Was RLM 02 used as a top-surface camouflage colour on Luftwaffe fighters?

[John D]

I came across the attached website asking for proof that, apart from fuselage-side mottling, RLM 02 was used as an exterior colour on Luftwaffe aircraft.

The Great RLM 02 Debate The Brushpainter

I've checked the reference sources that I have, as well as searched the web, and couldn't find any hard evidence (colour photos, Luftwaffe documents, recovered airframes) that RLM 02 was ever used as a splinter camouflage pattern colour on Luftwaffe fighters during 1940, at least.

Does anyone have any photos, Luftwaffe documents (not secondary sources) or know of any aircraft relics that clearly show that RLM 02 was used as a splinter- camouflage pattern colour?

On page 14 of "Luftwaffe Camouflage and Markings 1933-1945 Photo Archive 1", referring to day fighters the author states, "The official standard had been changed from 70/71/65 to 71/02/65 in December 1939 (see Volume One, page 77)...". As I don't have a copy of Volume One of this series, I can't refer to page 77. Can anyone help out here? Does page 77 have any hard evidence of RLM 02 being used or is it just yet more speculation and opinion?

 

[Tieleader]

I came across the attached website asking for proof that, apart from fuselage-side mottling, RLM 02 was used as an exterior colour on Luftwaffe aircraft.

The Great RLM 02 Debate The Brushpainter

I've checked the reference sources that I have, as well as searched the web, and couldn't find any hard evidence (colour photos, Luftwaffe documents, recovered airframes) that RLM 02 was ever used as a splinter camouflage pattern colour on Luftwaffe fighters during 1940, at least.

Does anyone have any photos, Luftwaffe documents (not secondary sources) or know of any aircraft relics that clearly show that RLM 02 was used as a splinter- camouflage pattern colour?

On page 14 of "Luftwaffe Camouflage and Markings 1933-1945 Photo Archive 1", referring to day fighters the author states, "The official standard had been changed from 70/71/65 to 71/02/65 in December 1939 (see Volume One, page 77)...". As I don't have a copy of Volume One of this series, I can't refer to page 77. Can anyone help out here? Does page 77 have any hard evidence of RLM 02 being used or is it just yet more speculation and opinion?

Don't have that particular book, however here's some info from "The Official Monogram Painting Guide Of German Aircraft 1935-1945" by Kennith Merrick and Thomas Hitchcock. Excellent reference book, long out of print with a ton of color chips.
This is all the 02 references I could find in the book. Hope it helps.

 

[John D]

Thanks very much for your reply. I should have mentioned that I've got a copy of the "Official Monogram Painting Guide" too and I agree, it's an excellent reference book. My concern here though is trying to locate documentary, photographic or surviving airframe evidence that proves RLM 02 was used as a top-surface splinter-pattern colour, particularly on fighters in 1940. I note the Monogram book states on page 18, "...in May 1940, an official order had been issued to the aircraft industry simplifying the original upper surface splinter pattern...In addition, those Jagdgeschwadern serving in France were to receive replacement aircraft camouflaged in the newly approved RLM scheme of 70/02/65". Does anyone know the name of this order and whether it specifically mentions RLM 02?

I've seen convincing evidence of RLM 74/75 (or something close to it) being used for the splinter pattern on 109s in 1940, but I've yet to see any primary evidence for RLM 70/02 being used for the splinter pattern.

Here's another page from that website I cited above. At this stage, I have to admit he's got a point. Looking forward to any hard evidence to show RLM 02 was used for the splinter pattern.

RLM 02 and The Most Interesting Photograph Ever The Brushpainter

 

[Airframes]

