Colours VVS WW II Options

[Dmitriy Linevitc...]

2 Massimo & KL.

Check this pages for my little research for АМТ-10 (russian o course, but see photos and pictures )
http://scalemodels.ru/modules/forum/viewto...p;&start=40

The issue with the color of SB is not simple. The fact is that in all the books just tell that early SB were silver. And no real facts are given. There is a fair question in such information. Now about my hypothesis. After all, the books says "early SB silver". And now the exact facts, the aircraft arrived in Spain painted gray! But in Spain the sending machine of the first series, on which early SB then we can talk? This issue can be solved only real evidence of the photo or debris with the presence of silver paint. I have not met such, all that I have seen personally in my opinion simply does not correctly identified.

Already fully confirmed that the greenish spots - a primer АЛГ-1. Actually, the spots is not quite green, they are yellow, exactly as described in the documents, and green stains appeared where gray paint gone not to the end, both manifested blue component colors, as we know blue plus yellow make green. Where the gray paint gone completely, primer yellow.

Incidentally this is one more subtlety to the modeller. Accepted simulate weathering on-metal aircraft stripping paint to metal. But for example, the study of debris SB shows that the paint to the metal rarely rush to a greater extent, we are dealing the most with some rubbing a dirty yellow-green type. And very, very small chips to the metal.

This post has been edited by Dmitriy Linevitch: Nov 12 2009, 03:15 PM

[Learstang]

Hi Konstantin,
nice discussion, with a lot of photos of wrecks.
Now, my doubt: the greenish paint visible on so many of the wrecks is a yellowish underlying primer under the light grey layer, or it is a remain of a camouflage green?




If I can answer: AMT-1 light brown, aside AMT-4 green amd AMT-12 dark grey, or their oil equivalents, since 1943.

Massimo

Thank you, Massimo! Do you know if AMT-1 was ever used with just the AMT-4 for topsides colours on the IL-2?

Learstang

[Mikehorrell]

Incidentally this is one more subtlety to the modeller. Accepted simulate weathering on-metal aircraft stripping paint to metal. But for example, the study of debris SB shows that the paint to the metal rarely rush to a greater extent, we are dealing the most with some rubbing a dirty yellow-green type. And very, very small chips to the metal.

A very good point!

The extreme flaking to be seen on some field-painted Japanese aircraft
has become a modeling fad even where it is not appropriate.

[sakai]

Thank you, Massimo! Do you know if AMT-1 was ever used with just the AMT-4 for topsides colours on the IL-2?

Learstang

Jason,
There no proof of any kind that AMT-1 was used before 2nd half of 1943 and in other combination than with AMT-4, AMT-12 on top (AMT-7 bottom) i.e. in the new NKAP schemes for attack a/c and bombers.
Cheers,
Mario

[Massimo Tessitor...]

Check this pages for my little research for АМТ-10 (russian o course, but see photos and pictures )
http://scalemodels.ru/modules/forum/viewto...p;&start=40

Very interesting topic indeed!
I observed your photos of the flying boat. On many of them, the color is a grey-green in the range of FS-34226 (that is as Humbrol 31), even if this color looks a bit dark to be called 'light grey-green'. Have you any other match to suggest, please?
In other images, I think to see a sort of green- is it the same color, if seen on the original pieces?
So, according to your idea, the AMT-10 could have been utilized for a navy disruptive scheme with AMT-11, isn't it? I see that some documents are citated: Is there anything clarifying if AMT-10 was introduced in 1944 or 1945?

Incidentally this is one more subtlety to the modeller. Accepted simulate weathering on-metal aircraft stripping paint to metal. But for example, the study of debris SB shows that the paint to the metal rarely rush to a greater extent, we are dealing the most with some rubbing a dirty yellow-green type. And very, very small chips to the metal.

Fully right. Sometimes, on models, I have even seen silver patches on fabric-covered surfaces.

Massimo

[Dmitriy Linevitc...]

