|
Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
I always knew there were three upper camouflage colours used on standard painted early German warplanes: RLM 61/62/63 (over RLM 65). However, on this official postcard I see four shades. What could be the explanation?
|
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
The darkest colour tone can be found around the tail fin. It seems the red fin band was oversprayed with this colour (RLM 70 or 71?), leaving free the swastika together with a white trim. Maybe other areas received this overspray, too.
Regards RolandF |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Or the RLM61/62/63 paints used to overspray the red band etc on the tail are fresher and less faded than the original RLM61/62/63 factory applied paints. :)
|
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
This is how I see the four different shades:
|
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Front (3) is part created darker by exhaust stain.
Only only around codes is lighter paint (quite common) and may not be different colour, just lighter shade, created by hand painted (vs factory spray paint). But agree to to total of four on topsides. |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Quote:
|
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Here is the official camo scheme scanned from Ullmann (Hikoki, 2002):
|
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Could the fuselage band and the rudder colours not just be bright (yellow?) markings added for identification?
Separately, although I think much of the darker colour on the lower fuselage aft of the exhausts is due to the exhaust stain, nonetheless there is a clear demarcation below the canopy framing. |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Quote:
Who´s right or who´s wrong is not my judging. See below. http://aircraftnut.blogspot.com/2014...n-service.html -Ed |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Clearly there was a B scheme, which was common on the earlier pre-war splinter pattern and if what we are looking at in the Ullmann illustration is the A scheme, the RLM colour segments in the photo do not match the Ullmann illustration to a certain extent... The different components appear to be a mixture of the A and B scheme as the undercarriage fairings adhere to the A scheme? seen in the Ullmann illustration yet the main fuselage pattern is an alternative arrangement of the colours seen on the Ullmann splinter pattern...
Would it be reasonable to assume that the individual components where supplied pre-painted and assembled into the finished article? |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
What is the source of the splinter pattern on the Ullmann illustration? I do not currently have the Ju87A handbuch available.
Is it derived from the Junkers handbuchs for the type or is it Ullmann's interpretation from available photos of the Ju87A? From memory I can't remember if the splinter patterns were included in Junkers handbuchs or if like Messerschmitt types the splinter patterns were marked out on the actual engineering blueprints and not the handbuchs? |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Source is given as "Pattern A - factory camouflage drawings".
|
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Ok, so assuming that what we are looking at is pre-painted components. Which if the Ullmann illustration is correct can be a reasonable assumption given the tonal differences of the individual components seen on the aircraft in the photo and how they then translate differently to the apparent official Ullmann RLM splinter pattern...
The areas which to my eye are really causing issues, are in fairness areas that have been meddled with at unit level. In which case the rule books and guidelines go out of the window so to speak. For example the tail area where the red band and older swastika style has been adapted into the newer style and as Ed has pointed out the overpainting of the factory codes which believe it or not and rarely visible on black and white war time photography occurred to varying degrees of application on 100% of LW aircraft photographed in service with a frontline unit. Linked is a diagram I have created showing what I believe can be seen in the photo posted by Dénes: here The tonal differences between the individual RLM61/62/63/65 splinter colours in my opinion can be explained by the extreme exhaust staining and the differing paint batches of the same colour seen on different components. The differing colour tones between the same individual RLM colours clearly adhere to the panel lines of the different components... For example the forward cowling components, which if we follow the Ullmann illustration should be the same paint colour as seen on the fuselage directly below the canopy. The blue segment in my diagram is clearly an after factory, unit applied addition intended to cover the factory code (pre-war green) and the red segment is another addition at unit level that doesn't appear to follow the official Ullmann Ju87A pre-war splinter pattern, but maybe intended to allow the more important areas of the black unit code to stand out against the darker colour tones of the original factory pattern. In my opinion the red segment is a slightly lighter (in application) overspray of the pre-war grey colour that is allowing much of the underlying darker colour tones to show through thus making it appear darker to the same grey colour seen on the rudder and other sections of the aircraft. Personally I believe what we are looking at is simply and as expected the normal pre-war RLM61/62/63/65 B (or A?...) splinter pattern for the Ju87A, but with the usual unit level meddling that was necessary to adapt how the aircraft was coded when it left the factory to what was required code wise at unit level... :) |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Thanks Paul. :)
|
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Forget Ullmann's one diagram. I just went through my Anton pictures and painting was all over the place, probably 3 to 6 variations. And that is not to mention a good deal of repainting. For whatever reason, the 61/62/63 pattern was maintained, with perhaps later greens being used. Then again, some got repaint in what appears to be 71/65.
