Jump to content

Pacific based WWII USN Fighters


Recommended Posts

guys, heres the deal... working on the 1/72 F4U Corsair for the OOB GB and am looking at how the real thing is weathered... I have found a number of black & white shots that show that Pacific based aircraft did have a faded look so that is what I am going for... However, the one colour photo I have found sort of points to the faded area being zinc chromate (I assume)..... can anyone assist me in identifying how the fade should look? had considered 2 options

1) lighten the blue spray all over (maybe add silver to the leading edges as again, phot evidence (B&W only) makes it look more silver than blue)

2) salt mask leading edges, walk ways, upper surfaces

3) spray original blue

repeat above but sue zinc chromate yellow instead of the light blue.....

or maybe a combination of the 2 - ie

1) silver for leading edges & salt mask

2) then zinc chromate (all over?) and salt mask

3) then light blue upper surfaces & salt mask

4) finally "normal" blue.....

5) remove all 3 layers of salt mask to give a very faded/worn/mottled loko

6) very dilute original blue all over to blend in (once decals are on to guive them a faded lok - nothing worse than faded paint and dazzling white decal (IMHO anyway)....

so thoughts on the above and, if anyone has any colour photos of in-situ F4Us.....

final thought - would the weatheirng be the same across all the pacific based USN blue aircraft (have other references for other planes) - if so could scour them too....

TIA

Rob

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, all american corsairs were blue. And it is nor clear if You are talking about carrier based, or land based planes.

The carrier operating crafts used to be well maintained and as the environment was very unfriendly there was a point to care for the paint. It is not a common thing to see the deck F4U with large areas of paint job missing and they mostly look quite well, even in the heat of intensive operations. It is possible to find such a pic but it is not a typical situation.

On B&W it is always hard to judge if the paint loss shows yellow or silver or it is no paint loss at all - some light reflection or even dirt fooling our eyes. But it is almost impossible to find a pic of any american fighter with big areas of primer showing through the camouflage paint. It is usually wiped off right to the metal with only scratches or edges left in ZCY and possibly small splotches too. I've seen it on pictures and on the parts I had a chance to hold in my hand.

The almost part is not underlined by accident. For example I have seen one picture of F4U4 being in opposition to the rule, but IMO the rule still stands.

As usual it is always the best way to have more then one pic of the craft or at least other crafts of the same unit, time period and place to produce an educated guess.

Edited by greatgonzo
Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for the response... I guess I look at photos to give me what I want to see..... not sure as yet if the model will be USS Bunker Hill (the one with the yellow cowling front) or one based in Okinawa (Checkerboard nose/tail)... I have printed a number of photos that show a "difference" in paint eg:

http://www.missingaircrew.com/images/corsair13.jpg

http://i297.photobucket.com/albums/mm206/tomkwi/tomkwi2/F4UCorsair.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v730/fugari/CaptKirkpatrick.jpg

enough to make me think there could be some fading/weathering etc..

also just noticed a huge mistake on my part... didnt open up the holes for the rockets - and all aircraft i see have them - ah crap!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're talking about a Gloss Sea Blue airplane, I'd take a look at photos again. Other than some exhaust staining, you won't find really crapped out looking airplanes on US carriers. The Bunker Hill with the yellow nose was a very short lived ID scheme (a matter of days). The GSB paint held up very well, and if you think about what it is that causes airplanes to get chipped paint, it didn't exist on a carrier. That comes from dirt, rocks, sand, gunk, and bugs. Out at sea there is none of that. You *rarely* see a photo of a carrier based USN a/c of WWII that doesn't look pretty well maintained.

Of course it's your model, so do it any way you want to, but if you're looking to build an accurate, historically representative model, then consult photos and build what you see in them (and don't weather the heck out of it).

Link to post
Share on other sites

have reviewed again and yes the ones on carriers do look in good nick - which implies that the heavily weatehred ones (thae number 29 plane in the links i posted for example) would be land based.... therefore I will look at VMFA-312 based out of Okinawa and see what comes up there......

maybe "weathering the hell" isnt what I intended... but will do some more digging.....

this shows a weathered one (ok not the same Sqn so will research its history)

VoughtF4UCorsair.jpg

is this difference becasue this seems to be the tri-colout scheeme (was that paint more prone to fading than the Gloss Sea Blue?

Edited by robw_uk
Link to post
Share on other sites

All three pics shown are land based birds. 29 is a probably most famous pic of Ike Kepford's VF-17 Corsair. Kirkpatricks 'Palpitating Pauli' belongs to VMF 411. Different camouflage, different conditions though. But the latter one belongs to Okinawa campaign . Be sure the step is polished up to dead metal with ZCY showing only on the edges :). It's -1D You are building I understand?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...