RAF WW2 camouflage. Hard edge or soft edge?

[nmayhew]

On 9/14/2019 at 6:42 PM, R Palimaka said:

I

 

I agree with Jennings, the edges of the colours are exactly that; tight but feathered. I looked at dozens of close-up photos of Spitfires last night (thanks guys, even though I had others things I should have been doing... :-) ) Masks would create hard edges. And if you look at the Castle Bromwich photo, you will see that the patterns are uniform but not identical. There are variations in the radii of curves, width of bands of colour, etc. It only takes a few minutes to notice the differences. 

 

Sometimes you do see hard-edged patterns in photos, but they appear to be repaints over the factory finish, such as was done during the change from Temperate Land Scheme to the greys and greens of the Day Fighter Scheme. As always, if you want to be totally accurate, look at photos of your subject. I think a soft edged pattern looks best in the larger scales...for me, achieving that on a model is another thing. 

 

One example. Wing Leader Hugh Godefroy's Spitfire IX, in relatively good shape. 

 

 

Richard

 

Wonderful picture, thank you for posting.

 

A quick trawl through my library of pictures and I cannot see that finish on a MkI or II Spit, but I am able to identify it on quite a few IXs.

 

I don't have many pics of MkVs, and the ones I have are not of sufficiently high res to be of much use.

 

I wonder if there was a change in painting process at some stage in production?

 

If anyone has pics of I or IIs showing clearly the feathered edge as we see above, please do post.

[dennismcc]

Dug into the archives again and this is from Edgar.

 

Posted 18 December 2014 - 05:07 AM

This subject causes almost as much controversy as rivets. At the beginning of the war, aircraft camouflage colours were "blended," i.e. merged, but it was found that this was often done by lifting the gun away from the surface, so that paint was drying before it hit the surface, causing excess drag.
At a meeting, early in 1940, Farnborough, who were the Air Ministry's source for camouflage, said that blending was a waste of time, so the Ministry sent a circular to all Resident Technical Officers, saying that mats could, in future, be used. This covered the manufacturers, and POSSIBLY the Civilian Repair Organisation, but probably not M.U.s., and certainly not the Squadrons.
Mats probably caused ridges between colours, which needed smoothing down, but nothing like the roughness of the blending process, and a smooth finish was what the Ministry really wanted, but couldn't achieve with cellulose. Synthetic paint, in August 1942, was found to be smooth and matt, so was used until after the end of the war.
Understandably, modellers often think of their model first, and the real thing second, and this is where the fun starts. Ideally, blended colours had a "join" only one inch (even half an inch) wide, which, in photographs, looks very prominent, but, divide that down by 72 for a model, and it comes to 1/3rd of a mm, or 1/2 a mm in 1/48, 3/4 of a mm in 1/32, even 1/24 is only 1mm, and spraying to those limits is really difficult (I've never managed it.)
Ideally, taking all this into consideration, a model's finish should probably be hard-edged, but, as always, it's up to the individual, and long may that remain so.

 

The full thread is here https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234972669-standard-raf-ww2-camo-lines/

 

Cheers

 

Dennis

[thierry laurent]

Sorry gents but we are mixing oranges and apples here!

 

There is reality on one side and there are the best ways to simulate it on the other one. Note that I wrote "simulate" rather than reproduce as a scifi shrink ray would do it! Hard edge RAF camo is typically excessive on a scale model (even a small one) and the contrast between the colors becomes too harsh. It simply does not 'look' right. This is part of the 'scale effect', even on a LSP kit.

 

Accordingly, the most logical approach on a LSP kit asks for the thinnest soft edge you can spray. With a small scale kit, the only solution is the use of a mask not sticked to the surface.

 

Discussing history is one thing but finding the most reasonable way to paint a scale model that 'looks right' is alas something else... ;-)

[Ryan]

Well said.

[The Dude]

On 9/14/2019 at 11:42 AM, R Palimaka said:

I

 

I agree with Jennings, the edges of the colours are exactly that; tight but feathered. I looked at dozens of close-up photos of Spitfires last night (thanks guys, even though I had others things I should have been doing... :-) ) Masks would create hard edges. And if you look at the Castle Bromwich photo, you will see that the patterns are uniform but not identical. There are variations in the radii of curves, width of bands of colour, etc. It only takes a few minutes to notice the differences. 

 

Sometimes you do see hard-edged patterns in photos, but they appear to be repaints over the factory finish, such as was done during the change from Temperate Land Scheme to the greys and greens of the Day Fighter Scheme. As always, if you want to be totally accurate, look at photos of your subject. I think a soft edged pattern looks best in the larger scales...for me, achieving that on a model is another thing. 

 

One example. Wing Leader Hugh Godefroy's Spitfire IX, in relatively good shape. 

 

 

Richard

 

That is an awesome picture for many other reasons other than the camo pattern discussion. Thanks for posting it. 

[TimHepplestone]

Thanks for all the great responses. I found this in an edition of Wingleader magazine ( a great publication by the way), it’s a mosquito that took part in the Amiens raid which is close to the airframe I want to model. Once again the edges of the camouflage are tight but slightly feathered. If anyone has reference photos of mosquitoes showing weathering I would greatly appreciate it.

 

[RBrown]

1 hour ago, TimHepplestone said:

If anyone has reference photos of mosquitoes showing weathering I would greatly appreciate it.

 

 

De Havilland Mosquito IIF DD739 RX-X of No 456 RAAF Squadron...

 

[TimHepplestone]

33 minutes ago, RBrown said:

 

De Havilland Mosquito IIF DD739 RX-X of No 456 RAAF Squadron...