Very interesting topic indeed!
I observed your photos of the flying boat. On many of them, the color is a grey-green in the range of FS-34226 (that is as Humbrol 31), even if this color looks a bit dark to be called 'light grey-green'. Have you any other match to suggest, please?
In other images, I think to see a sort of green- is it the same color, if seen on the original pieces?
So, according to your idea, the AMT-10 could have been utilized for a navy disruptive scheme with AMT-11, isn't it? I see that some documents are citated: Is there anything clarifying if AMT-10 was introduced in 1944 or 1945

So far the only official source of marine camouflage and colors for it, is a E. F. Burche book, who the author I believes should not say. From the book should be that the marine camo created before the war, as well as black-green army counterpart. It is known that the AMT-10 was certified in retrospect, at least, we know from an interview with a veteran (a mechanic) 9 ИАП ЧФ (Fighter Aircraft Regiment Black Sea Fleet), he said that in 43, at Gelenzhike - LaGG regiment repainted in the marine camouflage. He used special enamel, according to the veteran - aquamarine, i.e we are talking about the AMT-10. I assumed as a variant of the gray kamo AMT-11 because it had similar sample of paint from the wreckage. But the E. F. Burche book says, marine camouflage consist blue-green (AMT-10) and steel-gray colors, and we know that the "steel-gray" is the official name of A-14 gray enamel. So until the final answer yet far.

This post has been edited by Dmitriy Linevitch: Nov 13 2009, 12:38 PM

[Dmitriy Linevitc...]

2 moderator delete it please, it was double post

This post has been edited by Dmitriy Linevitch: Nov 13 2009, 12:34 PM

[Massimo Tessitor...]

So far the only official source of marine camouflage and colors for it, is a E. F. Burche book, who the author I believes should not say. From the book should be that the marine camo created before the war, as well as black-green army counterpart. It is known that the AMT-10 was certified in retrospect, at least, we know from an interview with a veteran (a mechanic) 9 ИАП ЧФ (Fighter Aircraft Regiment Black Sea Fleet), he said that in 43, at Gelenzhike - LaGG regiment repainted in the marine camouflage. He used special enamel, according to the veteran - aquamarine, i.e we are talking about the AMT-10. I assumed as a variant of the gray kamo AMT-11 because it had similar sample of paint from the wreckage. But the E. F. Burche book says, marine camouflage consist blue-green (AMT-10) and steel-gray colors, and we know that the "steel-gray" is the official name of A-14 gray enamel. So until the final answer yet far.

Hi Dmitriy,
this is interesting: according to this idea, AMT-10 was utilized since before the war in association to A-14.
Only a doubt: the AMT11/12 camo for fighters was introduced right in 1943, and already delivered planes could have been repainted with these colors. Couldn't it be that the mechanic interpreted this as a marine camouflage, without knowing that this was utilized by land units of fighters too? Blue-grey AMT-11 could be even more marine than a blue-green shade, and AMT-12 resembles a bit the color of weapons and could have been called steel-gray, even if it was not its official name.
Is the veteran still alive, just to ask if he saw new planes (La-5, La-7) delivered with the same camouflage?
Massimo

[Dmitriy Linevitc...]

Hi Dmitriy,
this is interesting: according to this idea, AMT-10 was utilized since before the war in association to A-14.
Only a doubt: the AMT11/12 camo for fighters was introduced right in 1943, and already delivered planes could have been repainted with these colors. Couldn't it be that the mechanic interpreted this as a marine camouflage, without knowing that this was utilized by land units of fighters too? Blue-grey AMT-11 could be even more marine than a blue-green shade, and AMT-12 resembles a bit the color of weapons and could have been called steel-gray, even if it was not its official name.
Is the veteran still alive, just to ask if he saw new planes (La-5, La-7) delivered with the same camouflage?
Massimo

Hmm, this possibility can not be denied, and I surely ask a guy who talked to a veteran about this. It seems to me doubtful that the veteran could well be mistaken, because he was personally involved in the repainting.

Here are scans from the book about which we, I was a little mistake, the official name of AMT-10: dark-blue-green.
I have only 2 pages are unfortunately not yet found the book entirely.

