Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum  

Go Back   Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum > Discussion > Allied and Soviet Air Forces

Allied and Soviet Air Forces Please use this forum to discuss the Air Forces of the Western Allies and the Soviet Union.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 26th January 2009, 10:26
Antoine Antoine is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Paris
Posts: 59
Antoine is on a distinguished road
FAA Corsair I, Informations needed

Hello,

I'm looking for informations about Corsair I used in the FAA during WW2.

Apart from what I've found on Fleet air arm archive.net, I didn't find many information about Corsair I in FAA service.

AFAIK, they were kept in the USA fro training, and they've never seen combat.

Could you help?

I'm looking for:

- Information about their units
- Any pics.
- Any color profile.
- Any tips about differences between these corsair and American F4U-1.

Also, did the RNZAF get some?

Thank you very much to any helping hand.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 26th January 2009, 17:09
Revi16 Revi16 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 911
Revi16 is on a distinguished road
Re: FAA Corsair I, Informations needed

To start with, the F4U-1 built by Chance Vought became the Corsair I. There were only 70 Corsair I's built, JT100-JT169. Sometimes referred to as F4U-1B (not sure what documentation shows this)?

I can't find all of the documentation to back this up, but I believe the Corsair I's were built with full span wings, making them useless for British carriers.
I did read that the first aircraft to have the short wing incorporated was JT270.

Unless JT-100/169 were retrofitted, use as training aircraft could be correct.

Here are some pics showing Corsair I's ( I believe in Maine, USA.) with the full span wing.
http://www.historylink101.com/ww2_na...149/15126.html
http://www.historylink101.com/ww2_na...999/15978.html

As to differences between the Corsair I and F4U-1, I haven't found anything major, especially if they had the full span wings. Perhaps the radios or some other small items?

The RNZAF did receive Corsairs, but these were US NAVY aircraft that were transferred. I have never seen anything referring to a "special build" Corsair for N.Z..


Regards,
Mike

Last edited by Revi16; 26th January 2009 at 17:58.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 26th January 2009, 17:32
Antoine Antoine is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Paris
Posts: 59
Antoine is on a distinguished road
Re: FAA Corsair I, Informations needed

Thanks for posting.
But the second pic show what seems to me a Corsair II, as there is no birdcage canopy.
Or am I wrong?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 26th January 2009, 18:00
Revi16 Revi16 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 911
Revi16 is on a distinguished road
Re: FAA Corsair I, Informations needed

You are probably correct, I was focusing on the wings being full span.

Regards,
Mike
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 27th January 2009, 01:37
shooshoobaby shooshoobaby is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 605
shooshoobaby is on a distinguished road
Re: FAA Corsair I, Informations needed

Antoine - Photo
Corsair Mk. II JT274
8 Inches clipped from Wings
Bird Cage Canopy
Dark Green and Sea Gray Upper Surface
Light Gray Lower Surface
Fighting Corsairs by Michael O'Leary
Mike
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 27th January 2009, 07:10
kurlannaiskos kurlannaiskos is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: northern New York
Posts: 174
kurlannaiskos
Re: FAA Corsair I, Informations needed

the two vintage color photos linked to above are photographic confirmation of the US 'Equivalent Colors' scheme of :

ANA 602 Light Grey on the undersides.
ANA 603 Neutral/Sea Gray on the top and sides-base coat.
ANA 613 Olive Drab on the top and sides-disruptive

(notice how the 3rd color is distinctly Brown , not green )
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 27th January 2009, 07:51
Antoine Antoine is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Paris
Posts: 59
Antoine is on a distinguished road
Re: FAA Corsair I, Informations needed

Quote:
Originally Posted by shooshoobaby View Post
Antoine - Photo
Corsair Mk. II JT274
8 Inches clipped from Wings
Bird Cage Canopy
Dark Green and Sea Gray Upper Surface
Light Gray Lower Surface
Fighting Corsairs by Michael O'Leary
Mike
A Corsair II with birdcage canopy?

