Colours used on JG54 109F aircraft at start of Barbarossa

[Don Pearson]

The examples you are citing are from different times in the war, if those are straightened out it may help you to your answer.

The greens you refer to on the Fw190s of JG 54 (as well as greens and browns of their earlier Bf109s) have been attributed to captured stocks of Soviet paints. The Bf109 Fs that you are interested in were painted before the invasion of Russia, so likely would exclude these particular colors.

The Bf109Es from the above attached photos were shown at a time when the E model displayed both the 1940-style schemes as well as the newly repainted 74/75 scheme. If the base camo of aircraft were being repainted in 74/75, why would it not seem logical for those colors to also be applied to the fuselage sides?

Don

[Franek Grabowski]

This discussion is on the best way to become ridiculous.
I am intrigued, how a one may identify colours based on so poor slides. Quick play in a photo editing software proves, that any colour combination may be achieved by various settings.
There are some points to be considered, however.
It is suggested by presence of traces of ID markings that the paint is at least of September 1940 vintage. If so, it should be a little bit faded after more than a half of year's service. This is further suggested by presence of stencils on flap and wing, which usually were not reapplied after overpaintings.
If teh paint was applied somewhere in June-August 1940, then factory scheme was 71/02/65. Paint on the fuselage seems lighter than the one on top but it must be noted that the coat was much thicker, therefore 70/71 remains a strong possibility.
Call it educated guess or whatever, but remember that army is generally dull, goes according to orders and dislikes individualism.

[Kjetil Aakra]

Franek, I think your characterisation of this disucssion is a bit rash and exaggerated. Luftwaffe colours have always attracted a lot of people and will continue to do so and while our conclusions can rarely be considered absolutes I do think that there is enough data to consider it a science of sorts.

Regarding this specific qustion we may never know the exact colours and hues used unless someone turns up a really good colour photo. Having said that, we can still infer a lot based on black and white photos, documents and 30 years and more of research into the topic (which has really made immense progress the last 5 years). For instance, we know that by the time of Barbarossa and the manufacture of most these F-2s (January - August 1942), the "grey scheme" (RLM 74/75/76) was being standarised so it is reasonably safe to assume that they carried this as the base colour. What the additional "streaks and blobs" were is of course open to speculation, but it can be narrowed down to a fairly limited range of colours (in my view) and we can arrive at a very likely combination by using common sense and the aforementioned research. Personally I think the streaks were a dark green while the blobs were RLM 02. On a model the exact hues don't really matter that much as there were always variation caused by so many factors that no one can actually say categorically you're wrong.

So to sum up: speculation and guessimates...certainly, but not to the level where it is rediculous as long as you pay attention to research, official documents and know a little about field conditions, the prevailing supply situation and stuff like that. So please, continue this discussion!

Lastly, Franek, your statement

"remember that army is generally dull, goes according to orders and dislikes individualism"

is certainly true, but does not at all apply to Luftwaffe as far as colours, camouflage schemes and application of these are concerned!

Regards,

Kjetil

[Franek Grabowski]

Kjetil

Originally Posted by Kjetil Aakra

Franek, I think your characterisation of this disucssion is a bit rash and exaggerated. Luftwaffe colours have always attracted a lot of people and will continue to do so and while our conclusions can rarely be considered absolutes I do think that there is enough data to consider it a science of sorts.

I cannot consider it a science when in most cases no science methods are applied.

"remember that army is generally dull, goes according to orders and dislikes individualism"
is certainly true, but does not at all apply to Luftwaffe as far as colours, camouflage schemes and application of these are concerned!

It does apply to Luftwaffe camouflage! Most colourful paint schemes are actually an effect of misinterpretation of photos, lack of knowledge and wishful thinking. As yet nobody considered different shades of Olive Drab a different camouflage scheme, so I see no reason we should treat German colours in a different way.
Cheers

[Kjetil Aakra]

"I cannot consider it a science when in most cases no science methods are applied."

Certainly true when modellers speculates and questions specific schemes of their chosen subjects. But those who study the subject seriously (like Ullmann, Merrick, Wadman to name a few) certainly applies scientific methodology.

"Most colourful paint schemes are actually an effect of misinterpretation of photos, lack of knowledge and wishful thinking."

I wouldn't say most, but admittedly there have been many imaginative schemes proposed over the years. However, because of the scientific method now being applied the majority of these have now been dismissed. Sadly, they often live on in the minds of many modellers and enthusiasts through older books and magazines. Examples include "Graff's all-yellow Fw 190", Fw 190s with red cowls, etc.

German colours are one thing, the ones used for upper surface ccamouflage were in my view rather few, although tonal variation no doubt varied a lot. They usually consisted of the regular greys (74 & 75) and a few others (79, 80, various greens and a few browns, both mixed and official).

It is when we consider the application of these colours that the true imagination and creativity of the Luftwaffe painters becomes obvious. Even you Franek, must admit that the variation in application style is way beyond that prescribed or intended by the RLM!!!?