[Learstang]

Jason,
There no proof of any kind that AMT-1 was used before 2nd half of 1943 and in other combination than with AMT-4, AMT-12 on top (AMT-7 bottom) i.e. in the new NKAP schemes for attack a/c and bombers.
Cheers,
Mario

Mario, then my question becomes - where do all these colour profiles of Shturmoviks in green/brown topsides come from (look at the Wings Palette site to see how many there are)? Some of these come from sources, Czech, for example, that predate Mr. Pilawskii's work. I can accept that few single-seaters were painted this way, but were there no two-seaters painted in a green/brown topsides? Are all these profiles the result of misinterpreting photos of green/black topsides on IL-2's?

Jason

[sakai]

Mario, then my question becomes - where do all these colour profiles of Shturmoviks in green/brown topsides come from (look at the Wings Palette site to see how many there are)? Some of these come from sources, Czech, for example, that predate Mr. Pilawskii's work. I can accept that few single-seaters were painted this way, but were there no two-seaters painted in a green/brown topsides? Are all these profiles the result of misinterpreting photos of green/black topsides on IL-2's?

Jason

Jason,
Even some Russian/Soviet references, older and newer, show this ever so popular brown/green scheme! If you remember some older English language publications showed fighters in this camo! There must have been a multitude of reasons for this, including b&w pictures misinterpretation, for sure. Most important culprit, from my point of view, was an incompetent and insufficient research. If I'm to believe V&O, and I have no reason not to, then:
- no extant fragments that could be positively dated before 1943 showing brown camo paint (of any kind) were located so far (except of current Pilawskii's "Albom rebuttal", given no source, no time, no credit, no nothing-NKVD struck again?)
- AMT-1 was formulated and ordered to production before GPW started but there is no documentation supporting it's standard application until summer 1943
- there is no mention in period documentation of any kind, of production and application of "AII Brown" and/or "AII Light brown.
There are orders, specs, schemes, none is showing any brown until 1943.
Cheers,
Mario

This post has been edited by sakai: Nov 14 2009, 05:52 AM

[klesnik]

I found text posted by Dmitriy Linevich extremely interesting and important.

Burche, author of disruptive schemes explains his philosophy and principles:

Following is translation spec for ARC Forum:

“First effective camouflage scheme for seaplanes (and land planes operating over the sea, as torpedo bombers) was developed by the author of this textbook in Soviet Union shortly before the beginning of the GPW. Year later similar scheme appeared in England.

Tests had shown that camouflage scheme for seaplanes (pattern and size of areas painted in different colors) has to follow the same principles of the camouflage for landplanes. The camouflage scheme has to be calculated for maximal deformation of plane contours, regardless of the different background for land and seaplanes.

Colors for seaplanes should correspond to the colors of the sea background when seen vertically from above and to the color when seen from oblique angles.

Colors of different seas are different. Even for the same sea, color of the water varies. But when seen from above color of the sea is always dark, and when viewed obliquely it’s significantly lighter.

Darker areas of the camouflage correspond to the background when plane is viewed from above and lighter areas correspond to the background when plane is viewed from the distance obliquely.

According to the above dark blue-green and steal gray colors were established.

Practice has shown that steal gray color blends with the color of the larger areas of the sea: it becomes blue with the blue sea color or green with the green sea color….”

These principles are also applicable on green-black and two gray schemes. This text also explains why black or dark-gray were present in these schemes.



How does Pillawskii explain camouflage? Zavod, ... Zavoda, ... Buchanova and her loops, ... blah, blah, blah…

Happy modeling,
KL

This post has been edited by klesnik: Nov 14 2009, 08:30 AM

[Dmitriy Linevitc...]

Unfortunately, information from the veteran can not be clarified, but interest on marine camouflage yielded its first fruit, a colleague VM from the Scalemodels.ru showed a photos on which the sea Yaks-7, they are painted at sea kamo!

[Massimo Tessitor...]

Here are scans from the book about which we, I was a little mistake, the official name of AMT-10: dark-blue-green.
I have only 2 pages are unfortunately not yet found the book entirely.