 

Awesome picture. Thanks for posting. As to the original question on this thread note a distinctly hard edge to the camouflage on the fuselage

[thierry laurent]

Indeed but look now at the edge close to the navigator... 

[LSP_K2]

5 minutes ago, thierry laurent said:

Indeed but look now at the edge close to the navigator... 

 

Indeed. I've yet to look through my Mosquito references, but I seem to recall a generally fuzzy edge rather than a sharp edge. As far as weathering goes, the engine areas as well as nose area frequently got pretty well beat up and skanky, but as to the rest of the air-frame, aside from the walked on areas of the wings, was pretty tidy. Of course there are probably many exceptions.

[R Palimaka]

21 minutes ago, thierry laurent said:

Indeed but look now at the edge close to the navigator... 

 

Yes, and the nose too. The grey paint on the rear fuselage also has a sheen to it, the paint on the rest of the aircraft is very matte and dull. Looks like the rear was repainted, for squadron code changes maybe or damage repair? Just a guess.

Edited September 16, 2019 by R Palimaka

[chuck540z3]

Interesting thread.  FWIW (and maybe confuse the issue more), this Mk I is supposed to have original paint.  Looks pretty freehand to me.

 

 

 

 

 

Cheers,

Chuck

[thierry laurent]

Even if that was possibly during the war it has been repainted as no Mark I was delivered with such a scheme. 

[LSP_Ron]

It is original "repaint" from the war. This is the history of this plane

 

Ordered as part of contract B19713/39, Aug. 9, 1939. Built by Supermarine Aviation at the Wooston works, Southampton, 1940. - Merlin III fitted. - First flight at Eastleigh. Pilot George Pickering, July 11, 1940. Delivered to RAF as R6915. - BOC: July 7, 1940. - Delivered to 6 MU at RAF Brize Norton in preparation for service, July 11, 1940. Between 20 July and 7 Oct 1940 it made 57 operational sorties, at heights varying from 4000 to 25000 ft. The aircraft was flown during this period by 13 different pilots. (records of these on file).. - Transferred to 609 (West Riding) Sqn, 'B' Flight Blue Section at RAF Middle Wallop. Coded PR-U, July 21, 1940. --12 August 1940. One Me 110 damaged while being flown by P/O Miller 1200-1300 hrs over Swanage at 15,000 feet. --13 August 1940. Two Ju-87 damaged - P/O Ostaszewski: 1530 - 1645 hrs over Portland 20,000 feet. --25 August 1940. One Me110 destroyed. P/O Agazarian: 1700 - 1745 hrs -- Damage sustained in action. Hit in oil sump by He111. Forced landing at White Waltham. Pilot Plt Of Noel le C. Agazarian, Sept. 7, 1940. --25 September 1940. One He111 destroyed. P/O Agazarian: 1600 - 1650n hrs --26 September 1940. One Bf-109 destroyed. Two Do-17 'probables'. Over Bournemouth at approx. 1630 hrs. P/O Agazarian. --27 September 1940. One Me110 destroyed. P/O Agazarian. -- Damage sustained in action. North of Warmwell. Hit in glycol tank by He111. He11 claimed 'damaged'. Returned to base. Pilot Plt Of Noel le C. Agazarian, Sept. 30, 1940. -- Squadron moved to RAF Warmwell, Oct. 2, 1940. -- Damaged sustained in action over Dorchester. Hit by cannon fire by a Bf 109, one Me110 destroyed. Returned to base. Pilot Flg Of John Dundas, Oct. 7, 1940. - Transferred to No 1 CRU for repairs at Cowley, Oct. 14, 1940. - Transferred to 12 MU at RAF Kirkbride, Dec. 12, 1940. - Transferred to 602 (City of Glasgow) Sqn at RAF Prestwick. Coded ZT-, Jan. 21, 1941. January - May 1941 aircraft assigned to and flown by Lt. F K Thornton RAFVR. -- Squadron moved to RAF Ayr, Apr. 14, 1941. - Transferred to 61 OTU at RAF Heston. Coded ?, July 6, 1941. - On charge with No 43 Group at RAF Hendon, July 22, 1941. - Transferred to General Aircraft Limited at Hanworth, July 29, 1941. - Transferred to 45 MU at RAF Kinloss, Oct. 2, 1941. - Transferred to 5 MU at RAF Kemble, 19??. - Transferred to No 1 CRU for repairs at Cowley, Apr. 2, 1942. -- Repaired awaiting collection, Apr. 15, 1942. - Transferred to 6 MU at RAF Brize Norton, Apr. 28, 1942. - Transferred to 61 OTU at RAF Rednal. Coded UU-, June 21, 1942. -- Damaged. Flying accident. Repaired on site, Apr. 20, 1943. - Transferred to 57 OTU at RAF Eshott. Coded ?, June 13, 1943. -- Damaged. Flying accident, Sept. 21, 1943. -- Repaired, awaiting collection, Dec. 10, 1943. - Transferred to 39 MU at RAF Colerne, Dec. 25, 1943. - Transferred to the Royal Naval Development Unit, Jan. 1944. - Transferred to 39 MU at RAF Colerne, Feb. 24, 1944. - Transferred to 82 MU at RAF Lichfield, May 10, 1944. - Transferred to 52 MU at RAF Cardiff Aircraft packing unit, Aug. 25, 1944. - Recorded in the RAF Census, Mar. 21, 1946. - SOC: June 21, 1947 Imperial War Museum, London. Aug. 28, 1946-2002. - Suspended by cables from ceiling.

[nmayhew]

[if you listen carefully you can hear Ron paying homage to the God of Copy & Paste ]