Surrender Betty Bombers at Ieshima a Picture Story from the Jeffrey Ethell Collection

[Jeffrey Ethell Collection]

Thought it would be interesting to look at some of the less well known images from the Collection and examine the story behind the image.

The arrival of the Japanese Surrender Envoys on the island of Ieshima in the Ryukus (Okinawa) August 18 1945 was the subject of hundreds of images of the famous G4M Betty transports painted white with green crosses.

In the above image which shows the Bettys and escorting B-25s of the 345th BG circling Ieshima (top left) prior to landing, it's worth noting just how close the B-25 escort is formating just slightly higher and firmly between the 2 Bettys.

Although the image suggests there were only 2 escorts there were in fact a total of 6 B-25 Mitchells and 12 P-38 Lightnings which intercepted the Bettys just off the southern coast of Kyushu island and accompanied them to Ieshima. Gen. MacArthur was just a little concerned that any Japanese aircraft in the air might not be seen as 'Friendlies', hence the large number of escorts provided.

Read the full story of the surrender envoy Betty flight to Ieshima here: The 345th's Final Show

Note also the slightly blurry outlines which is actually camera judder perhaps due to the photographer positioning the camera out of the port waist gun position and resting it on the metal edge which of course would be vibrating.

These and other images of the surrender Betty transports at Ieshima can be viewed at Flickr.com here: Japanese Air Forces

Darryl

 

[rochie]

Wow some incredible images in that second link !

 

[Gnomey]

Great stuff!

 

[Jeffrey Ethell Collection]

Often there were more dangers lurking for the novice photographer than camera judder. In the next series of images of the surrender Bettys at Ieshima we see how one photographer would have certainly learned from his mistake.

In the last image we see why the images are out of focsus, the manual lens focus was set to close up or foreground rather than infinity. You can imagine there was just a little disappointment for this photographer when he received the letter from home saying " Son, thanks for the photos of the surrender Bettys at Ieshima, too bad they were all out of focus!"

I know how he would have felt having done this myself. On the bright side, at least he got the images. The same couldn't be said for the careless photographer who exposed a whole roll of precious 35 mm film with the lens cap on.

Darryl

 

[nuuumannn]

Terrific! Certainly adds to the discussion as to whether the surrender crosses were black or really dark green...

 

[Jeffrey Ethell Collection]

The Green vs Black Cross is something of a vexed question. The color photo evidence supports both as in the examples below.

However, we really need to accept the word of the hundreds if not thousands of GIs and Army Air Force personnel present at Ieshima on 18 August 1945, who to a man/woman described the Betty transports as painted white with green crosses. They can't all have been color blind, surely?

This a case where you need to trust your ears rather than your eyes.

Darryl

 

[fubar57]

I've posted a few eye-witness accounts on another thread in the forum and they all say "green crosses"

 

[GrauGeist]

That's the darkest green I have ever seen

 

[fubar57]

I just finished this last month...trust me....the crosses are green

 

[Capt. Vick]

How did you get a model zero to surrender to you?

 

[Peter Gunn]

How did you get a model zero to surrender to you?

Threatened it with a BB gun?

 

[GrauGeist]

Geo gave it stern look

 

[daviemax]

Also escorting these G4Ms were armed Boeing 'B-17H' SAR aircraft - these appear in other photos.

 

[Gnomey]

Excellent shots!

 

[The Basket]

Sometimes it's not the picture quality but the picture that counts.

 

[Graeme]

Letter to the editor of Flying Review 1961.
Green crosses....
I wonder at what point in time we started to believe they were black?

 

[Shinpachi]

Didn't I say the green (midori in Jp) did not mean color but a state of liveliness like this girl's hairs ?
Midori meant "fresh". Ao meant "blue or green" for the old Japanese beside their knowledge of western color classification.
There was room to kid the enemies as the war was not over yet. Bettys were also commissioned from junk planes to keep decent ones in case the negotiation in Manila broke up.
Long long story to short.

緑の黒髪

Source: http://salon-hide.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/wasou06192.jpg

 

[mokyme]

Thanks Shinpachi,

Yes I understand the difference between Japanese term for "green" during WWII and what it refers to today and that it does indirectly describe the shade. In western world we add an adjective to describe the shade of green eg, forest green, grass green, cactus green because it connects the shade with some inanimate object that we recognize. However, the Japanese do the same as they describe bamboo green as "aotake" etc.

What is interesting is if we look at WWII J-A/C relics and the paint coating we can see how the shade of green is affected by the type and quantity of light that reflects the color back to our eyes. This reflective quality is referred to as SPECULARITY.

Original relic access door from Navy Type 0 3 seat Seaplane Suitei (E13A Jake) recovered from Kiska in the Aleutian Islands, 1943:

Can anyone say what part of the JAKE this access door/panel came from?

The interesting thing is the flash used shows how the shade of green changes due to the access door being curved. So in the center the dark green appears lighter while at the edges it is much darker,

Now consider the light on the green crosses of the surrender Betty bombers. The crosses are in the vertical pane so there is a lower (darker) specular value compared to how the crosses would appear if in the horizontal pane. Also consider the white surrounds to the crosses. The brightness of the white forces the pupils in our eyes to close down reducing the light that comes in thus making the green crosses appear much darker (almost black).

The camera and film acts in much the same way as our eyes although the one key difference is that film has a far smaller range of shades than our eyes. We see millions of colors while the camera/film sees a much more restricted range. I'm talking about Kodachrome film here. Obviously modern day digital cameras see a far greater range of colors than those that were around 75 years ago.

Don't you wish someone could go back to Ieshima with a digital camera? Would we see the green crosses with much more clarity?

Credit: eBay Auctions

JEC

 

[Shinpachi]

Thanks for your good lecture JEC and I have heard a lot about it at J-aircraft before too.
However, my conclusion about this green cross issue is simple since I was asked my opinion by Mr. David Aiken 16 years ago.
Interestingly you do not want to trust your own eyes but authorized announcements.
This would have been same 75 years ago like "Jap green cross planes will come here tomorrow".
This looks a perfect job of our airmen.

 

[Jeffrey Ethell Collection]

Hi Shinpachi,

You sound a little cynical but I know one thing I should never do is get into this argument of black vs green crosses. You can't rely on the photo evidence because Kodachrome film from 75 years ago did not faithfully reproduce all shades and tones of the color spectrum. Too many variables with Kodak warning people not to take photos before 10am or after 4pm due to the quality of the light changing the color tones.

So yes I do trust my eyes but I don't trust Kodachrome film!

I know let's just say they were green crosses that looked black. That way everyone's a winner.

JEC