I found text posted by Dmitriy Linevich extremely interesting and important.

Burche, author of disruptive schemes explains his philosophy and principles:

Following is translation spec for ARC Forum:

“First effective camouflage scheme for seaplanes (and land planes operating over the sea, as torpedo bombers) was developed by the author of this textbook in Soviet Union shortly before the beginning of the GPW. Year later similar scheme appeared in England.

Tests had shown that camouflage scheme for seaplanes (pattern and size of areas painted in different colors) has to follow the same principles of the camouflage for landplanes. The camouflage scheme has to be calculated for maximal deformation of plane contours, regardless of the different background for land and seaplanes.

Colors for seaplanes should correspond to the colors of the sea background when seen vertically from above and to the color when seen from oblique angles.

Colors of different seas are different. Even for the same sea, color of the water varies. But when seen from above color of the sea is always dark, and when viewed obliquely it’s significantly lighter.

Darker areas of the camouflage correspond to the background when plane is viewed from above and lighter areas correspond to the background when plane is viewed from the distance obliquely.

According to the above dark blue-green and steal gray colors were established.

Practice has shown that steal gray color blends with the color of the larger areas of the sea: it becomes blue with the blue sea color or green with the green sea color….”

These principles are also applicable on green-black and two gray schemes. This text also explains why black or dark-gray were present in these schemes.

Hi Dmitriy, hi Konstantin,
all these informations are extremely interesting. So, Burche is both the author of the VVS schemes and the author of a book? With such a book printed, it is surprising that so many misinterpretations of Soviet schemes were predominant until few years ago.
So, the idea is that AMT-10 was a dark blue-green utilized aside A-14, and that this is the color of the wreck. My doubt is that Hornat describes AMT-10 as a light greyish-green introduced in July 1945. This led the doubt that it could have been a somewhat different color.
Are there postwar Soviet flying boats with such color preserved? How were Beriev Be-6 and 12 painted?
Massimo

[Dmitriy Linevitc...]

Hi Dmitriy, hi Konstantin,
all these informations are extremely interesting. So, Burche is both the author of the VVS schemes and the author of a book? With such a book printed, it is surprising that so many misinterpretations of Soviet schemes were predominant until few years ago.
So, the idea is that AMT-10 was a dark blue-green utilized aside A-14, and that this is the color of the wreck. My doubt is that Hornat describes AMT-10 as a light greyish-green introduced in July 1945. This led the doubt that it could have been a somewhat different color.
Are there postwar Soviet flying boats with such color preserved? How were Beriev Be-6 and 12 painted?
Massimo

It is strange at all, at Russia has never issued any compilations of works Burche, this without doubt an outstanding engineer (not least like the famous aircraft designers), is virtually unknown in his own country, and yet except for immediate work in state service, he has written many books on aircraft camo at air sea and land.

[Learstang]

Jason,
Even some Russian/Soviet references, older and newer, show this ever so popular brown/green scheme! If you remember some older English language publications showed fighters in this camo! There must have been a multitude of reasons for this, including b&w pictures misinterpretation, for sure. Most important culprit, from my point of view, was an incompetent and insufficient research. If I'm to believe V&O, and I have no reason not to, then:
- no extant fragments that could be positively dated before 1943 showing brown camo paint (of any kind) were located so far (except of current Pilawskii's "Albom rebuttal", given no source, no time, no credit, no nothing-NKVD struck again?)
- AMT-1 was formulated and ordered to production before GPW started but there is no documentation supporting it's standard application until summer 1943
- there is no mention in period documentation of any kind, of production and application of "AII Brown" and/or "AII Light brown.
There are orders, specs, schemes, none is showing any brown until 1943.
Cheers,
Mario

Thank you, Mario! I think that pretty much clears things up.

Jason

[Dmitriy Linevitc...]

