Weathering USN Gloss Sea Blue

[jeroen_R90S]

Cool stuff, I had no idea!

And great tips on weathering GSB too, I really like that colour, just not for weathering...

 

Interesting effects on the photo's of matt versus gloss, too! I did something similar on the anti-glare panels of my 1/72 F4U-4s. I simply masked them off at the end and shot a coat of matt, where the rest went satin.

Not much weathering on these anyway as they were one of those bad-karma-for-everything models and I was just glad to get them somewhat done.

 

Completely gloss, after/during decals:

And satin for the whole thing, anti-glare panel masked and got a flat coat (the "notch"  on 214's cowling was there on the real thing as well, may have been a repaint or replaced panel)

These photo's are not the best but they do show how the same colour looks totally different in gloss, satin, and matt

 

Jeroen

[Gerhard]

Please dont laugh, pigments, the powder kind. 

[Woody V]

1 hour ago, jeroen_R90S said:

anti-glare panel masked and got a flat coat

Flat clear?

[jeroen_R90S]

Yes, I used just Tamiya flat clear. (XF-86) over the GSB base colour. 

[JayW]

I am just now doing a hair spray method weathering job on my 1/18 Corsair.  As you probably know since you look in from time to time.  One thing I notice that is universal for all weathered Corsairs (-1's, -1A's, -1D's, -4's) is the heavy wear directly adjacent to the engine accessory compartment, both sides.  It's pretty clear that when those bays had to be accessed, mechanics were slipping and sliding on the sloped surface there, instead of using the platforms you see in some pics of birds under maintenance.  There was no walkway coating there.  This is also where you see the "checkerboard" pattern directly aft of the leading edge intake.  The panels there were thin skinned and no doubt deflected in just a bit under the weight of a booted foot, leaving the ribs and stiffeners to take the load, and the wear. 

 

Also, the small non-skid painted trapezoidal shaped panel just in front of the inboard flap gets just obliterated, in nearly every shot I see of it, at least the RH side where the pilot hikes himself up onto the wing.

 

 

 

 

[Woody V]

20 hours ago, JayW said:

This is also where you see the "checkerboard" pattern directly aft of the leading edge intake.  The panels there were thin skinned and no doubt deflected in just a bit under the weight of a booted foot, leaving the ribs and stiffeners to take the load, and the wear. 

 

First of all, allow me to congratulate you on your incredible Corsair build, it's one of my favorite builds and I do check you out frequently.

 

And let us all keep in mind that model building is a creative endeavor while sometimes being overly influenced by current trends in the hobby. Years ago the trend was "correct" colors and no weathering, but today (and rightfully so) the trend is more toward depicting aircraft in service.
 

So many modelers have no idea how aircraft are built and go wild chipping with no idea why they're doing it or where they should be doing it. Aircraft skin is subject to four basic forms of deterioration:
1. Fading and discoloration from exposure to the elements and chemicals.

2. Wear from being walked on, most commonly evidenced by primer color showing through and bare metal exposed over underlying structure due to repeatedly being walked on.

3. Chipping for being impacted by debris most commonly found in aircraft operating from coral bases. Also seen on fasteners and surrounding skin.

4. Dents caused by striking combat debris or ground handling accidents. This is rarely seen and depends on the current service status. Minor dents in the field are ignored for more pressing matters to attend to, but repaired otherwise.

My Revell Corsair build, late 1980s. A bit excessive in places but it is what it is.

Edited August 26, 2022 by Archer Fine Transfers

[JayW]

3 hours ago, Archer Fine Transfers said:

My Revell Corsair build, late 1980s. A bit excessive in places but it is what it is.

 

Dude!  Was the hair spray method around back then?  Look at that checkerboard! 

 

[Woody V]

21 hours ago, JayW said:

 

Dude!  Was the hair spray method around back then?  Look at that checkerboard! 

 

 

No, no hairspray. I used Testors buffing Metalizer and Aero Master enamels. TM had a bad reputation because nothing stuck to it but I used that to my advantage and just carefully scraped the dry paint off with a knife. I was having so much that got a little carried away though.

Edited August 27, 2022 by Archer Fine Transfers

[Troy Smith]

On 8/5/2022 at 10:55 PM, ivanmoe said:

Yes, those are F4U-4 pics, but the paint is the same as that found on a -1D in late WW2.

This thread got linked from another on Gloss Sea Blue,  Some points that maybe of use,

WW2 ANA 627  Gloss Sea Blue is not the same color as the Korean War War Gloss Sea Blue.  The only wartime image is the top pic you post of '2', which  is from 1946, in the Mediterranean,   which is WW2 ANA 623. And why it got replaced,  the 1946 date is important as the USN was being run down at this point post war, likely why they are so faded and tatty.     The other are are post 1947, when the paint was changed.

 

this is from @Dana Bell  

"There are a couple of other reasons the model paint manufacturers have had problems matching the Sea Blues.  Most are working from the FS595 chips, which never accurately matched all three versions of the wartime colors.  The other problem is that the formula for ANA 623 Glossy Sea Blue changed in 1947/48.  The original color faded to quickly and was replaced with more resilient pigments.  When the US Navy gave modelers the old stocks of ANA paint chips in the 1960s/70s, some of us got the 1944 card-stock chip of ANA 623, while others got the 1948 metal replacement chips.  I can well remember the arguments back then, arguments that arose because we were working from different standards!"