That is also a PR photo, which might explain what a freshly touched up aircraft was used. http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e4...pssvvfcsib.jpg http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e4...psusbedmkm.jpg http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e4...psqayngs1i.jpg http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e4...psuxzspqad.jpg http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e4...psicheg0at.jpg http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e4...psrsd0ydqc.jpg |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Thanks Modeldad. Putting aside the later usage of the Ju87A in the period where the RLM70/71 paints would have been available and utilised to repaint the aircraft in the new scheme. Speaking strictly from a pre-war RLM61/62/63/65 perspective which is what we are looking at in the photo posted by Dénes would it be possible to see the photos that show the apparent use of up to 6 schemes that you mention?
Are you including the 70/71 scheme and partial adaptation into the 70/71 scheme in that total? Because to my eyes at least the last 3 photos in your post show a full repaint to the 70/71 pattern/scheme? I'm interested because in the recently published literature on the Hs123 they rather erroneously claim to have mapped out up to six possible variations of the Hs123 RLM61/62/63/65 splinter pattern when after quite a detailed investigation into the Hs123 splinter pattern it was clear that only two were utilised, an A and B pattern. :) |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
After checking what RLM61/62/63/65 camouflaged Ju87A photos I have available to me, to be fair to Ullmann I'm not seeing a lot wrong with his diagram interpretation of what the pre-war pattern looked like. I think it is based on photographic evidence however and not an official period pattern diagram, but it stands up to what I am seeing in the photos quite well. Obviously the angles and shapes move slightly from one aircraft to the next which is to be expected, but they do loosely adhere to the same pattern as Ullmann's diagram.
Do you have a photo of the starboard side of an RLM61/62/63/65 camouflaged Ju87A that you can share with us that does not adhere to this pattern...? :) |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Do these variations include permutations of the three colors?
Back to "our" Ju 87A: if the lighter color on the nose (marked '1') only appears to be light (it could be RLM 62), and then the darker areas behind it (marked '2' and '3') reaching until a bit aft of the octane triangle are the same color (RLM 61), and the slightly lighter segment that comes next is RLM 62 again, then the only area where we can be sure there are 4 colors is around the codes. Then it's a Ju 87A with a standard camo pattern - but slightly repainted with a fourth color added under the '24'. The strange thing is that this fourth color (marked '1') looks like the normal RLM 63. Then why is the lightest color (marked '4') so pale? Is it a pale grey? It can't be so badly faded as the aircraft is in a good condition. Here another question emerges: Was the 3-color pre-war camo always only RLM 61/62/63 or did they use further colors? |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Well I did contemplate whether RLM02 could have been the mystery triangle colour applied under the "24" which wouldn't be outside the realms of possibility.
Concerning your last question: At the factory the pre-war 4 colour splinter undoubtably only consisted of RLM61/62/63/65. These were official diagrams and the precise colours were stipulated on them. As much scientific as colourful, these specific paint colours and splinter patterns would have been devised by experts in camouflage and colour theory based on the colours that would have been commonly encountered in the theatre where those specific aircraft would be operating. I think that any deviation from the official RLM approved patterns or colours that were specified to be used in those specific patterns would have been prohibited. I have seen zero evidence to suggest otherwise. Same with the later RLM70/71/65 splinter pattern. When they leave the factory however, that is when certain areas tend to get meddled with and we start to see anomalies to what we would expect, but you know the factories were charged with supplying exactly what the RLM wanted and for the factories to use non standard colours with certain splinter patterns it would not have been accepted in my views as long as there was adequate stocks of the paints available. This issue however during pre-war periods and early WW2 would not have been a factor. I'm not so sure how available paint stocks would have affected the camouflage schemes devised during late war times as that's not really my area... :) |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Modeldad's comment about six variations encouraged me to turn to Ken Merrick's Luftwaffe Colours - the original volume 1 of the Kookaburra series. In there is an illustration of the standard pattern that was applied to all Luftwaffe aircraft painted in 61/62/63. This existed in two mirror images, each of which had three different arrangements of the colours. Hence six variations. A drawing of the aircraft was scaled so that the span was as wide as the diagram, then the tailplane was placed at the bottom of the diagram. The differences in shapes of the aircraft gave the visible differences in the pattern. Only the plan view was used, with the manufacturers wrapping round the provided patterns onto the fuselage sides. This has to be open to some room for differing interpretations.