By late 1939, the camouflage scheme for the Bf109 was RLM 70 and RLM 71 on upper surfaces,with RLM 65 undersurfaces, the upper / lower demarcation being along the lower edge of the fuselage.
During the winter of 1939/1940, the blue (RLM 65) was extended up the sides of the fuselage, roughly level with the bottom of the cockpit canopy, as this provided a better camouflage against the bright winter skies, and there were variations in the demarcation line, depending on unit.
By summer 1940, the RLM 70 (Schwarzgrun) was replaced by RLM 02, although the earlier scheme could still be seen, as could a combination of 'early' and 'late' schemes - for example, RLM70 amd RLM 71 on the wings and tail planes, with RLM 71 and RLM 02 on the fuselage spine.
There were, of course, variations, and study of photos of a chosen subject will show this.
By around late September / early October, some aircraft were painted at unit level in shades of grey, similar to what later became RLM 74/75/76, the scheme which became 'official' by early 1941. It is not known if these early 'grey' schemes were the 'official' paints, or locally mixed, but possibly the latter.
However, regarding RLM 02 (and this is purely a personal view), until recently, I had always believed this to be a different shade to that currently produced as model paints, this current version being a beige/grey shade, and I still believe this to be the case.
Contemporary photos, both B&W and the more rare colour photos, show the RLM 02 as being somewhat darker than current model paints, and I still have an (empty) tin of the original Humbrol 'Authenticolour' RLM 02, which matched a colour chip (which I believe, from memory) also matched the chip in the Monogram publication, and was a very close match to a fragment from a crashed '109 I had at that time.
This shade was more of a mid grey-green, rather like a slightly lighter version of German Army 'feldgrau', and I tend to mix paints to match this when painting models of Bf109E's (example pic below).
That said, this slightly darker visual effect might well have been the result of spraying the RLM 02 over the existing, very dark green of RLM 70.
Whatever the reason, many contemporary (B&W) photos show a distinct tonal difference between the RLM 02 of the cockpit, and that of the exterior camouflage.
Bottom line is, yes, what is believed to have been RLM 02 was used on the Bf109E and the Bf110 in 1940, replacing the earlier RLM 70.

EDIT:- The tones in the colour pic shown in the link in your last post are deceiving - this is either a colourized print, or the original, or reproduction of a reproduction of an original Agfa colour image, where either tones have not reproduced correctly, due to age, processing, reproduction or a combination of these. Note the 'pale' look of the yellow figure and Gruppe bar, and the totally incorrect shade of the Luftwaffe uniform.
Also, what is noted as RLM 74 is too light for this, and has a green cast. I believe this to be a scheme showing RLM 71 / RLM02 over RLM 65.The shade noted as RLM 02 on the lower fuselage appears to be dirt and / or lighting effect, and the tone beneath the tail-plane is similar, although the latter may be RLM 02.
The overall effect of the tones in this image suggest to me that this is a colourized image.

 

[GrauGeist]

Great info, Terry!

In regards to that photo of Yellow 6, the tones really look off.

It almost has qualities similar to a colorized lithograph (like an old colorized postcard or image for publication).

Also of note, it appears that there's a patch of off-color RLM 65 beneath the Yellow 6, suggesting that the aircraft had a different assignment at one time as well as showing inconsistancies in paint colors on Luftwaffe aircraft.

 

[Wurger]

The shade noted as RLM 02 on the lower fuselage appears to be dirt and / or lighting effect,....

You mean the RLM76 Terry, don't you? I agree with you. What is more I would say that the fusealge was washed up at the area. It is very likely the exchaust stains and dirt there was removed with a brush or a rag soaked with a gasoline. This and moisture caused the effect of the darker paint there. Also I agree the pic might be colourized. Additionally it is quite common that scanning of pics results in false colour tones. Here is a good example. ... Bf 109E3 7./JG26 Walter Blume, Caffiers ,France, 1940

Three different scans of the same pic and almost three different tinges of the yellow. But what is more the third scan reveals the RLM02 on the tops while the two others suggest the Grey paint there.

The pic source:
Messerschmitt Bf 109E3 7.JG26 (W13+I) Walter Blume Caffiers France 1940 02
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/8c/9a/a9/8c9aa9da0c72f59fc722fd4aee6ca3ba.jpg
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1645/24664699900_f41a9ac52d_b.jpg

 

[Airframes]

Oops !
Yes my friend,that should read RLM 76.
I believe that the 'true' colours lie somewhere between the second and third pic posted above, that is, slightly darker than shown in the third pic. It's very possible, in fact likely, that the training aircraft in the background is in overall RLM 02, the 'standard' colour for trainers at this time.

 

[Wurger]

 

[Crimea_River]

Terry's description above is pretty much consistent with a passage on this topic in Ulmann's Luftwaffe Colours book. He states that 02 was used to replace either the 70 or 71 splinter colours in early 1940 as part of experimental efforts to lighten the camouflage due to experience gained in Poland where it was found that the upper camo was too dark.

As far as "proof" is concerned I can not offer any other than to suggest that competent restoration museums have likely documented the paint layers on surviving artifacts. The 109E o display at Duxford still has the original paint on one of its wings but i dont recall if 02 was present or not.

Personally I am fully prepared to defer to credible people who have done extensive research on the topic and accept their findings without asking for proof.