Thanks Mike, but I'm looking for informations about Corsair I.
AFAIK, they didn't have the clipped wings.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 28th January 2009, 01:32
Nicholas Nicholas is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Norfolk, England
Posts: 41
Nicholas is on a distinguished road
Re: FAA Corsair I, Informations needed

"the two vintage color photos linked to above are photographic confirmation of the US 'Equivalent Colors' scheme of :

ANA 602 Light Grey on the undersides.
ANA 603 Neutral/Sea Gray on the top and sides-base coat.
ANA 613 Olive Drab on the top and sides-disruptive

(notice how the 3rd color is distinctly Brown , not green )"


kurlannaiskos, no they are not. The undersurfaces are very clearly US Substitute Sky, probably patterned to ANA 610 Sky and as required by AMO 864 of 7.9.44. for naval monoplanes operating from ship or shore bases.

The "equivalent" US colour for the AM required Sky was ANA 610 Sky. Why would it be anything else?

If there is any factual, documentary evidence for the application of light grey instead of Sky, contrary to AM, BPC & FAA requirements, please let's see it.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 28th January 2009, 06:14
kurlannaiskos kurlannaiskos is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: northern New York
Posts: 174
kurlannaiskos
Re: FAA Corsair I, Informations needed

http://www.airwarfareforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=812

personally I think the best evidence as to what colors were actually used on these aircraft (not the ones listed in specifications) are the vintage color photos in the three links above.
(use the Mark 1 eyeball)

try this: open the images in Adobe Photoshop and use the 'Auto Contrast' and 'Auto Levels' commands to correct the images.
you will see the underside is Gray , not Green
AFAIK ANA 610 Sky (type S) is for land-based aircraft.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 28th January 2009, 10:54
Nicholas Nicholas is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Norfolk, England
Posts: 41
Nicholas is on a distinguished road
Re: FAA Corsair I, Informations needed

"try this: open the images in Adobe Photoshop and use the 'Auto Contrast' and 'Auto Levels' commands to correct the images.
you will see the underside is Gray , not Green"

Yes, I know all about correcting digital images and the results, thanks. The undersurfaces are a very pale blue-green - not a light grey. I have no doubt that they can end up looking more like light grey using Photoshop, especially using the auto correction parameters and given the colour space occupied, but that is not a reliable approach. When it comes to colour the "Mark 1 eyeball" is perhaps the least reliable methodology! It is subjective and dependent on colour perception. Colour science and colour facts are perhaps preferable to colour opinion. Btw Sky is not "green" but rather a very pale blue-green very close to the "grey" colour space.

It is better that we consider all the available evidence. Whilst it is certainly true that not all specifications were followed and there are many anomalous examples, they do provide evidence of what was intended and required. In fact the evidence suggests that AMO's were usually closely followed and that deviations were often the result of misinterpretation and/or specific unit/theatre changes. In the case of the BPC and American contracts the requirements were more closely followed as there was a comprehensive inspection and acceptance process that included the camouflage paints being used in American factories.

You identify the colour used as ANA 602 Light Grey but in fact on 19 Jan 1944 the Technical Sub-Committee on Camouflage report on ANA colours was revised as follows:-

"That Navy Gull Gray Dark be adopted as standard and the British Sea Gray Medium and Navy Light Gray (ANA 602) be eliminated."

However, Sky, required by the FAA as part of the Temperate Sea Scheme (TSS), had been accepted as a standard ANA colour and continued to be so, long after it was no longer required for RAF aircraft:-

"(13) That the British Sky Type S Gray be accepted as standard"

The word "gray" was later dropped from the terminology but as Dana Bell records "The color which became ANA color 610 was the same pale greenish gray called Sky in the UK." In fact the US substitute Sky paints varied from the original AM RAE swatch and were based on the Du Pont 71-021 Sky-Type S Grey swatch provided to the AM & BPC and in turn cited by them to US manufacturers as a sample to match against - a fact revealed by Dana Bell himself. This was a very pale blue-green, exactly similar to the appearance of the undersurfaces in the colour photographs, but could vary in appearance from a very pale light blue to a colour much more like Sky as a result of the imprecise paint formula and the use of different white pigment types.