|
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Graham, I don't have that book. What is the source of the diagram illustration? Is it official period documentation. Is it Ken Merrick's own interpretation based on the photography he had available to him when that book was published?
|
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Ok, I've found reference to this idea in Merrick's Luftwaffe Camouflage and Markings Vol 1, published by Classic, regarding the Hs123 3 colour pattern:
"In both instances this was the 3 colour upper surface camouflage and the additional designation A or B simply identified standard or mirror pattern. The colour order of each pattern also had two forms, providing four variations overall, thought the latter variation was rarely seen, probably for ease of manufacture once industry commenced a war footing." I have found no evidence to support this statement when investigating the pre-war camouflage pattern used on the Hs123. I have the official splinter pattern diagrams which are also simply labelled A and B. I have only ever found evidence of two distinct RLM61/62/63/65 variants of the pattern, an A and B scheme. The colours simply changed order, the pattern did not mirror so that rather puts into doubt the claim there was a blanket rule that all pre-war camouflaged aircraft had six possible variations of splinter application. I have not found the diagram you mention being published in the 1981 Kookaburra publication in Merrick's latest version of his volumes. I would think that would be an important document to show unless he had perhaps changed his opinion on the application of the pre-war schemes in the years between publication of his earlier and later works? |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Graham, is it possible to post a scan of the diagram you mention?
|
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
I suspect a redrawing of original documentation for the book. Judging from the detail of the patterns presented, it is at least based on original period documentation if not a straight copy: there is much more than could be expected from analysis of photographs. It shows four of the schemes: A, A2a, B and B1a for the Ju86E. Patterns A2a and B2a are presented, in very similar format, for the Do17 in Ullmann and also in Merrick (Classic Vol.2) but here there is no mirror effect: possibly an error in the original documentation that neither author spotted? Pattern A2a is the same in both books but pattern B2a in the later books is just the pattern A in the oldest. Although clearly the same pattern, the one in the Dornier views has been trimmed to exclude the outer parts.
It occurs to me that other possible combinations of the colours were possible, the exchange of the colours not being a simple rotation. No reason is given for the restriction to three possibilities. The three books do include a number of photos of the Ju87A, but (in my opinion) these don't significantly help to answer Denes' question. I would say that, although some of the colour differences could reflect the effect of weathering on RLM63 (i.e. the front of the spat compared to the nose), the very bright appearance of the rudder and fuselage band does not. Edit: for the Hs123, Merrick states that the aircraft plan view was not central but was offset one square - he doesn't say which but it is to the left from a photo and a piece of artwork. The artwork is plan A2a with the green and grey exchanged (not listed as a standard) the photo A2a (On my interpretation, assuming the brown is the darkest colour.) Neither of these agree with Scheme B as presented in Uhlmann, which would be A1a according to Merrick, but they all have the same pattern without any mirror. This may suggest that the pattern system was indeed simplified to remove the mirror examples, but it seems that the Do17 and Hs123 do not agree on just which alternatives were chosen. My brain hurts - I hope I haven't misidentified any! I have not (yet) attempted to study Do17 schemes based on these patterns -perhaps for another thread. |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
I found the diagrams you mentioned in Merrick's earlier 1977 book published by Skybooks Press. To be honest looking at the diagram I'm currently not convinced that they are derived straight from an official period document. This diagram could have easily been derived from studying the Do17 and or Hs123 official pattern diagrams and created by Merrick to show his ideas of how the paint colours were rotated. They do show the pre-war splinter pattern which as pointed out was the same for all aircraft in plan view except the obvious differences in segment placement across different types because of their shape/size.