 

[John D]

Thanks very much for the input. Great stuff. I'm happy to go with wherever the evidence leads us, but at this stage I'm still bothered by the possibility that the upper-surface splinter-pattern colours on fighters went straight from 70/71 to 74/75 sometime in late 1939 or early 1940. The notion that 70/02 or 71/02 was used after the application of 70/71 was discontinued appears to have come from researchers in the 1970s trying to account for the greater contrast noticed in black and white photographs taken in the early 1940s of the splinter-pattern colours on 109s. However, it seems that you get the same level of contrast from 74/75 in black and white photographs, so where's the evidence for 70/02 or 71/02?

It's interesting that you mention the Duxford 109E-3 currently on display, which was shot down in September 1940. While the left wing has been restored and repainted in 74/75, the right wing has been left wearing its original paint. I've seen this aircraft and the right wing, and although scratched and worn, it looks grey or bluish grey; 74/75 in fact. Now that to me is hard evidence. And yet even for this aircraft, which is on public display for all to see, so embedded is the RLM 02 idea that some still insist it was painted 71/02/65 and that the restorers have got it wrong! See the commentary here at "the 109 lair".

The 109 Lair- The Online Source for Messerschmitt 109 information

Regarding the scanning of photos resulting in false colour tones, I would agree. Unless we have access to original colour photographs, it's take your pick regarding scanned colour photographs found on the web. For example, regarding the "Bf 109E3 7./JG26 Walter Blume" photograph, here is another of the same aircraft from the same website and the colours on the spine of the fuselage look like 74/75 to me.

Messerschmitt Bf 109E3 7.JG26 (W13+I) Walter Blume Caffiers France 1940 03

I can't find any sources or acknowledgements for the photographs on the "Asisbiz" website, so I don't know how far we can rely on them as accurate in terms of colour. I found this version of the photograph you posted on Pinterest and going by the line down the centre, I'd say it's been scanned from a book. Any idea which?

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/d0/ed/98/d0ed98cc6e6169bf5cd5b5b2eeb34b61.jpg

 

[Wurger]

The main problem of these colour pictures is that the level of blue is overcrossed. It results in incorrect shades of many colours. Secondly, even if you can access the orginal colour pics you have to remember that the process of making the print photos was different from the one we use today and not the one used for the digital images. These prints were made with filters in order to get colours.It was enough to overrun the exposure time for any of the RGB colours and the final effect was different from the one you should get.

 

[Crimea_River]

I'm trying to contact Dave Wadman about this topic and will advise if I hear something that might help. Dave has written a number of the Jagdwaffe series of books and lives near me.

 

[stona]

RLM 02 was used extensively as an outer coating before the war.

Michael Ullmann:

"To the confusion of everyone, because of the absence of documentation, DKH L40/52 grey (or Avionorm nitro-paint 7375 light grey) was designated RLM 63 light grey. Aircraft painted in L 40/52 (or Avionorm 7375 matt grey) were in service at the same time as aircraft whose OS lists stated that they were painted in RLM 02. As the clearly evident differences could not be explained, the two shades were designated RLM 63, based on a wrong interpretation of the OS list for the He 52, in the absence of further information. Dated photos show that the light grey paints L 40/52 (or Avionorm 7375 matt grey) were widely used in 1935 but tye number of RLM 02 paints rose steadily thereafter, in accordance with L.Dv. 521/1, until the light grey paints had disappeared."

So RLM 02 had long been a surface finish before the war. In fact IT was replaced by the various camouflage schemes when

"Front line aircraft were … painted in the regulation two tone (70/71) or three tone (61/62/63) colours."

It is hardly surprising that when the need to lighten Luftwaffe fighter camouflage became apparent in the early campaigns of WWII that a reversion to an already proved and tested colour should occur.
Trials began in early 1940 on both the Bf 109 and Bf 110. They did not just involve the substitution of RLM 02 for one of the darker colours, the very high demarcation line for the underside colour (RLM 65) was another result of these trials.
A quick visit to a decent museum will confirm the RLM 02 on unrestored artefacts.

Cheers

Steve

 

[Airframes]

Also, the colour we know a 'RLM 02' was well documented on crash reports in the UK, along with the 'greens' and later, the first evidence of the greys which ultimately became RLM 74, 75 and 76, the first report describing' battleship grey'
The nose-on pic of Blume's '109 is rather spurious in its colour rendition - this is possibly a reproduction of an original, where again the tones are affected, with the engine cowling, on the ground in the foreground of the pic, being the better example of probable colours, which look nothing like RLM74 and 75, but do look like poorly reproduced (photographically) RLM 71 and 70, whereas the fuselage spine looks more towards RLM71 and 02.
The colour balance overall is very 'washed out', especially on what should be RLM 65, the main overall colour.