Thank you, Mario! I think that pretty much clears things up.
Jason

Do you want to corral into a final stupor? At least I did it I was. On the eve of a friend sent me a chapter of the camoflage manual issued in 44. By Burche course.
For the general Western audience will explain who he is, it's soviet expert on military camouflage 20-50 years, the inventor of concealment and camouflage techniques, in short, everything that relates methods of coloring and camouflage schemes, it's all Burche.

Short translate, read and be surprised.
http://scalemodels.ru/modules/forum/viewto...825.html#233825

--------

Aha, some feedback available

This post has been edited by Dmitriy Linevitch: Nov 15 2009, 12:19 PM

[Massimo Tessitor...]

Do you want to corral into a final stupor? At least I did it I was. On the eve of a friend sent me a chapter of the camoflage manual issued in 44. By Burche course.
For the general Western audience will explain who he is, it's soviet expert on military camouflage 20-50 years, the inventor of concealment and camouflage techniques, in short, everything that relates methods of coloring and camouflage schemes, it's all Burche.

Short translate, read and be surprised.
http://scalemodels.ru/modules/forum/viewto...825.html#233825

--------

Aha, some feedback available

Hi Dmitriy,
I've seen some of the scans of that rare manual (the site didn't allowed me to download them all for some reason). What is the matter that surprised you?

I've had a look to the photos of marine Yak-7. Yes, they are strange. The strangest of all things is the dark look of their undersurfaces.

By the way, I have updated the page of colors, that now is linked at the main page of Mig3.sovietwarplanes.com. Everyone willing to have a look, and let me know suggestions to improve or correct it, is welcome.
Massimo

[sakai]

Michael Orlov's 11/10 response to E.Pilawskii's "Albom rebuttal" is here
http://scalemodels.ru/modules/forum/viewto..._start_320.html
dragonlance did a quick google translation on the same day however this is a "cleaned-up" version by yours truly.
Just in case the original EP's rebuttal is here
http://vvs.hobbyvista.com/Research/1948/19...m_Nakrasok.html
I suggest you print both and read carefully.
Mario

So, Mr. Pilawskii was finally able to familiarize himself with the “Album of paints manufactured by the factories of Glavkraska MKHP USSR ", published in 1948. What kind of impression did this edition leave on him? Unfortunately, not what one would expect.
I understand that he considered this "Album" as an ideological weapon against his research. This, perhaps was prompted by a discussion on this forum, which was conducted by some gentlemen- friends in a rather heated manner. Something like this reminds me of an arguments about the origins of Suvorov-Rezun works which resulted in the emergence of innovative and new "works" from both Rezun supporters and opponents. Fortunately, the scale of debate about the origins of coloration of the Soviet Air Force airplanes is much smaller. Nevertheless, the interest in the topic of Soviet aircraft coloration shown by modelers is quite understandable and justified.

I do not want to engage in the polemics with Mr. Pilawskii here, however, having learned the contents of this forum, I thought it was not useless to share my opinion in regards to the "Album of paints" and some other matters.
For the first time this album was mentioned by me and V. Vakhlamov in a monograph published in the magazine "M-Hobby", namely in the number 2 / 1999. I studied it much earlier, unfortunately, now I can not remember when exactly. This copy of the album was located (and remains there as of today) in the Library of Lenin, now RSL (Russian State Library). According to records in the library forms nobody had borrowed the album for nearly 15 years before I did. Unfortunately the FULL basic data of Album were not stated in the text of our monograph.

In his book (2003) Pilawskii, using information from the monograph, criticized the album, calling it for some reason (perhaps to permanently discredit it as a source) edition of the NKVD. Philistine be forgiven for not knowing that in 1946 all Commissariats were transformed into Ministries ( at NKVD it partially occurred on March 15, 1946), but for a historian studying the Soviet Air Force it’s unlikely not to know this fact. Nevertheless, it characterizes Pilawskii as a researcher, who in the absence of data, probably invents them himself.

