[PeterA]

Originally Posted by RolandF

Maybe I don´t get it right but there´s one mistake in evidence imho.

From profession I know a bit about colour layers on medieval facades, medieval ceilings, staircases etc. Same goes with archeological layers and strata. So the most upper layer is the youngest, the most lower the oldest, alright?

Exposed to weathering the most recent layers disappear first, finally leaving only "shadows" or chemical reaction zones, as I´ve understood. The younger layers protect the older layers by creating protective covers, okay?

The number which is preserved least of all is "8", and imho nothing contradicts the assumption this must be the most recent colour application. On the starboard side there is even a small portion of the upper part of "black 6" protected by the upper circle of "8" imo.

Looking at the starboard photograph, within the two circles of the "8" remnants of red colour on white primary coat appear close to the overlapping duraluminum panels. Obviously enough overlapping to protect thosesmall traces of paint.

Now I ask myself - shouldn´t be a "Red 8" the final tactical number? And how is this connected with the red disc?

Nobody has made statements about the fuselage Balkenkreuz. It seems to me that a narrow pre-war cross si superseded by the standard later cross. Maybe even with attempts to reduce the white portions of the Balkenkreuz. And what are those grey areas beside the numbers? Afaik the Balkenkreuz on the Bf 109 moved further aft during the last prewar months.

Regards

Roland

Roland,

You may well be correct.

All I can say is that if the 8, of whatever colour, was on top there is no evidence that I can see, at high resolution, the shows that it in any way protected the lower 5 & 6.

You experts will tell me what that little triangle is for. It seems to have a proportional relationship with the 8 but not with the 5 & 6.

Here is a close up of the triangle. I see triangle paint on the base coat but none on the black of the horizontal on the 5. I believe I see a faint witness mark of the of the base of the triangle on the black which I think is the sharp break line caused by the masking tape that produced the triangle.

In my judgement the triangle is below the 5.

Interesting stuff.

PeterA