Apollokid Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Has anyone ever seen any official document regarding the alleged grey camo, or are we just looking at ratty airplanes/poor paint quality? I suspect the latter. Jennings I agree. I think it's a matter of very badly faded tan and color shift in some of the photos. Nothing more. I have yet to see any real evidence. Cheers, Gene. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
zkalos Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 (edited) Hi folks ! I have an opinion on this subject. An aircraft painters told me some time ago, that the red part of some paints will disappear as soon as possible in the in ultra-violet radiation of the sun, as in the case of the cars for example. The red cars fading and matt out most sooner in the sunlight, if Your car parking in the street for a long time, as mine too. Therefore, it is now the manufacturers varnishing the non-metallic cars too, especially the red cars. It's fast fading and matting very easy to see on the old "east-block" maiden red cars in Europe, like Dacia, Wartburg, VAZ or the early Suzuki in Hungary, which were not warnished in the factory. For this reason, I did not buy ever a red car without metallic component or without varnishing. If from a brown or green paints the red part is dissapear, then it will be that color, what You see in the pictures, I think. Sorry for my bad "Google-translate" english :)/>/>/>/>/> Edited January 11, 2015 by zkalos Quote Link to post Share on other sites
habu2 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Another one with Mint Green: http://media.nara.gov/stillpix/330-cfd/1982/DF-SC-82-01067.jpeg Jari Does the presence of stencils imply this aircraft is wearing paint applied at the factory? It was my understanding that (most of) the stencils were not re-applied when the jet went through depot or painted / touched up in the field.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Pete Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Does the presence of stencils imply this aircraft is wearing paint applied at the factory? It was my understanding that (most of) the stencils were not re-applied when the jet went through depot or painted / touched up in the field.. Yeah, but this one is at Eglin AFB with the Air Armament Center, judging by the badge under the cockpits (which was once even further on the front of the fuselage, you can still see the overpainted spot) and the white stripe with red diamonds on the tail. Not quite "in the field", I'd think. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rex Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Yeah, it might have been painted with 34201 at the factory (a color that is actually in the TO) Otherwise, we are kinda stuck with the current wisdom that in the brutal weather conditions in the jungles east of Pensacola, paint can't stand up to the weather. Either that, or the paint faded to that same green in the weather in England, Vietnam, and Florida, and that it was impossible to provide paint to those remote areas that matched the colors that the USAF *gave to* the GSA to include in their FS color standard. Shrug, I am going to use 34201 from the TO for the Green ones, an as yet unspecified Gray for the Gray aircraft,,,,,and just tell the world on my entry form that I "expertly faded 30219" to get those colors. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
habu2 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Yeah, but this one is at Eglin AFB with the Air Armament Center, judging by the badge under the cockpits (which was once even further on the front of the fuselage, you can still see the overpainted spot) and the white stripe with red diamonds on the tail. Not quite "in the field", I'd think. Looking closely I can see subtle color variations that look like paint was sprayed around (but not over) stenciling during what I presume was 'touch-up' painting. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
G_Marcat_Italy Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 found in the hard disk this image: The Phantom in the background is clearly faded in all the colours while the first Phantom look more pristine. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
hooter Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 I remember several years ago visiting Lakenheath just as they did a maximum aircraft generation exercise, and one of their F-111F's had a dark, almost black olive drab colour instead of the normal FS 34079, which stood out like a sore thumb ! Now, if someone made a model depicting that scheme everyone would say "no, no, it's completely the wrong colour ! " but there it was, large as life. Pity I didn't make a note of it's serial number for future reference. I think that just shows that there are exceptions to the rule. HTH :cheers:/> Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ben Brown Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 found in the hard disk this image: The Phantom in the background is clearly faded in all the colours while the first Phantom look more pristine. Notice how 690 has a patch of newer tan paint where they changed the serial number to PACAF-style. The tan is similar to the tan on 529. Ben Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Notice how 690 has a patch of newer tan paint where they changed the serial number to PACAF-style. The tan is similar to the tan on 529. Ben Not to open up yet another can of worms but does the tan on 529 look darker / redder than normal or is it just due to the quality of the picture? Regardless, what is the final consensus on the "mint green" tan color? Do we agree that at some point, they painted a small number of F-4's with off-spec tan paint? Or is it still felt that this shade was due to weathering? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
G_Marcat_Italy Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 (edited) found other images I try to reproduce the F-4 (monogram 1/48 f4c/d) with faded tan but I loose interest on the subject This argument was discussed here on ARC in 2008 at this link with a bunch of images:CLICK HERE Edited January 14, 2015 by G_Marcat_Italy Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Corey Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 (edited) Not to open up yet another can of worms but does the tan on 529 look darker / redder than normal or is it just due to the quality of the picture? Regardless, what is the final consensus on the "mint green" tan color? Do we agree that at some point, they painted a small number of F-4's with off-spec tan paint? Or is it still felt that this shade was due to weathering? I think you are correct. The tan on 529 does look darker and my opinion more "chocolaty" than the standard tan. Compare the sandy tan on 690 to that of the C-130 in the back ground. 529 and the touch up on 690 must be some kind of local variation... Corey Edited January 14, 2015 by Corey Quote Link to post Share on other sites
supacruze Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I think judging by these photos that it was either a deliberate overspray or a case of grey being mislabeled at the factory as tan. There is one pic from airliners.net which shows grey overspray on the olive green portions, it would be interesting to see if all the aircraft shown rotated thru the same base or maintenance location, perhaps a wing commander decided to do an experiment and dispensed with the usual red tape. The grey looks like FAC grey to me (used on AF OV-10 Broncos at the time), maybe they were used for a specific mission which was classified at the time. I have heard that one serviceman claimed that F-4s were used for seeding clouds to create thunderstorms over Vietnam and I have seen pics of the aircraft. Maybe the scheme relates to that, or a Fast FAC trial. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.