An exotic and different camouflage

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by pampa14, Sep 12, 2015.

  1. pampa14

    pampa14 Active Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2013
    Messages:
    126
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I share with you some pictures of aircraft applied with camouflage called Barclay. A question, does this camouflage was used operationally or only a test? To see the photos, please visit the link below.


    Aviação em Floripa: Camuflagens Barclay


    Best Regards.
     
  2. Clayton Magnet

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2013
    Messages:
    145
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Looks cool, probably not effective though. As far as I know, the camo pattern is irrelevant, all airplanes become black dots at distance
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. BiffF15

    BiffF15 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    Messages:
    537
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    USAF / Commercial Pilot
    Location:
    Florida
    Actually, if you look at the current colors and schemes used by the US you will notice a trend of grey, blue grey, and grey. The black dot at a distance is delayed / blurred by lighter colors (in my opine) and in closer due to blending with the background make judging distance away more difficult.

    The USN RCAF also paint false canopies on the bottom of their A/C, which is something I personally like. It can cause an adversary to delay or not do something which in turn might allow an advantage for the friendly.

    Cheers,
    Biff
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. GrauGeist

    GrauGeist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Messages:
    15,195
    Likes Received:
    2,032
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Public Safety Automotive Technician
    Location:
    Redding, California
    Home Page:
    The A-10 also has a "false canopy" on their undersides and an interesting note about that, the Ju88 gunships with the solid nose used to have a "false greenhouse" painted on their nose to fool interceptors into thinking it was a standard bomber, thus enticing a frontal attack (a fatal mistake for the interceptors)
     
  5. Milosh

    Milosh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,919
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
  6. fubar57

    fubar57 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2009
    Messages:
    11,091
    Likes Received:
    1,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Heavy Equipment Operator
    Location:
    Jungles of Canada
    Some P-38s also had a false front to make this look like unarmed droop snoots. As far as I remember, the Barclay aircraft never went into combat.

    Geo
     
  7. nuuumannn

    nuuumannn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2011
    Messages:
    3,743
    Likes Received:
    439
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Engineer
    Location:
    Nelson
  8. bobbysocks

    bobbysocks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,809
    Likes Received:
    181
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    that is pretty interesting. I think in an engagement where the pilot was close enough to see and recognize the canopy ( fake one ) it may lull him into choosing the wrong maneuver in order to engage...
     
  9. bobbysocks

    bobbysocks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,809
    Likes Received:
    181
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    that is pretty interesting. I think in an engagement where the pilot was close enough to see and recognize the canopy ( fake one ) it may lull him into choosing the wrong maneuver in order to engage...
     
  10. BiffF15

    BiffF15 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    Messages:
    537
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    USAF / Commercial Pilot
    Location:
    Florida
    It generally gets you beyond a few thousand feet. It often makes you delay an aggressive pull for fear of collision. I'm not sure why the USAF doesn't use it.

    Cheers,
    Biff
     
  11. Milosh

    Milosh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,919
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Maybe NIH??
     
  12. GregP

    GregP Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Likes Received:
    853
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Electrical Engineer, Aircraft Restoration
    Location:
    Rancho Cucamonga, California, U.S.A.
    Hi, Biff. They looked into it and decided not to pay royalty fees to the aviation artist who developed the concept. Canada pays the royalties. At some point, the patent will run out, but they can run 50 years.
     
  13. fubar57

    fubar57 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2009
    Messages:
    11,091
    Likes Received:
    1,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Heavy Equipment Operator
    Location:
    Jungles of Canada
    If I recall, the RCAF reasoning for the false canopy was more to do with ground attack more than dog fighting .


    Geo
     
  14. GrauGeist

    GrauGeist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Messages:
    15,195
    Likes Received:
    2,032
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Public Safety Automotive Technician
    Location:
    Redding, California
    Home Page:
    It's to create confusion in a dogfight, where a split-second moment of confusion under high Gs can offer a chance to evade an attacker. A good number of airforces use it today.

    On a related note, Kieth Ferris holds several patents on modern camouflage, including the false canopy. While he's a very accomplished aviation artist, I don't agree with several publications (and websites) that claim he's a "pioneer" in aircraft camo and that he's the "inventor" of the false canopy.
     
  15. GregP

    GregP Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Likes Received:
    853
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Electrical Engineer, Aircraft Restoration
    Location:
    Rancho Cucamonga, California, U.S.A.
    Hi Graugeist,

    I don't know for sure either way, so I'll say this. Canada pays him royalties and we refused and don;t use the technique. That says something to me, but maybe it's only legal. I haven't an opinion on whether or not he originated the idea, but he DOES have a legal claim. All they'd have to do to find out is to start using the technique without paying. When the lawsuit settled out, we STILL might not know, but SOMEONE would win some money.
     
  16. GrauGeist

    GrauGeist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Messages:
    15,195
    Likes Received:
    2,032
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Public Safety Automotive Technician
    Location:
    Redding, California
    Home Page:
    Greg, to be honest, they were painting fake cockpits or greenhouses on aircraft before his time. I know I've read somewhere that he's a fan of historical camouflage, so this initself indicates where his concepts have come from.

    In WWI, they used razzle-dazzle camo on ships, tanks and aircraft, the Germans used (to good effect) the Lozenge camo, which had it's roots in the Impressionism art of the day. There's been many different "optical deception" schemes used, following examples set by nature.

    Anyway, here's a mock greenhouse used on a Ju88 gunship (as I mentioned earlier) that lured interceptors into fatally thinking it was a bomber:
    image.jpg

    Here, we can see the "mock greenhouse" taken to an extreme level on a B-24:
    image.jpg

    So Kieth's concepts are nothing new and in my opinion, don't warrant a patent nor accolades.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. GregP

    GregP Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Likes Received:
    853
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Electrical Engineer, Aircraft Restoration
    Location:
    Rancho Cucamonga, California, U.S.A.
    #17 GregP, Sep 14, 2015
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2015
    None of those is the same idea, but perhaps close. The B-24 is more like Dazzle and the fake wake about 1/3 back from the ship's bow. I'd say nobody in WWII bothered to patent the idea and the legal climate since then is somewhat ridiculous. But I digress ...

    The new concept looks like a decent idea for close-in fighting and our methods are designed to mitigate that, so maybe they just don't think it is necessary. I can't say.
     
  18. GrauGeist

    GrauGeist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Messages:
    15,195
    Likes Received:
    2,032
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Public Safety Automotive Technician
    Location:
    Redding, California
    Home Page:
    well, the idea of painting a dark spot on the fuselage to look like a canopy sure seems like the same idea as the Germans had, painting a spot on the nose to resemble a bomber's greenhouse...just 40 year's difference! :lol:
     
  19. GregP

    GregP Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Likes Received:
    853
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Electrical Engineer, Aircraft Restoration
    Location:
    Rancho Cucamonga, California, U.S.A.
    You think like I do, but I am NOT a laywer.

    The two ideas are different concepts ... one is a piston fighter and the other is aan F-18 jet about 50 years later. Since I'm not a lawyer, one could easily lead me to the other, and I wouldn't think to patent it either.

    Rod did.
     
Loading...

Share This Page