The real markings of Pierre Le Gloan's Dewoitine D.520 No.277

[Glenn Sprouse]

Hello,

Some others details:
No "Masque de Tragédie" on the tail during BoF.
N°277 is an early serie D.520, so, early air scoop each side of the nose
Antenna mast NMF and "chamois "color probable behind the rear cockpit windows

HTH
Stéph

Ok, I just found the model you did in 2018 of this aircraft.
**** FINISHED: GB-39 1/48 Dewoitine D.520 – Battle for France to Battle of Britain

First, it is beautiful. Wonderful job!

Second, I see exactly what you are talking about in regards to color placement. I will do this on my digital aircraft as well.

Again, great job on the model.

 

[Glenn Sprouse]

The chamois is now behind the cockpit and Masque is removed from the rudder.

I will now apply all the appropriate changes to the other versions. Let me know what you think on the work so far. Thanks everyone!

 

[waroff]

As a general question about the interior. Was the whole interior chamois or just the area behind the cockpit? I'm getting some mixed information between chamois and Blue Nuit for the cockpit itself.

according Dewoitine technical manual(1940) the cockpit receive one coat Chamois primer then one coat "Bleu de nuit", the areas normally non visible, as rear fuselage, remain in chamois.
So it's not sure that Chamois was the colour under the rear vision window, may be "gris bleu clair" as on MS406, CR 714, interior

however first D520s had cockpit paint in "Gris bleu" (seen on wreckage)- "Bleu de nuit" was preconised since december 1939.

mast antenna was NMF, length 750mm mini to 950mm max. The length was adjsutable to frequencies settings.

 

[Glenn Sprouse]

Hello Everyone!!

Just wanted to post some photos of the digital rendition with all of the changes added to each version of Le Gloan's no.277.

First, Battle of France.

I know I've already posted one of this variation but this angle shows what I did with the nose colors better.

Next, in Algiers, white spinner version.

Finally, Syria.

Also, just for fun, I tried to replicate one of the photos we have discussed.

And again in black n white.

Hopefully I've gotten close.

Let me know what you think, and thanks for all of the input everyone.

By the way, what's with the "bacon" rating. I'm hoping it is good because, well, bacon.

 

[Wurger]

Well done. However there are still inaccuracies in the layout of the camo spots.

Can you see?

 

[Wurger]

IMHO the Green colour should be around the cockpit. The chocolate coat was on the engine cowling with the green spots in front and behind it. There was a spot of teh same paint at the tail. The grey colour was on the fin , the front fuselage panel as you did and also in front of the cockpit.
I would like to make a focus on the lack of the camo spot of the port side of the fin in the pic with the D.520 in the hangar. So either it was applied later ( also on the port stabilizer ) or the entire fin was repainted. Note the lack of the insignia there too. Judging by the tone of the spot I would say it was of the green paint. The undersides of the light grey coat as you did.
Here is my suggestion of the camo layout. for the port side....

 

[Glenn Sprouse]

Well done. However there are still inaccuracies in the layout of the camo spots.

Can you see?

View attachment 625862

Thanks so much Wurger!

The problem with the camo is that it is imbedded into the graphics and unfortunately is not separated out into its own layer. It will take me a good while to get it corrected. More than likely I will have to find a blank template and do the camo and markings from scratch. I do have several of the marking as separate layers so that will not be as difficult.

I was hoping to find a standard camo template for the D.520 (like the British used on their aircraft) but it looks like they were all different. Am I correct in thinking that each D.520 had a unique pattern?

Could I also ask if you could see if either of these profiles are correct in the pattern used?

This one I know has some errors but the tail section looks close to what you pointed out. I know the nose should be grey.

On this one the nose looks more accurate to your photo.

I have to confess, my eyes aren't as good at they used to be and I am having problems telling what is what in the B&W photos. I am going to the eye doctor soon and will probably wind up with bifocals.

Thank you for all of your help. This is truly above and beyond! I really appreciate it.

