RNZAF P 40 Question re Torokina

[alanw]

David D and Dave H

Found this discussion from an another earlier post, and
I think I know for my self (not technically supported by
any evidence though ) which way I will go.

The Olive Drab/NZ Sea Blue Gray/either NZ Sky Gray or NZ Duck Egg Blue
underside (the K undersides way too light for US Neutral Grey)

Previous Post

rnzaf.proboards.com/thread/26656/rnzaf-40k-7-guadalcanal

This forum is a Goldmine of Information

Thanks/regards

Alan

[davidd]

Some grey-haired members of this Board may recall that a certain British artist convinced himself that an official photograph showed an RNZAF SBD-5 Dauntless in a colour scheme akin to an RAF temperate scheme, in shades of brown and green. He was so convinced that he prepared a drawing of this scheme which was published in a well-known book in about 1954; I think this book was the first version of the Harleyford book on aircraft colour schemes of the world, might have been the one with an illustration on the cover showing the Curtiss P-40 covered in the nationality roundels of all those air forces operating the type. Based on this Dauntless drawing, I have an idea that at least one kit was marketed showing this scheme. Subsequently it was learned that the scheme, although well intentioned, was totally fictitious. So far as I can recall, have never seen the photographs of NZ3072 mentioned by Dave H which appear to show this aircraft wearing a disruptive-type camouflage scheme, so would not like to comment on this, but to me it would seem strange to apply such a scheme on this aircraft after its return to NZ. The official photographs taken of this particular aircraft at Guadalcanal during July 1943 to my eye certainly appears to be in the dark olive drab and neutral grey colours, without any sign of a disruptive scheme, as indeed do most other clear photographs showing this model. Of course after a few months in the tropics these schemes did fade somewhat and begin to appear scruffy, something which has caused others to wonder what sort of scheme it is that they are looking at.
David D

[Dave Homewood]

Sept 9, 2018 23:22:44 GMT 12 davidd said:

Some grey-haired members of this Board may recall that a certain British artist convinced himself that an official photograph showed an RNZAF SBD-5 Dauntless in a colour scheme akin to an RAF temperate scheme, in shades of brown and green. He was so convinced that he prepared a drawing of this scheme which was published in a well-known book in about 1954; I think this book was the first version of the Harleyford book on aircraft colour schemes of the world, might have been the one with an illustration on the cover showing the Curtiss P-40 covered in the nationality roundels of all those air forces operating the type. Based on this Dauntless drawing, I have an idea that at least one kit was marketed showing this scheme. Subsequently it was learned that the scheme, although well intentioned, was totally fictitious.

I guess that accounts for this hideous die cast model's scheme

From www.ebay.ie/itm/ARMOUR-E080-SBD-3-DAUNTLESS-RNZAF-52-FG-5-FS-model-aircraft-1944-1-48th-scale-/201409565846

So far as I can recall, have never seen the photographs of NZ3072 mentioned by Dave H which appear to show this aircraft wearing a disruptive-type camouflage scheme, so would not like to comment on this, but to me it would seem strange to apply such a scheme on this aircraft after its return to NZ.

The photos were taken at Guadalcanal, not NZ. The photos of it back in NZ show it repainted in either olive drab or the foliage green colour, with the famous nose art no longer on the cowl.

The official photographs taken of this particular aircraft at Guadalcanal during July 1943 to my eye certainly appears to be in the dark olive drab and neutral grey colours, without any sign of a disruptive scheme, as indeed do most other clear photographs showing this model. Of course after a few months in the tropics these schemes did fade somewhat and begin to appear scruffy, something which has caused others to wonder what sort of scheme it is that they are looking at.
David D

Yip, although the photos in question do seem to show some sort of tonal changes in the colour, I'm not sure if it is camouflage, or just muck and wearwhere the aircraft has been washed. You can view the original discussion and Pete's theory with photos here:
rnzaf.proboards.com/thread/17774

It could make a great What If colour scheme all the same, OD and NZ Blue-Grey camouflage.  