Pilawskii called Album "bureaucratic", what was meant by that - I did not understand. In his book he noted a strange color of the A-28m enamel which we described as "greenish-blue. He called it "completely false", without paying, perhaps, the attention to a footnote, where it was written - "after some time of exposure to elements". Hereby we wanted to demonstrate how could the color of this enamel change. Pilawskii found the color A-24m in satisfactory agreement with the known examples. His position was the following: chips of the colors that were in regular use at the time of the Album publication “seem genuine”. According to Pilawskii the paints AMT-7 and A-28m were no longer used in 1948 and were replaced by the AMT-16 and A-36.
He repeats almost the same thing now. Let's elaborate on this issue in more details.

Аviation lacquers AMT-16 (light gray-blue color) were produced according to TU NKKHP 1670-47, confirmed on 10/22/1947.
Aviation lacquers AGT-16 according to TU NKKHP 1611-47, confirmed on 07/24/1947.
Enamel A-36g according to TU NKKHP 1654-47, confirmed on 10/04/1947.
For some time, until the date stated earlier, they could be manufactured as an experimental batch according to the temporary TU (VTU).
What does this mean?

The fact that in 1948 this lacquer was manufactured and used it could, theoretically, get into the Album. Why then it isn’t there? Does Pilawskii have an idea what it means to gather the samples from all the paint factories in USSR? First, you don’t gather the entire range of enamels produced by a plant in one day. For a week, maybe a month, the plant produces 2,3,4 ... 10 brands of paint, then switches to the another, then to the third ... But you have to take them to Moscow, print the album and paste (manually to 1000 copies.! ) these chips ... And there were many factories (does Pilawskii think that all the chips had been manufactured in one place?).

It is obvious that the plannig of the Album with a list of chips it should contain, was drafted long before its release. When? I cann’t say the exact date –I simply do not know it. But Album was put in print on July 7, 1947.
What happened in 1947?
We won’t talk about all industries, let's talk about aviation industry only. During the post-war period aviation paints were basically manufactured by three plants: № 36 (Moscow, specializing in nitro-cellulose lacquers), № 861 (Moscow, oil-based, pentaphtalic, glyphtalic and similar enamels), № 34 (Chelyabinsk, same brands as in Moscow and also the other coating materials, this factory had a much larger potential than those in Moscow).

Experimental batch of AMT-16 was manufactured according to a one-time order in the factory number 36 in 1946, in 1947, this factory has launched a large-scale production. But it became clear that this enamel didn’t have a future potential.
Glossy lacquer AGT-16 was more promising. In 1947 the factory number 36 manufactured 68.4 tons of the lacquer as an "unscheduled production on the order of Glavkraska" (this figure and others below are from the annual reports of plants, see RGAE fax. 8311, op. 1, dd 181, 187, 211 and 240). Total production of aviation lacquers of different colors at the factory nr.36 was 931.7 tons during that year.

On August 11, 1947 the order number MAP 549s was issued according to which the directors of factories number 21, 31, 99 and 153 were ordered, not awaiting the results of the performance tests of the new coating materials, to paint the Yak-15, Yak-21, Yak-9 and La -9 in light gray-blue oil-based enamel A-36g and AGT-16 nitro-lacquer of the same color (fabric covering the rudders and ailerons). Delivery of the aircraft in this camouflage was supposed to begin as early as 10 September. And, indeed, in the MAP records out of 134 La-9s operated in September, about 40 were already painted in the new colors. During this period aircraft factory nr. 21 was manufacturing fighters in series of 12-13.

Year 1948 is marked by the implementation and beginning of production of the aviation lacquer AGT-16 at factory nr. 34. The following year 1949 its production at factory nr.34 was 293 tons. The production of the enamel A-36g was significantly lower - 44,9 tons (plant number 34, 1949). These enamels are missing from 1948 production assortment of the factory nr.36.
Simultaneously the production of lacquers AMT/AGT-7 and enamels A-28m / g continued. In 1948 the combined production of factories nr.34 and 36 was 133.8 + 89 = 222.8 tons of AGT-7, 16 tons of AMT-7, and 78 tons of A-28 g.

The attentive reader will notice: production data of AGT-16 and A-36g are from 1947and 1949, and of AMT/AGT-7, A-28m from 1948. Not a very accurate comparison, right? But in the 1948 annual report of the factory nr.36 the lacquers AGT-16/A-36g are not mentioned at all, and the factory nr. 34 made the following entry –“ production implemented”, without specifying the output which was probably not large.