Glenn

 

[Wurger]

Hi again,

That's true that the French planes didn't have the standard camo template used. As memo serves the instruction for painting just said how many and what colours had to be used only . But there weren't defined the shapes of the camo spots. As e result each of the D.520s had slightly different camo layout. Sometimes more than slightly I would say.

Regarding the camo layout I would say that the second ( bottom ) profile you posted above is the closest one. There are still inaccuracies especially at the nose and the tail although the tail is painted yellow. The same is with the first profile although the tail at the starboard looks good.

I have edited a little bit the second profile. Not perfect but it should give you the idea on how it should look like. I didn't correct the view from the front and bottom.
What is more, I'm still thinking that the green ( Khaki) colour was all around the cockpit compartment, the Chocolate spots seen in the profile in front of it also could be and are very possible. So I could follow that too.

 

[Glenn Sprouse]

Thanks so much Wurger. I'll use your recommendation with the corrections and information you already have pointed out. Might take a little while but I'm looking forward to seeing what it looks like all put together.

Again, thanks so much.

 

[Wurger]

My pleasure.

 

[fubar57]

Good stuff Wojtek. From what I read when building mine was the reason the camo was all different was so that the enemy couldn't keep track of aircraft strength

 

[Glenn Sprouse]

It has been a while and I have finally gotten the new camo and markings done. Here are some photos of how it turned out.


An overall photo of the camo. As for the odd lines and white puffs in this photo, I'm being shot at.

Left side with Masque. This is the marking for Algiers I went with.

Color demarcation by Wurger for comparison.

Again, the left side. The original photo is missing the Masque and the Brown blotch that was under it, so it doesn't match the skin in that regard.

The right side. I already noticed the error in the camo demarcation between the brown and grey under the cockpit. It has already been corrected in the skin.

Left side with the yellow tail and Masque painted on in Syria.

I also just found this photo and will post it as an interesting side note. The final state of No.277 after it was crached. It looks like the Masque on the tail in the above photo is absent or has been bloted out by censors.

Well, there it is. Please let me know what you think. Also, thanks to everyone who chipped in with help, comments and suggestions. I really appreciate it.

 

[SaparotRob]

I am amazed by how good that is.

 

[Glenn Sprouse]

Thank you so much SparaotRob! I really appreciate it.

 

[Wurger]

Well done.

 

[Glenn Sprouse]

Well done.

Thnak you so much. Also, thank you Wurger for all of your help. I really appreciate it.

 

[Wurger]

Really my pleasure.

 

[Milos Gazdic]

Hello Glenn & other gents,

This is the most interesting subject, considering that Le Gloan was the highest scoring pilot & most of his scores came from this mount, so for anyone who likes D.520 this machine cannot be ignored. It is also nice (as mentioned & known) that his machine managed to go through various phases when it comes to markings, with minimal camouflage alterations.

I have visited the page showing your three variations when it comes to camouflage, Glenn, and these look really nice. When it comes to your work on this aircraft I would just suggest slightly softer edges on the camouflage demarcations since according to my knowledge these were predominantly applied freehand.

My main question for all (considering there are profiles available of the mount portraying that period) is: are there any photos available clearly showing White 6 Nº277 during the Battle of France? Profile of BoF period in Docavia book shows the machine with the Masque de Tragédie & with the white spinner for the BoF period but I still didn't manage to see the photo in the book. Other 2 to 3 books I have on D.520, and multiple magazines - do not have it either.

