conclusion that you started with, but no more.

 

This approach results here in you only accepting any evidence that you feel supports your (already decided) conclusions. For example your FW190D-9 parts appear to confirm your hypothesis that 76 sometimes had poor binders, so you are happy with that idea, but you then dismiss any evidence that counters your conclusion (such as Matts power egg pic and caption, Jerry's examples and pictures and the Fw 190pics).

 

Radu recently demonstrated the need for us to suspend our pre-existing ideas about late war Luftwaffe colours when he provided a very compelling argument that what we tend to see as 81/82 on late war airframes is really 70/71 even though this idea runs counter to the convention of late war colours. I'm quite prepared to say here that I changed my perspective on the issue as a direct result of his ideas.

 

We all do well if we keep our minds receptive to new ideas. Hopefully you haven't signed off this post - it would be good to continue the discussion.

 

Padraic

 

Edited by Padraic Conway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if the terminology was clarified (colour/hue/formula/RLM designation) there's not really any disagreement here...?

 

I don't know if it is being done, but surely we are now at the stage where these various hues of paint need to be analysed chemically to ascertain if there are differences in composition/ratios and if that would make a difference to the fresh paint's appearance and whether it would affect the way the paint behaved after application. I'd also be interested to know what effects the long term (75 years or so) exposure to anaerobic muds, deep water/silt etc had on the paint.  It'd be fascinating to make up new batches of the paints and expose them to different conditions/preparations etc to see how they react.

 

Finally, whilst not for one moment belittling the research that is going on into what the paint was and why it looked the way it did, from a modelling perspective if its  in the place where RLM 76 was officially sanctioned to be put but it's white-ish, yellowy or green tinted it doesn't matter, we just replicate it (though telling these hes apart in B/W photographs must be close to impossible).

 

If however, at some point, we can isolate these various hues to specific time periods, from specific production facilities we can make more intelligent guesses about what colours to paint our models. Has there been any correlation between the various hues and aircraft types or factories?

 

Matt

Share this post


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

 Has there been any correlation between the various hues and aircraft types or factories?

 

Excellent question, Matt. Research has been done regarding camouflage patterns from different factories, ie. Jerry Crandall - FW 190D & Tomas Poruba -109G-10/K4 - FW 190D, however, research regarding hues, if possible, is still yet to be pursued in a thorough manner. Beginning with Poruba's "Green" paint in a can marked 81from the WNF/Diana facility and Crandall's still of the power egg with unusual blue, green, etc. colors, we may have a start in winkling out which factory used which hue when. Thanks to those with primary sources, a/c parts and a love of the subject more clarity may be forthcoming.

 

Cheers,

 

D.B.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mark P said:

Ummmm….actually no.

 

The first link takes you to RLM 76 Lichtblau. The next two links take you to Grunblau and Blaugrun, both marketed as German Late War with no reference to RLM 76. The later two greens in your link are also provided w/o RLM designation.

 

Mark Proulx

 

Oh OK. I use all 3 depending upon what stage in the war or profile? RLM76 up to 44 then either of the other 2 for late stuff according to profiles etc. the more grey blue one is just that and the other a nice rendition of the greeny 'sky' version the discussion is about?

 

Just posted them up here as I thought the discussion was about finding paints to re-create our builds that's all.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m kind of thinking that all those variations of 76 weren’t intentional, just a byproduct of the German industrial / distribution system breaking down, coupled with disbursed, “cottage” industries building sub-components  and rebuilding damaged aircraft.   Really don’t think that with all the problems the Germans were facing by late ‘44 that they had a meeting and decided that instead of just using 76, let’s instead introduce 3 distinct, new colors.  

 

Or maybe they did decide to replace 76 with the most common hue of “84” and the less common variations were simply due to lack of necessary pigments to follow the new spec to the letter and quality control being thrown out in those last few months?   This again applies mostly for refurbished aircraft which seem to have most of the off-spec colors.  

 

Compare those aircraft to new production aircraft, even those manufactured at war’s end.  For the most part, those aircraft (primarily the jets) seem to still have factory spec paint jobs using standard 76 and the other late war colors. 

Share this post


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

I’m kind of thinking that all those variations of 76 weren’t intentional, just a byproduct of the German industrial / distribution system breaking down, coupled with disbursed, “cottage” industries building sub-components  and rebuilding damaged aircraft.   Really don’t think that with all the problems the Germans were facing by late ‘44 that they had a meeting and decided that instead of just using 76, let’s instead introduce 3 distinct, new colors.  

 

Or maybe they did decide to replace 76 with the most common hue of “84” and the less common variations were simply due to lack of necessary pigments to follow the new spec to the letter and quality control being thrown out in those last few months?   This again applies mostly for refurbished aircraft which seem to have most of the off-spec colors.  