I think it's clear that the pattern was not mirrored, but I am as yet unconvinced that there were more than two different variants of colour combinations. I'm going to look into the other types to confirm. I am however 100% convinced that this was the case for the Hs123. I have studied hundreds of photos of the type mapping the splinter pattern out and it is a fact that there was just an A and B scheme as far as I am concerned. I'm pretty sure about the Ju87A too, but I currently do not have enough photos to make a detailed study, but I'm working on that. What you have to take into consideration is the difficulties that would arise if you had aircraft and components painted in six or even four different splinter pattern colour combinations. The units/depots/factories would have had a real hard time stocking components in 4/6 different colour combinations to match the aircraft that they would eventually be fitted on. There is a photo of a Do17M/P in flight with the main wings, tail wings and cowlings left in bare metal, but with the fuselage, control surfaces and tail fins finished in the pre-war splinter, which I think confirms that at least during that period the main components were supplied pre-painted and later assembled into the finished article. After a while you would have had a visible mis match of pre-war camouflaged aircraft with many different combinations of the 4/6 different colour combinations on different replacement components. This is not something that we see in the photographic evidence that survives. It would be much easier to handle this situation with only two combinations, an A and B scheme. This is what we are seeing also on the official diagrams. No mention of 4/6 schemes always A or B... Where are the diagrams that explain the other C, D, E or F schemes? They are no where to be found and if anyone has any hidden away I would love to be proved wrong... I do think however that in Dénes' Stuka photo that we have an example that has been finished in the A scheme, but has a replacement starboard undercarriage fairing painted in the B scheme. Anyway, always interesting these camouflage discussions. Still so much to discover even if some are of the opinion that these camouflage conundrums were done and dusted 50 years ago... :) |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
That Merrick's basic pattern extends beyond the limits of the Do17 and Hs123 patterns, unnecessarily so for his purpose, rules out any simple derivation. I agree about the likely problems with multiple schemes, but note that the published diagram for the Do17 refers to Sichtschutzordnung 2a, which would appear to relate to Merrick's terminology of A2a and B2a. To suggest that he simply invented mirror images and altered colours appears unjustified: an invented (or even just extrapolated) scheme would have had a more obvious colour rotation and be slightly more consistent in the terminology. Perhaps we should look at photos of the Ju86 as this is the type shown by Merrick? And indeed extend this to other types with this scheme - Ju52s and He111s? You speak of official diagrams - I've only seen a reference to these for the slightly later Do17 and Hs123, do you have more?
I postulate that the initial idea of six (or more) options was superseded - probably for the reasons you suggest, and even possibly before adoption - by just two options, before being replaced by the much rarer form with fewer segments (He111P, Romanian He111H-3, Portugese Ju52). There does appear to be more to be said about this earlier camouflage than has been presented in organised form to date. |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Graham, my only concern for these larger diagrams is the fact that we have not seen them reproduced in their original form. We have only seen them redrawn with the source stated as being "Factory Drawings". What factory drawings are we talking about here? I wasn't aware that any Ju86 blueprints had survived and not having access to the Ju86 handbuchs I do not know if they are sourced from those either. Luftarchiv Hafner usually have a small thumbnail of the camouflage diagrams displayed on their site if they are featured in that specific handbuch, but I cannot see any camouflage diagram thumbnails included for the handbuchs that are available for the Ju86. I just find it strange why all of the other camouflage diagrams in the Merrick volumes appear as original scans and not contemporary reproductions and this particular Ju86 one does. Why did he not simply include examples in their original form instead of recreating them? Unless it was to illustrate his own personal ideas/interpretations?