Then we have the January 1941 report of the Chemistry Department of the RAE which succinctly summarised the British approach to aircraft camouflage, listing only three colours (at that time) for the undersurfaces of camouflaged aircraft (of which none was a light grey):-

"1. A light duck-egg blue (standard 'Sky') for use against day sky backgrounds in temperate climates for both land and sea aircraft normally operated at or near cloud level."

So the empirical and other evidence is as follows:-

1. BPC/AM & FAA wanted Sky undersurfaces (AMO 864 & Others, + correspondence & memoranda)

2. ANA charts continued to include 610 Sky but dropped 602 Light grey (correspondence and amendments)

3. Colour photographs, before manipulation, appear to show an undersurface colour exactly like the US manufactured versions of Sky, aka Duck Egg Blue or "Duck Egg color" and which matches the extant, measured swatch for Du Pont 71-021 Sky- Type S Grey (that is not to say the paint used was Du Pont - it was just used as a convenient sample by BPC & others).

4. When the original factory applied paint on KD431 was examined, the undersurfaces of the tailplanes (in TSS) were found to be Duck Egg colour - the report states that "this paint, having been concealed from daylight for over half a century. now provides an excellent primary-source colour reference for the Second World War temperate colour scheme of olive green, slate grey and sky ('duck egg') applied to British aircraft".

5. Page 78 of Ron Belling's 'Military Aviation in South Africa' re the colour scheme of Corsair 6C - JT324 which "clearly illustrates the contrast in colours when US-built aircraft were finished in approximate BS equivalents. The top surfaces are Olive Drab and Sea Gray and the undersurfaces Sky."

6. Part Three of Ian K Baker's 'The History and Development of Olive Drab and Other Camouflage Finishes', specifically the sections entitled 'Sky or Light Grey?' and 'Olive Drab with Sea Gray'.

7. Nowhere, in any primary source AM, BPC, RAE or RAF documentation, or in the colour notes recorded by contemporaneous eyewitnesses like Ian D Huntley and M J F Bowyer, are there references to "light grey" undersurfaces on US export aircraft intended for the RAF or FAA.

AFAIK there was no requirement for the Temperate Sea Scheme to use "light grey" as an undersurface colour and there is no documentary evidence (?) to suggest why Corsair aircraft should have been manufactured with light grey paint applied to the undersurfaces instead of the Sky/Duck Egg colour.

What seems to have happened is that some US modellers may have become confused over the Temperate Sea and Day Fighter schemes, assuming that the Medium Sea Grey undersurfaces of the latter were required for Corsairs, especially as the upper surface colours appear to be the equivalent to Dark Green and Ocean Grey. But this is also part of a general trend to promote a light grey undersurface colour for many US export RAF & FAA types, apparently with little evidence to support it.

So we are being asked to ignore all the cumulative, holistic evidence summarised here, abandoning the principle of Occam's Razor in the process, in favour of an individual and subjective visual perception which results from a commercial software paint programme auto-correct of a digital image posted on the internet? What I think you might ask yourself is why should light grey have been applied when the requirement was for Sky and Sky paint was included in the ANA chart and list?

Last edited by Nicholas; 28th January 2009 at 13:28. Reason: Added information
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FAA Casalty 14/08/1944 dp_burke Allied and Soviet Air Forces 5 5th June 2008 21:07
FAA Role in the Pacific.? Smudger Smith Japanese and Allied Air Forces in the Far East 28 16th May 2008 19:36
FAA Stat's Stephen Smith Allied and Soviet Air Forces 1 14th May 2008 23:53
FAA Albacore loss on 4 July 1941 Edelweiss Allied and Soviet Air Forces 0 27th April 2007 22:24
Luftwaffe against FAA Monaco Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 3 5th June 2006 18:10


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 23:48.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, 12oclockhigh.net