 

AFAIK, the post 1947 then got incorporated into the FS595 when that was introduced, as FS15042.  

 

 

On 8/8/2022 at 10:58 PM, TAG said:

Here's a glorious period color photo that really showcases the green undertones of GSB

ANA 623 really is not green.  the chips in the The Official Monogram US Navy & Marine Corps Aircraft Color Guide Vol 2 1940-1949 by John M Elliot Maj. USMC (Ret).  book show what was described by the owner of Colourcoats as "a deep smoky blue" it may well lose the purpleness when faded,  

 

FS15042 is a really deep green blue.  That is the post war GSB.  

 

On 8/11/2022 at 11:01 AM, Woody V said:

The "Sea Blue" used here is the same color - note that the only difference in the FS number is the first digit, 2 indicating semi-gloss and 3 indicating non-specular. However the non-specular version in this photo is much lighter than the official color.
Semi-Gloss Sea Blue, ANA 606, FS 25042

Non-Specular Sea Blue, ANA 607, FS 35042

No.   FS1/2/3 5042 are NOT the same as ANA 606/607/623. 

From @Dana Bell

"There are a couple of other reasons the model paint manufacturers have had problems matching the Sea Blues.  Most are working from the FS595 chips, which never accurately matched all three versions of the wartime colors."

FS595 came in the 1950's, and does not replicate wartime ANA colors in most cases.

On 8/11/2022 at 11:01 AM, Woody V said:

This photograph, which appears to be of a factory fresh aircraft, presents a compelling argument that the "Sea Blue" is indeed two different colors.

 

They are different colors.

On 8/11/2022 at 11:01 AM, Woody V said:

However this stands in contrast to the actual colors per "official" designation.

Confusion from the point FS595 is not the same as ANA colors, despite the very common assertion they are the same.

from @Dana Bell

"The scheme is actually four colors - white, Intermediate Blue, Semi-gloss Sea Blue (atop the wings and horizontal tail), and Non-Specular Sea Blue (atop the fuselage and on leading edges of the wings and stabs). The last two colors differ in more than the gloss factor - non-spec is distinctly grayer and lighter than the semi-gloss. "   Which is clearly shown in the photo, which is superb. 

 

from here

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235014486-usn-hellcat-colours-an-unexpected-query/#elControls_2589271_menu

 

see also

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235049797-us-navy-sea-blues/

 

 

On 8/9/2022 at 3:57 PM, TAG said:

The T.O. also designates Insignia white for the national insignia, so clearly it was just plain old matte white being used on the undersides, you were right all along. I guess the white wouldn't stay pristine for long and quickly faded to an off-white, hence today's new "paradigm"?

White's vary depending on the pigments used. 

Titanium dioxide, gives a  cool  'blue white'  for example, and is commonly used in model paints. 

Wartime Insignia White is warm white,  there is a chip for it in the Elliot book, it's a very slightly cream color, it's not the same as the white behind it on the page.   

 

Hope of interest and clarifies some of the point above,  I'm just passing on what I have learned from Dana.     I don't know of a source of chips for the ANA paints mentioned above, of the above color apart from the Elliot book.    I have both the Elliott book and a FS595 fan deck, and ANA 606/607/623 are not the same a FS 1/2/3 4052.  somewhere I saw a post where Dana had compared the Elliot book with ANA samples he had and the matches were good.

 

Not find that, this may be interest

https://www.sovereignhobbies.co.uk/blogs/sovereign-about-us-research-and-development/references-how-to-tell-the-good-from-the-bad

 

"So, what's the problem?

The widespread ownership of FS595 in particular has resulted in many enthusiastic people to compare artifacts which predate the 1956-onwards FS595 with a collection of colour chips which other people own. There's nothing wrong with this, but the qualifications often get lost as the references are repeated. Furthermore, compared to the NCS1950 colour system above, FS595 has 950 chips in total, a full 1,000 fewer than NCS1950. Worse, FS595 is split into three sections; FS1xxxx caters for gloss finish chips, FS2xxxx caters for satin finish whilst FS3xxxx caters for matt finish chips. Of the modest 950 chips in total in it, many colours are duplicated or triplicated even across the different finishes. This results in an extremely limited number of discreet colours to compare things to, such that the closest match in FS595 may not actually be very close at all! Somewhat amusing anomalies arise when the same FS reference is given for  distinct American WWII paints. Here's an example:

 

From Maj John M Elliott's The Official Monogram US Navy & Marine Corps Aircraft Color Guide Vol 2 1940-1949; FS25042 is often cited as a match for ANA606 Semi-Gloss Sea Blue, which it isn't, and FS35042 is often cited as a match for ANA607 Non-Specular Sea Blue. Similarly, FS15042 is often cited as a match for ANA623 Glossy Sea Blue which, for WWII, it isn't, and the reason for that is that ANA623 changed shade slightly in 1947 when its formulation was revised to address premature fading. When FS595 was collated in the 1950s, it was the newest version of ANA623 which was incorporated as FS15042.

Tip Number 1: If a source quotes FS595 references for anything pre-1956 and wasn't made in the United States of America, look for either a qualification as to how the colour compares to the FS595 reference, or a statement that FS matched paint was indeed specified on the original. FS595 references for the Royal Air Force during WWII should set your alarm bells ringing! "