 

[John D]

Thanks very much again to everyone for taking the time to share their knowledge and views. It's much appreciated.

Regarding the caution that old colour photographs may not be entirely accurate colour wise, I would agree. However, when you look at period colour photographs of early FW190s, for example, which we know with more certainty were finished in 74/75, you can see two contrasting greys, not completely different colours. A bigger concern for me is the insistence that we're definitely looking at RLM 71/02 when the photographs (to me at least) suggest RLM 74/75. Here are a few examples:

See top photo on page 28, Luftwaffe Camouflage and Markings 1933-1945, Photo Archive 1.

See page 249 of Luftwaffe Camouflage and Markings 1933-1945 Volume 2 by Merrick and Kiroff

Another concern is the "dating" of colour photographs indisputably showing 74/75 to a later period, thus avoiding the possibility that 74/75 was being used instead of 71/02 or at a much earlier time. Take this colour photograph of an early 109, for example, and note the caption.

See page 391, Luftwaffe Camouflage and Markings 1933-1945 Volume 2 by Merrick and Kiroff

However, we know for certain that at least one other early 109 was finished in 74/75 because the "Official Monogram" guide (p 18) tells us a 109C was recovered from Norwegian waters and found to be painted 74/75/76. But we're then told that it seems "probable" this was a test scheme! Is it not more "probable", given the odds, that this recovered 109C was finished in the standard camouflage pattern and colours of its time?

The comment noting that RLM 63 and RLM 02 were actually the same colour is very helpful. It certainly makes it more plausible the Luftwaffe would revert to a proven top-surface colour when looking to replace the 70/71 colour scheme. However, as our friend "The Brushpainter" points out, "You can't get the typical "02/71" scheme by "just painting over" the black green. You have to repaint the entire aircraft, because the dark green ends up where the black green used to be, and the 02 ends up where the dark green used to be. So it's not some kind of "field mod" paint job, done that way. It's an overall repaint, and when they did an overall repaint, I'm convinced that they went ahead and painted the 74/75/76 scheme that became that standard at that time."

Remove the Splinter from THINE OWN Eye! The Brushpainter

Regarding seeking the answer by visiting museums, that's also an excellent suggestion! Duxford's 109 has been mentioned and when I saw it, the unrestored right wing looked grey. Then there's the Hendon 109E. Unfortunately it's been repainted, but the colours chosen are grey, which suggests the restorers/repainters looked at the original splinter-pattern colours on the wings and saw grey. Then there's the 109E in the technical museum in Munich. Also repainted, but in grey!

All is not lost, however. The Kent Battle of Britain Museum has a tail-section relic from a 109E from 1940. Attached is a page from a very old copy of Wingspan magazine featuring a black and white photograph of the tail. The museum in Kent is closed for winter at the moment, but if someone could visit the museum when it reopens and take a colour photo of the tail, it would be most appreciated. Providing the tail has not been repainted and clearly shows the RLM 71/02 or 70/02 scheme, I think the case for RLM 02 is proven beyond reasonable doubt in its favour.

 

[Wurger]

I haven't seen these pics you mentioned above but it is possible these were taken late than the camo with the RLM 02 was used. Especially you mentioned them with the vol.2 of the Luftwaffe Camouflage and Markings 1933-1945 by Merrick and Kiroff. The vol 1 of these authors states the RLM 02 was used in the period 1939/1940. Both of these books seem to keep the timeline. Also you asked about the page 77 of the vol.1.. the page and the no.78 contain the daigrams for the splinter camo of the Bf 109 just with the RLM02 as a top colour.

 

[John D]

Thanks for the information on Volume 1.

Regarding the colour photographs I reference, the caption for the one on page 28 of Photo Archive 1 states in part, "...Russia in mid-1941...The colour shift has produced a blue-grey effect, but the actual colours were 71/02". So even though the photograph was apparently taken in mid-1941 and the colours look to me like 74/75, the author claims the colours were 71/02 due to "colour shift".

The two colour photographs on page 249 of Luftwaffe Camouflage and Markings 1933-1945 Volume 2 are of 109Es. One is dated May 1940, while the other looks like it was taken around the same time. Both look like they have been painted in 74/75 to me, but the author states, "Camouflage was 71/02/65" for one and "Camouflage is 71/02/65" for the other. I don't know why. I have had my eyes tested and I'm not colorblind.