And Luftwaffe certainly had nose art and fuselage art almost as gaudy as that of the Americans. Just consider the Ju 52 with the fuselage snake marking (Luftwaffe im Focus # 4, p. 24-25) or the Stuka with its snake (Luftwaffe im Focus # 7, p. 24-27)! They are not imagined.

One thing that fascinates me, is how you in many cases can actually recognize the unit to which a Luftwaffe aircraft (mainly fighters) belongs from its camouflage style alone, even when no unit insignia are visible! Try to do that with an RAF Spitfire (and please, this is not a bait to get a "Luftwaffe is so much better" discussion going, just a factual observation)!!

As an example of such unit specific camouflage, consider this heavily repainted Bf 109F-4/trop from the 10xxx block delivered to the Luftwaffe (specifically 6./JG 5) some time in 1942:



Kjetil

[Franek Grabowski]

Kjetil

Certainly true when modellers speculates and questions specific schemes of their chosen subjects. But those who study the subject seriously (like Ullmann, Merrick, Wadman to name a few) certainly applies scientific methodology.

There are always some exceptions.

I wouldn't say most, but admittedly there have been many imaginative schemes proposed over the years. However, because of the scientific method now being applied the majority of these have now been dismissed. Sadly, they often live on in the minds of many modellers and enthusiasts through older books and magazines. Examples include "Graff's all-yellow Fw 190", Fw 190s with red cowls, etc.

I have combat reports mentioning both yellow Fw 190s and red nosed Fw 190 and I do not think anybody did any scientific research on them. That is the point. People laugh of Clostermann but believe anything else.

It is when we consider the application of these colours that the true imagination and creativity of the Luftwaffe painters becomes obvious. Even you Franek, must admit that the variation in application style is way beyond that prescribed or intended by the RLM!!!?

Well, could you tell us what RLM intended? Oh, I have just went through JG26 album and I saw no 'creativity'.

And Luftwaffe certainly had nose art and fuselage art almost as gaudy as that of the Americans. Just consider the Ju 52 with the fuselage snake marking (Luftwaffe im Focus # 4, p. 24-25) or the Stuka with its snake (Luftwaffe im Focus # 7, p. 24-27)! They are not imagined.

You are kidding, are not you? A few examples confirming the rule, that there was no nose art in the Luftwaffe, apart of exceptional gothic names under a windscreen.

One thing that fascinates me, is how you in many cases can actually recognize the unit to which a Luftwaffe aircraft (mainly fighters) belongs from its camouflage style alone, even when no unit insignia are visible! Try to do that with an RAF Spitfire (and please, this is not a bait to get a "Luftwaffe is so much better" discussion going, just a factual observation)!!

Here you are, Malta Spitfires! Actually, painting style identifies the painter and not the user. It is possible to identify Spitfire manufacturers by the scheme or markings applied. There are always exceptions, like eg. 56 FG, but they are not the rule.

As an example of such unit specific camouflage, consider this heavily repainted Bf 109F-4/trop from the 10xxx block delivered to the Luftwaffe (specifically 6./JG 5) some time in 1942:

I am not sure if colours are correct.

[Kjetil Aakra]

You amaze me, Franek! I have no doubt that you know a lot about Polish aviation and related fields, but from your last post it is obvious that you haven't really studied Luftwaffe camouflage and markings or have completely failed to grasp the meaning of what you are seeing. You demonstrate a level of ignorance I thought impossible by someone who frequents this forum so often as you do.

There is simply not enough time or space here for me to give you a detailed presentation of Luftwaffe camouflage styles and patterns and besides, I see from your other posts that you will never be convinced by any other person's arguments so I'll save myself that trouble, anyway.

Just a few comments on your latest mail, as I won't let them stand uncontested.

What the RLM intended, well they certainly didn't intend the multitude of schemes we see on Bf 109s and Fw 190s from units like II. & III./JG 5, II./JG 3, the whole of JG 54, JG 51 and so on! Find some books on these units and you'll see what I mean.

"You are kidding, are not you? A few examples confirming the rule, that there was no nose art in the Luftwaffe, apart of exceptional gothic names under a windscreen."

But that's my point. There's not just a few examples of nose art, tail art and fuselage art. There are hundreds. So your statment is demonstrably wrong - there were lot's of nose art in the Luftwaffe.

Regarding the colours of the Bf 109F I showed I had them confirmed a few days ago by a former member of the Geschwader. This, in addition to a lot of photographic and documentary evidence leaves virtually no doubt that the base colour was RLM 79 modified with dark green and RLM 75.

(Apologies to Ruy Horta if this is going too far, but I just want to say this.)

I have read many of your previous post and "discussions" with other people on this forum, Franek, and it is obvious to me that you have an agenda. A clear anti-Soviet and anti-German historical agenda, that is. I don't know much about Polish aviation so I couldn't say if you distorted and lied or really presented the true picture (I was always willing to give you the benefit of doubt), but when I see what you think you know about Luftwaffe it makes me wonder.

A last piece of advice before I conclude this "discussion" - try not to be so sure about things you don't know anything about, it actually increases your credibillity!

Kjetil