Talking about the spinner - In my personal opinion, photo #1 in post #1 shows a white spinner, rather than yellow. Please note that the average reader out of the spinner gives a grayscale readout of 21% black on the spinner while the "arrow" bar has it at 26%, making it basically brighter than the arrow. What makes the arrow look optically brighter is its darker surrounding (camouflaged fuselage), rather than the bright sky/landscape behind the spinner.
How was the spinner in BoF, before the Armistice - we can only dream, without the photo. All photos from the May-June period of CG III/6 showing D.520 I have seen show black spinners.
In photo #2 in post #2 spinner is of average readout of 19% and the white arrow reads between 10% and 18%. The reason for this could be a bit stronger reflection on the fuselage that is directly lit by the sun rather than the convex shape of the spinner which just strikes a specular spot on the reflective point and retains a slightly darker tone due to the shape.
So if I would have to choose I would say: black > white > yellow for three phases, so in that sense, Glenn's "skins" are aligned with my thought.

When it comes to camouflage patterns it got really great at the end. All the changes would be micro-adjustments here & there.

Regarding the cowling's tip, housing the water tank - I am afraid to make a conclusion. Knowing that these machines were still fairly "new" at the moment when the photo #1 in post #1 was taken (as already suggested by Bobolex), I would for sure exclude the option of "weathering" (although the last shot in post #2 has a decent amount of weathering on the nose of both 1st & 2nd aircraft in the line, including the dent in the air intake). The colour change could be due to:

1. the angle of the nose tip's face is obviously under a much different angle than the rest of the fuselage's side (grayscale readout - 48% black, which matches a readout of Gris Bleu Fonce just in front of the cockpit in a per cent with an identical readout of 48%) - which is my strongest belief but I have to be honest and say I am not fully committed to that belief
2. replacement unit which comes overall painted in a single colour (now it will be a wild guess which colour this could be, but I have not heard of any damages to Nº277 requesting this fairly simple replacement of the cowling's tip, housing the water tank).
3. an overall painted area as a sign of "show off" (recognition mark) for Le Gloan's achievements (I believe in this case the part would be painted in some more vibrant colours than just another "blue" as some profiles show it)

A thing mentioned by Bobolex - that the Le Gloan machine's arrow finished earlier than the majority of other D.520s (which had them almost touching the spinner), does help support the options #2 & #3 (shortened arrow after new part or new colour was introduced to the airframe).
The area does, somehow, look a bit more glossy than the rest of the aircraft, especially in photo #2 of post #2. Readout in that shot is 53% vs GBF in front of the cockpit reading 52% - a very close match).
Photo #1 in post #2 was obviously not the best copy and should not be taken into account for these matters, but when looking at it in Fana #603 (large double spread printout), the spinner does look darker than the arrow! Please NOTE: In the scan of the given photo, the spinner reads 25% black, identical to the red of the roundel on the fuselage!! Please note that on the photo blue disc reads as 31% black!
Except for Wurgler's photo #3 in post #2 I could swear, that I have seen another shot of GC III / 6 aircraft showing a group of the unit's machines with bright spinners but I must be damned and cannot locate it now. Spent 45 minutes flipping through pages now trying to find it. The interesting thing about that shot is that it was taken on an overcast day, which we can be concluded based on a very soft shadow under the line of aircraft (unlike in-flight shots which all were taken on sunny days). On this photo (and the photo of post #13), although scans are not of great quality (one being too bright and the other too dark) we can notice that the demarcation between the "pointed" cowling tip & the area just aft of it is non-existent & the transition in tone is undisturbed by the kink between the parts (as it would be expected if they are of single colour under the soft light) supporting option #1 from the above paragraph.

Regarding colour filters on cameras in the 30s & 40s: Yes, colour filters are always a great thing one can add to his camera's lens to "enhance" or modify the look of his images, whether they are shot on ortho- or pan-chromatic films. But one thing is for sure, they are and were utilized much less than they are mentioned in the discussions & articles dealing with the camouflage of our beloved aircraft. Imagine if you have a film of 25 or 50ISO sensitivity & then you shove a filter that will easily "eat up" a full stop. That would be the first reason not to do it, second would be the trouble they cause when you have to put them & remove them from your lenses and we are talking about the images of the aircraft shot in frontline units, often taken by enthusiasts aka amateurs. So we should not stress much about those, but we should learn to recognize pan- & ortho-chromatic films in order to more easily read the images we are observing, as suggested by Bobolex above again.
One thing I would suggest is using the picker in some photo editing software (i.e. Photoshop) to read the areas of interest. Our eye is prone to optical illusions. The same grey tone on the white & black areas will look different to our eye. Darker on white & brighter on black! So do not trust your eye 100%