I notice Ullmann mentions the same regarding the mirror and four combinations when captioning his contemporary rendition of the Ju86 camouflage diagram in his book. Again sighting as being sourced from "Factory drawings" was Ullmann simply relying on Merrick's previous observations/interpretations of the Ju86 schemes? It would have been nice to have been supplied with a proper source instead of just "Factory drawings" so that one could check. Merrick does make other assumptions without the help of any surviving factory documentation. I just wonder if this instance with the Ju86 patterns is the same? Currently there is no way of knowing unless the originals diagrams can be sourced or Ken Merrick can comment? The problem with the Ju86 is finding enough photographic evidence to be able to make a thorough analysis. Too many assumptions regarding LW camouflage have been transformed into fact in the past while being based on very little photographic evidence. I try to be realistic and unless enough survives to claim reasonable accuracy in any statements, I think it's better to be open minded. With the Hs123 I had enough to complete an analysis that really left no question as to what I was seeing. In fact I didn't find a single photo that caused me to not believe that there were only two schemes in use. Every anomaly could be easily explained if you took factory code and other markings overpaints, exhaust staining and weathering/dirt into consideration. Much the same with Dénes' Stuka photo that started this discussion. There's nothing special about it, no break from the norm. Just a standard Ju87 pre-war splinter with code overpaints, dirt and exhaust staining tripping people up... My analysis of the Hs123 camouflage spurred me on to question what I had been led to believe in the previously published sources as my findings did not mirror what I had been led to believe and my aim is to get these as accurate as possible... I'll have a look at what original period camouflage diagrams I have for this scheme. I know that I definitely have the Hs123 and Do17 ones at the moment. Some company handbuchs had them, some didn't... My real goal at the moment is finding the original source of the Merrick Ju86 diagrams. It could be that initially it was planned to mirror the scheme and use other combinations of the colours, but then decided that it was not a good decision for the reasons I have already stated and therefore why we do not see it in the surviving photographic evidence. I have original period diagrams showing the RLM70/71 splinter camouflage pattern mapped/planned on the Bf109F which as you know came to completion long after that scheme had been abandoned on fighters. It shows that just because you have a document you do not necessarily have proof that what it depicts was ever used and assuming that it was can be dangerous without backing it up visually from a large enough pool of photos. Regarding the export schemes, personally I think these are a totally different ball game and have no relation to what we are discussing here which is the standard pre-war RLM61/62/63/65 scheme in use with the Luftwaffe. They were in effect export schemes for use with other air forces and it's futile lumping them together with the scheme currently under discussion. I'm pretty sure there is no evidence that the LW/RLM had any input into how these particular export aircraft were finished and the schemes may have been simply devised by the factories whilst working alongside the purchasing nation, but using paints that were in stock at those factories at the time? The LW/RLM might not have wanted the export aircraft sporting the LW splinter pattern during that period so were supplied finished in different camouflage schemes? |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Are you perhaps referring to same (?) splinter diagram marked "scheme A2c"
in Ju 86 "booklet" (Militaria 142) p. 57 -Ed |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Not sure, I do not have that "booklet". The diagram consists of four basic Ju86 plan views with the splinter pattern laid over the top with a key describing the scheme number/code.
|
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Found one Merrick book "Luftwaffe Camouflage and Markings 1933-1945" vol.1
(Classic Colours) with splinter diagrams on Do 17, Hs 123, etc. and Ju 87 later pattern 70/71 but no Ju 86´s or old Ju 87 patterns in here so far... |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
I have found this to be the case too. It seems that the diagram was only included in Merrick's very earliest and numerous, respectable works on LW camouflage and markings which is strange as it is quite an important document considering it is the only one that mentions these six schemes and mirroring. As already stated this also leads me to believe that there's a possibility that his views on the relevance of the diagram changed over the years between his first excursions into camouflage research and his later more refined opinions on the subject?
|
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
You say that export schemes are irrelevant: but the "third scheme" is seen on He111P in Luftwaffe service, despite this variant not being exported.
You may be right about the scheme not seeing service, and it would be good to actually see one of these variants, but just casting doubts on sources doesn't answer the points suggesting otherwise. Far from Merrick abandoning an early idea, he continued to describe it in his final work on the subject. From his work for Classic Vol 1 page 45 partway down the second column. "...by using a mirror reversal option, plus rotation of two of the uppersurface colours..." Unless more evidence appears, we are just talking in circles. In the end, if the mirroring etc is ok for Uhlmann to accept then it's ok for me. |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
That's fine Graham, but I prefer using primary sources to come to my own conclusions instead of relying on other researchers interpretations of what we are seeing in black and white photos. We all have eyes don't we? This ethic has born fruit that would have otherwise led me to make the wrong decisions in the past had I blindly put my trust in what had been previously published on the subject.