Thus, in 1947-48, the lacquers AMT/AGT-7 and the enamels A-28m / g were not discontinued and AMT/AGT-16 and A-36g did not replace them yet. So why include them in the album of the basic assortment?

Second question is: to what extent does the current condition of chips correspond to their original appearance?
Pilawskii wrote that he had examined two copies of the Album. How exactly? Most likely from the photographs, judging by submitted scans of the overall poor quality. Therefore, the assertion that the identically marked chips included in different albums differ from each other, is beyond any criticism.

I did not quite understand, what was meant by «NLR collection in Moscow», where, according to Pilawskii, the best preserved copy is located. I can say however that the scans he submitted were NOT taken from the Album located in the Russian State Library in Moscow (former State Library of Lenin).
What remains to discuss? General thesis about the chips color oxidation, two black and white photographs of the WWII aircraft and several color photos of the aircraft fragments.

Of course, we will never determine the ABSOTUTE accuracy of the period color -time overpowers everything. In the principle however we can say that storage conditions at the Library featuring constant temperature and humidity when book is used very rarely (remember – the loan interval was 15 years) are much more gentle than those of the aircraft fragments lain number of years in the mud, earth or, even worse for the paint - in the sun.... “Paper absorbs and concentrates the contaminants from the environment" - of course, "environment" in Moscow is not perfect, however, it is still cleaner in the library storage than the water in the swamp.

In order to analyze the black-and-white photographs, one MUST KNOW the type of light-sensitive layer of film on which the picture was taken. For example, Br-Ag film without enhanced sensitivity has the upper limit of the spectral sensitivity in about 540 nanometers i.e. the spectrum of the yellow-green to red colors will be represented (on the photo paper copy) in very dark shades of gray while visually dark purple color with appear in the picture as very bright. These films as well as any photo paper can be developed under red light.

With the introduction of optical sensitizers into photo emulsion we can "bump up" the upper limit of spectral sensitivity. In the image taken with such a film red color will appear already light.
Besides the curve of spectral sensitivity is not monotone since it has its peaks and valleys as well as nearly horizontal segments. For example, isopanchromatic film has roughly the same spectral sensitivity in the region from blue to red colors i.e. in such a film blue, yellow-green and red colors will have approximately the same brightness ( A brief photographic guide, Goskinoizdat M. (not the NKVD!!!) 1952, p. 161).
Does Pilawskii know what type of film were the negatives of these two pictures made on? If he does he’s certainly not telling us.

Color photos.
I do not like and avoid making conclusions based on color photographs, however good at the first glance they may look. Here I fully agree with Pilawskii that "physical examination should be the only standard of examination”. Besides it would not be a bad idea to try carefully remove the top, most damaged layer of paint. It was done on the sufficiently large fragments available to me. The results showed good match to the color chip from the Album. But in this case there is nothing to be done.

Yak-9 vertical stabilizer and rudder.
My IMPRESSIONS: small, fairly dark area at the bottom of the rudder is visible, the rest of the surface is in gray-blue color. Gray-blue color is clearly two-layered, probably after repair. Lower layer is somewhat darker, perhaps it was better preserved. АMT-12 and AMT-11, if maintained for several decades in the atmospheric conditions, may well look exactly like this as they do on my computer screen.

Yak-3, supposedly in Cracow museum.
According to Pilawskii it’her appearance from 1992. Where has shet been up till then? Until we get an answer to this question the further evaluation of the coloration is meaningless, we don’t see anything valuable in this picture at all.

Lagg-3 fuselage section in the Finnish museum.
AMT-4, AMT-7, AII Kr. colors(Kr=krasnyi=red) (application of the oil-based A-13 on nitro-lacquers is doubtful) and even the AMT-6 are very similar (with the correction to Yak-9 fragment) to the samples of these paints in the Album.

IL-2.
Paint is obviously weathered very much. It resembles the light- brown color.