 

Compare those aircraft to new production aircraft, even those manufactured at war’s end.  For the most part, those aircraft (primarily the jets) seem to still have factory spec paint jobs using standard 76 and the other late war colors. 

 

All possible John, but the photographic evidence (plus the considerable number of painted parts still extant) leads us strongly towards 3 or more distinct undersurface colours in use during 1944/45. Jerry has done a lot of work in this field, as have others (JaPo, Merrick, Ullman, Wadman, Brown for example), and the current consensus is that:

  • these differing colours did exist (blue, green and brown/cream variants)
  • paint and binder mixes/use of cobalt/differing chemistry can account for some variations within 76  but not easily account for the larger variations
  • the differing colours are pretty consistent across differing surviving aircraft parts

Personally, I suspect that Matt's idea of linking colours/hues to differing aircraft types and their places of manufacturer may have a great deal to offer us. JaPo have done exhaustive work in this field, pinning down camo patterns to type and manufacturer. Your comments about Me262s using 'factory spec' 76 appear to supported by colour pictures. The He162 however is another matter, and lets not forget the He219 at the NASM with green squiggles over black/grey. If that airframe had been simply pictured in black and white at wars end, then we all would have simply seen 76 over 66 and thought no more about it. How many more He219s carried that scheme? Using Matt's premise, perhaps all of the production batches with black/grey undersides?

 

All fascinating stuff (at least to me)

 

Padraic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, John1 said:

Really don’t think that with all the problems the Germans were facing by late ‘44 that they had a meeting and decided that instead of just using 76, let’s instead introduce 3 distinct, new colors.

 

Looking on the 'funny' side of that premise, there were elements of the Nazi command, RLM and aircraft industry sitting down and submitting/evaluating designs for complex fighters and bombers powered by engines that didn't exist... so while I agree that there would be elements of adapting to the strictures of the strategic situation, there was also a lot of 'in denial planning' going on.... the 'new' hues could easily have been under consideration and production. Seems a bit crazy, but I think that's a good word to describe Nazi occupied Europe at that time... Also, to be appearing on aircraft in late '44, they'd have been in development for a while before that....

 

I'd be interested in seeing an RLM colours timeline. Do late war colours appear earlier in experimental test applications? I'm not sure where the various colours used on the Soviet front fit into this and of course Merrick proposed that RLM 81 qnd 82 were in fact re-introduced pre-war/export colours (was it RLM 61 and 62???). If paint was properly developed, would there have been time to identify the new strategic (defensive) situation the Luftwaffe found itself in and develop new colours as a response to that?  If not RLM 81 and 82 may have been 'knocking around' for another use... maybe the predominantly low level fighting going on over the Eastern Front where camouflage against vegetation was more useful - this could then have been rapidly re-purposed to on the ground camo.

 

I need to re-read Ullman, Merrick, Crandall and JaPo... :)

 

Matt

Share this post


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

 

All possible John, but the photographic evidence (plus the considerable number of painted parts still extant) leads us strongly towards 3 or more distinct undersurface colours in use during 1944/45. Jerry has done a lot of work in this field, as have others (JaPo, Merrick, Ullman, Wadman, Brown for example), and the current consensus is that:

  • these differing colours did exist (blue, green and brown/cream variants)
  • paint and binder mixes/use of cobalt/differing chemistry can account for some variations within 76  but not easily account for the larger variations
  • the differing colours are pretty consistent across differing surviving aircraft parts

Personally, I suspect that Matt's idea of linking colours/hues to differing aircraft types and their places of manufacturer may have a great deal to offer us. JaPo have done exhaustive work in this field, pinning down camo patterns to type and manufacturer. Your comments about Me262s using 'factory spec' 76 appear to supported by colour pictures. The He162 however is another matter, and lets not forget the He219 at the NASM with green squiggles over black/grey. If that airframe had been simply pictured in black and white at wars end, then we all would have simply seen 76 over 66 and thought no more about it. How many more He219s carried that scheme? Using Matt's premise, perhaps all of the production batches with black/grey undersides?

 

All fascinating stuff (at least to me)

 

Padraic

I’m curious about your comment on He162’s.    I always thought they were pretty uniformly finished using standard 76 and 81/82 topsides.  What am I missing here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, John1 said:

I’m curious about your comment on He162’s.    I always thought they were pretty uniformly finished using standard 76 and 81/82 topsides.  What am I missing here?

 

When Memorial Flight restored their He 162, they discovered that the wing topside was originally painted RLM 70 overall. http://memorial.flight.free.fr/He162uk.html 

That is not proof that all He 162 were painted like that, but it shows that Schwartzgruen continued to be used as camouflage colour alongside 81/82. The same can be said about the Ar 234 and Do 335: despite a pervasive belief that they were painted 81/82, the majority were painted 70/71. 