I would kindly like to ask le_steph40 to let me know where the info about no Masque de Tragédie in the BoF period comes from?
Another interesting detail is noticed on the small photo printed on page #51 in Fana #603 showing Le Gloan with mechanics in the front port side of the Nº277 on the Algiers Maison-Blanche airfield. Basically, this photo shows the tail without the Mask as suggested by Steph40 and without the dark (Brown? Khaki?) patch coming from the port horizontal stabilizer near the root of the tail. The same thing is seen in Photo #2 in Post #1 posted by Glenn. Is this the confirmation that until a certain moment in the Armistice period aircraft flew without these two features?

Also, what does "N°277 is an early serie D.520, so, early air scoop each side of the nose" means? Does that mean that air scoops should be of very early production type (short with the recessed profile in front of them)? All photos of Nº277 I have, including the ones posted in the thread. show it with standard air scoops on both sides. Am I missing something? I am aware of the early style vents on both port & starboard sides on Nº277 but not the air scoops (intakes).

The discussion about the colour of the area behind the "rearview windows" is another important discussion: Chamos? One of the camouflage colours? Gris Bleu Clair? Bleu Nuit? but I believe that this, together with the shape of the panels behind that window is a story for another discussion (and might even be non-standardized 100%).

Hello fubar57

From what I read when building mine was the reason the camo was all different was so that the enemy couldn't keep track of aircraft strength

I would really love to hear more about this thing if possible!

and lastly:

The final state of No.277 after it crashed. It looks like the Masque on the tail in the above photo is absent or has been bloted out by censors.

I sincerely don't think this was altered by censors? Do you? Could it happen that dirt and carbon covered it in the accident? Or that it was for some reason repainted (removed) once again in the career?

I am so sorry to have joined to this discussion one year after it was closed - but it is most interesting one, and it for sure leaves some places for discussion and various opinions.

Best regards,
Miloš

 

[le_steph40]

I would kindly like to ask le_steph40 to let me know where the info about no Masque de Tragédie in the BoF period comes from?
Another interesting detail is noticed on the small photo printed on page #51 in Fana #603 showing Le Gloan with mechanics in the front port side of the Nº277 on the Algiers Maison-Blanche airfield. Basically, this photo shows the tail without the Mask as suggested by Steph40 and without the dark (Brown? Khaki?) patch coming from the port horizontal stabilizer near the root of the tail. The same thing is seen in Photo #2 in Post #1 posted by Glenn. Is this the confirmation that until a certain moment in the Armistice period aircraft flew without these two features?

Also, what does "N°277 is an early serie D.520, so, early air scoop each side of the nose" means? Does that mean that air scoops should be of very early production type (short with the recessed profile in front of them)? All photos of Nº277 I have, including the ones posted in the thread. show it with standard air scoops on both sides. Am I missing something? I am aware of the early style vents on both port & starboard sides on Nº277 but not the air scoops (intakes).

Hello,

The info regarding the Masque de Tragédie comes from French magazine Avions N°161 (January/February 2008) where it have explained that the D.520 N°277 (early serie with early air scoops) receptionned by Armée de l'Air the 26 May 1940 and affected to the GC III/6 the 9 June.
The Masque de Tragédie was added after the defeat of France, between the Summer and Autumn 1940. No Masque de Tragédie in Alger-Maison Blanche during Summer 1940 but Masque de Tragédie visible/added on photos taken at Casablanca during November 1940.

Regards
Stéph.

 

[Milos Gazdic]

OK! I found the lineup of GC III/6 aircraft with white noses! Even Nº277 seems to be there - third in the line.