[alanw]

Hi David and Dave,

I'm one of those people who like to dwell with technical
certainty - doesn't always work and with things like
our RNZAF historical facts, some are more certain than others.
I have had Mk III Sunderland build on the go for more time than
I care to remember - I even have a Mk III Sunderland manual, but
there are subtle differences even in the Mk III production that
proving my build is wholly accurate is mission impossible.
Research is part of the fun

One of my pet hates is modellers who profess that
their Pride and joy is built per some information read
in some magazine or someone has posted on the Web, and that
is how we Kiwi's had our aircraft.
When you ask them as to how the publication actually
verified such information they get quite snooty/abusive.
My personal philosophy is to research what information
I can obtain and pick the brains (read pester ) those
on forums like this - reason being is I trust the knowledge
on here.
I have certainly learnt that not all information is there, or
there are only fragments of a greater jigsaw.

With the P 40K I know Charles Darby mentions that "Some" of them
in Desert Air Force Colours (page 68) of "First Decade"
Some in RAF TLS colours - don't know what he based that on?
Pete Mossong also mentions RAF TLS - I haven't seen Pete on here in
along time, and would love to know what he based his comments on?

David with your thoughts on the Olive Drab/NZ Sea Blue Gray, you
certainly struck a chord with me - I know that they are just that
your thoughts, but I see (personally) some reasoning behind this
The lower colours certainly have given me "Sleepless Nights
and I may just go with the US Neutral Grey (I haven't even built the model
yet )

The Caveat I choose to use in cases like this is "This is My Take on the Subject"
meaning I have used what I can find to at least verify what I build has some
validity ( or not) but cannot testify 100% it is wholly accurate.
So eventually when I represent my P40K on here or any other forum - It will be with
"This is my Take on it"

Guys, again thank you for your comments/knowledge

Regards

Alan

[Dave Homewood]

If you have tried and exhausted every good source on the subject (and imho there is no better source than David's research in almost all RNZAF history topics), and followed the findings to the best of your ability, no-one can ever quibble with your paint scheme on your model, till they can produce new evidence to prove you're wrong.

And always beware of 40 or 50 year old books and magazine articles when it comes particularly to paint schemes, much in-depth research has superseded a lot of what was written back then.

[davidd]

Alan,
I think you have got my drift now, we can only try and locate what we believe is the "good stuff", then attempt to cross check everything, and keep asking on this forum, and see what comes bubbling to the surface. So I am going along with what Dave H says above, and you can explain your philosophy to anyone who asks about your reference (or more likely references plural) on which you base your conclusions, then ask if they have anything else to add. I don't even trust old colour photographs very much either for exact shades of colours, as we all know that their fidelity can be pretty suspect. I don't actually build model aircraft these days, as I find the research alone is just too interesting (and frequently too confusing) to leave much time for anything else. Unless some clever type comes up with a real time machine, we are pretty much up against it when attempting to correctly describe these ancient paint schemes for which very little, if any, reliable information still exists.
David D

[Mustang51]

Did a huge amount of research when we were [painting the Temora Hudson. The "RAF" camouflage was the best equivalent colours manufactured in USA and not an exact match for the UK manufactured colours. This probably mentioned elsewhere on this thread but the US colours also faded a deal quicker than the UK paints for some reason

[alanw]

Sept 10, 2018 23:07:53 GMT 12 davidd said:

Alan,
I think you have got my drift now, we can only try and locate what we believe is the "good stuff", then attempt to cross check everything, and keep asking on this forum, and see what comes bubbling to the surface. So I am going along with what Dave H says above, and you can explain your philosophy to anyone who asks about your reference (or more likely references plural) on which you base your conclusions, then ask if they have anything else to add. I don't even trust old colour photographs very much either for exact shades of colours, as we all know that their fidelity can be pretty suspect. I don't actually build model aircraft these days, as I find the research alone is just too interesting (and frequently too confusing) to leave much time for anything else. Unless some clever type comes up with a real time machine, we are pretty much up against it when attempting to correctly describe these ancient paint schemes for which very little, if any, reliable information still exists.
David D

Hi David,

Thank you again (and Dave H) for all your help and comments.

I don't doubt as I build other RNZAF aircraft I will have questions,
and as I said above, this forum is my go to place that
I trust

Yes the "time machine" would be invaluable

Thanks/regards

Alan

[Dave Homewood]

There is always paint on parts that still exist from the Rukuhia dump. Some of the items dug up there by Tony still have amazingly fresh paint. it may not be 100% guaranteed as a perfect indicator but it will give you some idea I guess of the colours of the NZ made paint. Just like those swatches you have Alan.