Radu 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, John1 said:

I’m curious about your comment on He162’s.    I always thought they were pretty uniformly finished using standard 76 and 81/82 topsides.  What am I missing here?

 

Yes John, like you I had always thought this. Or that they were a mix of 70/71 and 81/82 with either 65 or 76 undersurfaces. However, other evidence is coming to light to challenge or supplant this idea.

 

See here: http://memorial.flight.free.fr/press/fc/fc2.jpg  which is a Flugzeug Classic article from 2005 covering the restoration of the French He162 W Nr 120015.

 

The article says this: Der komplette Rumpf der WNr 120015 war in RLM77 (grauweiss) gestrichen, die einzige Ausnahme war die Abdeckung des Munitionsbehalters unmittlebar hinter dem Kabvinendach, die einen Tarnanstrich in einem noch nicht definierten Grunton aufwies. Der sonst fur Nachttjager reservierte Farbton RLM77 schient standardmassig bei der He162 der Baureihe 120000 gewesen zu sein, die uber keine BMW 718-Starthilfsraketen, jedoch uber den grosseren 695 Liter fassenden Kraftstoffbehalter verfugte.  (apologies to German speakers  as my British keyboard doesn't easily allow me to use the ß symbol)

 

Which translates as: The complete fuselage of the W Nr 120015 was painted in RLM77 (gray-white), the only exception was the cover of the ammunition container directly behind the cabine roof, which had a camouflage paint in a not yet defined Grunton. The color RLM77, which was reserved for Nightjager, is standard on the He162 of the 120000 series, which did not have any BMW 718 booster rockets, but had the larger 695 liter fuel tank.

 

In my view Flugzeug articles have credibility as a source, and the article in question also explicitly refers to some of Ken Merrick's earlier work, so I am inclined to accept their ideas, especially as these originate from a primary source (an airframe restoration).

 

I've also read about the late war 'RLM84' shade appearing on these aircraft, but I'll have to dig through my references to find the source for that idea.

 

The point I'm wanting to make here is that well established ideas (in this case He162s being 76/81/82) hold sway for long periods, but that other evidence has surfaced to challenge this.

 

Padraic

 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Radub said:

 

When Memorial Flight restored their He 162, they discovered that the wing topside was originally painted RLM 70 overall. http://memorial.flight.free.fr/He162uk.html 

That is not proof that all He 162 were painted like that, but it shows that Schwartzgruen continued to be used as camouflage colour alongside 81/82. The same can be said about the Ar 234 and Do 335: despite a pervasive belief that they were painted 81/82, the majority were painted 70/71. 

Radu 

 

I see that Radu and I have been looking at the same site!  :o ;)

 

Padraic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Padraic Conway said:

 

Yes John, like you I had always thought this. Or that they were a mix of 70/71 and 81/82 with either 65 or 76 undersurfaces. However, other evidence is coming to light to challenge or supplant this idea.

 

See here: http://memorial.flight.free.fr/press/fc/fc2.jpg  which is a Flugzeug Classic article from 2005 covering the restoration of the French He162 W Nr 120015.

 

The article says this: Der komplette Rumpf der WNr 120015 war in RLM77 (grauweiss) gestrichen, die einzige Ausnahme war die Abdeckung des Munitionsbehalters unmittlebar hinter dem Kabvinendach, die einen Tarnanstrich in einem noch nicht definierten Grunton aufwies. Der sonst fur Nachttjager reservierte Farbton RLM77 schient standardmassig bei der He162 der Baureihe 120000 gewesen zu sein, die uber keine BMW 718-Starthilfsraketen, jedoch uber den grosseren 695 Liter fassenden Kraftstoffbehalter verfugte.  (apologies to German speakers  as my British keyboard doesn't easily allow me to use the ß symbol)

 

Which translates as: The complete fuselage of the W Nr 120015 was painted in RLM77 (gray-white), the only exception was the cover of the ammunition container directly behind the cabine roof, which had a camouflage paint in a not yet defined Grunton. The color RLM77, which was reserved for Nightjager, is standard on the He162 of the 120000 series, which did not have any BMW 718 booster rockets, but had the larger 695 liter fuel tank.

 

In my view Flugzeug articles have credibility as a source, and the article in question also explicitly refers to some of Ken Merrick's earlier work, so I am inclined to accept their ideas, especially as these originate from a primary source (an airframe restoration).

 

I've also read about the late war 'RLM84' shade appearing on these aircraft, but I'll have to dig through my references to find the source for that idea.

 

The point I'm wanting to make here is that well established ideas (in this case He162s being 76/81/82) hold sway for long periods, but that other evidence has surfaced to challenge this.

 

Padraic

 
 

 

 

 Grunton is missing an umlaut.  Grünton translates to green tone.

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...