Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I bet those pink PR Spitfires were flown by closet homosexuals produced by the English public school system. Or closet communists. Or is that the same thing?
That was quite important considering the resources needed to manufacture the paint in the first place. With naval AC requiring to be painted, it was a macro economic decision to let then navy get the paint they needed and the AAF do without as it was mostly unneeded.
I bet those pink PR Spitfires were flown by closet homosexuals produced by the English public school system. Or closet communists. Or is that the same thing?
I bet those pink PR Spitfires were flown by closet homosexuals produced by the English public school system.
A Directive dated 13th February, 1944, stated that fighters and strategic bombers in the 8th AF, would no longer use camouflage. The aircraft were to be left in bare metal, apart from Olive Drab anti-glare panels in front of cockpits, and on engine nacelles immediately within the pilot's vision, on multi-engine types.
I would presume this Directive was issued by the War Department at the Pentagon, via the relevant production and service authorities.
Well I don't think we ever got anything approaching another "flying circus" on any side.
Both the Luftwaffe and USAAF seem to have allowed more leeway in what could and couldn't be applied to aircraft than the RAF. Interesting stuff like US red tails,blue noses and fancy nose art,as well as the Luftwaffe's checked or tulip noses,yellow tails and plethora of personal emblems simply weren't allowed by the spoil sports at the Air Ministry.
There's a really sad directive from the AM laying down exactly where and how big the lettering on a presentation aircraft might be. It gives the impression that really the Ministry would prefer the acknowledgement not to be there at all.
Cheers
Steve
During 1944 American Army Airforce in Europe gradually did away with the camouflage paint. Some sources claim that this was because of the diminished oposition and the fact that the aircraft performed better without. I am curious to know from which point (date) this happened and who initiated it. It certainly gave the US airplanes a sense of glamour and it contributed to the confidence of the allied armies. But still, was this planned or just dumb luck. I have been googling on tis subject and have not come up with much.
I hope some of the forum members can provide me with usefull info.
Chrzzzz
Somewhere in my dusty files is a TTY Memorandum from the West Coast Material Command to NAA, Douglas, Boeing, etc for the following:
Effective 1 January, all US Army Air Force aircraft must be delivered in NMF with exception of anti glare panels. IIRC, the order was transmitted in late November to give the contractors enough time to insert the new requirement into the production process plans.
NAA issued the internal memo on or about December 25, 1943 and the change was implemented just after the P-51B-10-NA block started. The first of the -10's emerged, and were accepted by AAF, with standard OD/Grey camo. IIRC the first NMF P-51B-10's with NMF was around 43-7158 accepted in first week of 1944.
The reasons stated included a.) reducing labor and time for not only the paint shop but also the quality inspection and fixes., b.) reducing weight and drag, and c.) cost of paint and primer. The Mustang was only partially affected as the wings were still puttied, sanded, primed and overs prayed with aluminum paint.
I have been told by multiple sources that theatre commanders could exercise counter orders to deliver 'as before' for tactical reasons. Douglas A-20s are an example of continued OD/Grey deliveries via Project Number.