I have a valid reason to cast doubts as I have rigorously researched the scheme on the Hs123 and found that there are serious doubts concerning the case for multiple colour combinations of the same scheme. I have also discussed the subject in detail with a respected researcher currently working on the a forthcoming volume for the type and he was of the same opinion. So what do we do? Ignore our own observations just because other researchers have come to a different conclusion? That's not research in my book. You mention a third scheme on the He111, what photo are you referring to? Regardless, you have one photo that you can offer and you feel that you can claim that there was an entirely different official splinter scheme in use with the LW? Do you know the full background story of the He111 seen in the photo? It's assumptions like that that have led to many erroneous conclusions in the past regarding camouflage. Look, we are all free to make our own conclusions based on what we have personally researched whether that be from old books or perhaps taking it further into other sources of investigation. I'm open to other views and research backed up with evidence. You can accept my findings into the subject or not. Having your consent as to whether my opinions are valid is not something that particularly interests or drives me to continue what I do. :) |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
[quote=Modeldad;203479]
http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e4...pssvvfcsib.jpg http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e4...psusbedmkm.jpg These two photos posted by Modeldad (thanks!) show exactly what I meant in my original post: in "my" photo I see four distinctive shades on the top areas (just like on the same aircraft depicted in the top photo here), while the standard RLM 61/62/63 should show only three shades (exactly like the bottom photo here). Personally, I am not interested in the variants and delimitations of the so-called 'splinter scheme', but rather in the early camouflage colours. Thanks for all the good posts so far... |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Dénes, unless you point out where you can see 4 colours on the upper surfaces of the Ju87s in those photos we are not really going to know what's what because I can only see three... :)
|
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
OK, Clint (and other interested forumites), I give it another shot (attached).
I believe that #1=grey, #2=brown, #3=green, #4=unknown (possibly sand yellow/brown, not found on early RLM paint charts). I avoided on purpose to mark the overpainted area around the fuselage code. What's your opinion? |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Thanks Dénes,
I refer again to my explanatory diagram posted previously in this topic here, as my views have not changed. What you have to take into consideration is that the multitude of differences in curvature and angles of certain areas of the aircraft's fuselage/cowling etc is going to give quite different tonal values compared to other areas on the aircraft that are painted in the same colour because of how the reflected light affects what our eyes and the camera sees. Dependent on the light source in each photo we could have a whole range of tonal values that are realistically all the same colour. The area on the nose that you suggest is colour 1 is mostly affected by the reflection of the light source (sun). Because that particular area of the cowling is curving/facing directly into the sunlight it is reflecting the most light back at our eyes or the camera in this case. Take a look at the same area, but closer to the top of the cowling where it curves away from the direct sunlight. Notice that it gradually starts to get darker and thus closer in tone to the section that you mark as colour number 3... These two splinter segments are the same colour (RLM62 green). It's just the bright reflections from the sun light is affecting how the colour is perceived. :) 1 = RLM62 (Green) 2 = RLM61 (Brown) 3 = RLM62 (Green) too 4 = RLM63 (Grey) :) |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
Clint, to my eyes, the shade marked with #1 (light grey) is exactly the same seen on Modeldad's bottom photo, precisely at the same location. I have no doubts about it.
It is followed (from front to rear) by #3 (dark green), then #2 (dark brown), and so on. The only question I have is the shade of #4. |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot... you get the picture... Adios amigos. :)
4 is RLM63, clearly... :) |
Re: Camouflage colours on a Ju 87A
The question is, why does the RLM 63 look so pale? And what color is the area under the '24' (which looks much more like the normal 63). Fading is not an adeqate explanation because worn and weathered RLM 63 looks patchy rather than faded (I've looked at hundreds of photos from the Spanish Civil War last night and couldn't find a single example of badly faded RLM 63).
BTW, there are six combinations of three colors without any mirroring: 61/62/63, 62/63/61, 63/61/62, 61/63/62, 63/62/61, 62/61/63 |
| All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:33. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, 12oclockhigh.net