Pe-2.
Referring to the color of IL2, it can be added that before we talk about the color shades it’s imperative that the surface is DRY.

What else in the Album attracted Pilawskii’s interest?

AE-8 mystery.
What’s so mysterious about it? From 1930s to 1950s AE-8 remained THE ONLY aviation OIL-BASED enamel of SILVER ( aluminum) color. As an oil-based enamel it was placed on the same page with aviation oil-based enamels. The use of all other aviation enamels of AE- brand was long time discontinued. Would you include the whole page for just one enamel? The mystery is obviously in that that Pilawskii probably confused the alumunim color of AE-8. It is shown in his book as medium-gray (p.11). However from the technical specifications 161AMTU we know that this enamel consisted of 90% of clear oil-based lacquer LM-15 and 10% of aluminum powder. Over the years the proportions changed a little but the basis remained always the same i.e. these two components only. What other color could it be then? And over the years SBs were painted in both aluminum AE-8 and light-gray AE-9.

A28m color.
Perhaps here we can agree with Pilawskii. Color of the A-28m sample in the Album changed a lot, I think this is to blame on poorly matched compatibility of the blue pigments and flattening additives.
Why? Color of any coating material (if the color is standardized) is determined by two etalons (standards). The actual color of the paint should be placed between the two factory benchmarks agreed with VVS Headquarters. The colors of paints of the same brand but of different origins could not be absolutely identical. But they should be within the interval determined by those two etalons. A-28m, A-28g, AMT-7 and AGT-7 paints were produced according to VARIOUS recipes but the SAME etalons. Therefore, new paint samples should be close in color, but over the time difference them could vary due to the different formulations applied. This strong color shift is not observed on the other paint samples (A-28g, AMT-7, AGT-7). But A-28m stands out of this line. In the case of A-24m, A-24g, AMT-4 and AGT-4 paint samples the difference in shades is very small even today. If during this period significant color shift did not occur it means either they have changed the same way (taking into the account the different chemical composition it is unlikely) or these changes are insignificant.

Primers .
Comparison of the primer colors does not make sense for one simple reason: they were not standardized. TU NKKhP 777-41 states about ALG-1: "color from light to dark yellow. TU NKKhP 1047-43 states about ALG-5: "color - gray-green according to the etalon (shade not standardized).
Perhaps enough said so far.

PS
1. If I incorrectly interpreted Pilawkii’s claims I apologize in advance. The reason is my limited knowledge of English language.
2. What do I like about Pilawskii? He doesn’t peddle nor trifle. He doesn’t insult anybody personally. All those who disagree with him, he just calls across the board, at best, «self-promoted luminaries", in my machine translation "samoprodvinutymi luminaries. Who promoted Mr. Pilavski himself then?
3. What torments me and does not let me sleep at night? Where did Pilawskii get those AII Light brown and AII Brown aviation lacquers of the second coating since they were never manufactured by the Soviet industry? In this context the question of the other paints such as Tractor Green and Factory Green AE-5 is fading away.

[Massimo Tessitor...]

Michael Orlov's 11/10 response to E.Pilawskii's "Albom rebuttal" is here
http://scalemodels.ru/modules/forum/viewto..._start_320.html
dragonlance did a quick google translation on the same day however this is a "cleaned-up" version by yours truly.
Just in case the original EP's rebuttal is here
http://vvs.hobbyvista.com/Research/1948/19...m_Nakrasok.html
I suggest you print both and read carefully.
Mario

Hi Mario,
thank you for providing a good traslation of the answer of Orlov, that was much less understandable in the automatic version.
All these considerations are highly interesting.

I would like to ask to Orlov and eventually other Russian experts some questions, but my Russian is unexisting and I've found difficulties to subscribe.
If they could guess a FS equivalent for AMT-16 and A-36;
about A-9: I found it described both as dark blue and light grey. Is there some confusion with AE-9? How are things? What was the color for hydraulic system, dark blue or light grey?
Could you write these questions on Scalemodels.Ru, please, maybe in the same discussion?

Massimo