The colour photograph of an early 109D on page 391 of Vol 2 is clearly painted in 74/75. The author confirms that the colours on the aircraft are 74/75/76, but then apparently uses that information to date the photograph to "after Spring 1941". But as I state above, we know for certain that at least one other early 109 was finished in 74/75, because a 109C was recovered in Norway wearing 74/75, so who's to say the photo on page 391 wasn't taken in early 1940, thus undermining the 71/02 usage claim for that period?

 

[Wurger]

If these pics are dated on the 1941 so no wonder the 74/75 camo was used. Reagarding the early Bf 109, I mean the C and D variants. it is very likely these were repainted with the late colours for the camo. And it doesn't mean they didn't wore the 71/02 uniform at all.

 

[Airframes]

Basing colour definition on reproduced photos, B&W or colour, can be a minefield, especially if the viewer does not have an understanding of the photographic materials and processes of the period concerned, and what is involved in the various stages of reproduction to print in a publication.
The variables in these processes are many and, without some form of training in the subject, reaching a positive conclusion is virtually impossible. Even with training, a definitive answer can only be a 'best guess'.
For example, a colour reversal film (a transparency or 'slide' film), has as its basis a B&W negative emulsion, along with 30+ 'layers' of colour additives, colour dyes, colour couplers and stabilisers.
Given that the first stage in producing the image is correct, that is, the initial exposure, then the latent image should be as close as possible in colour rendition and contrast, to the actual subject.
However, it will now already be apparent that the first set of variables are now in play, with exposure affected by aperture and shutter speed, ASA / ISO setting' length of exposure and, of course, angle, quality and 'colour tempertaure of the light source (mainly daylight in the case of this discussion).
The time between exposure and processing, along with variations in temperature during storage before processing, will also effect the final result.
Then there is the processing itself - this has to be absolutely perfect if the optimum results are to be obtained, with process control monitoring taking place at least three times per day, and with the correct temperatures (plus or minus 0..25 of a degree), time, agitation and chemical replenishment of the Developer, Bleach and Fix.
Any and all variation in this process will effect the final colour balance and contrast.
If the now processed colour transparency is to be printed, then (at the period of WW2) an inter-negative has to be produced. This is a colour negative, exposed from the original, which is then used to produce a colour print, just as a colour negative would be used to do the same.
The same variables now come into play - exposure, filtration, and processing.
When this colour print is to be used for reproduction in a printed publication, then four B&W negatives are produced, as colour separations, to then produce four printing plates covering Cyan, Magenta, Yellow and what is generally known as a 'black printer', the latter providing the overall contrast to the final printed page.
This process, of course, is wide open to a multitude of variables, and without extremely rigid process control, the finished image can end up looking nothing like the original, in terms of overall colour balance, and / or contrast.

Although perhaps not quite as complex as colour reproduction, the processing, printing and reproduction of a B&W image still has many variables, starting at the camera and then, like the colour image, involving processing of the film, exposure onto the b&W paper (where the choice of paper 'grade' can make a vast difference too), processing of the final print, and then the variables of reproduction, via a half tone negative and printing plates, to the final printed page. And this is not even allowing for any filters that may have been used over the camera lens, and is accepting that the correct type of B&W film had been used in the first place !
From this, it can be seen that some knowledge of the photographic and printing processes is required to even begin to interpret and assess colour tones and hues in reproduced images. I am fortunate in that I had rather extensive training in this field, but that does not mean that I could give an absolutely definitive answer to what colour is what - although there's a very good chance I could decide between what is grey, blue, green etc.
So, basing definite opinions on rather dubious colour (or B&W) reproductions, without knowing, or at least understanding, the history of the image in question, it's method of reproduction, whether it's original or copy etc, and without some grounding in photographic and printing sciences is, at best, a very 'hit and miss' affair.

Suffice to say that, what we know, or accept, as RLM 02 was used as a camouflage colour in 1940, with records from crashed aircraft to support this, although I'll return to this later.
There is also evidence to support the use of greys, which might or might not have been 'official' RLM colours (it is generally considered that these were locally mixed paints), and there is also evidence that one Geschwader, JG53, used various colours, in a number of different patterns not at all related to the 'official' patterns.
The colour we know as, or at least call, RLM 02 was still in use in early 1941, both on the BF109E and BF109F, and on the FW190, and was then replaced by the three greys, RLM 74/75/76, which became fully in use by summer of that year.

Even Rolf Pingel's BF109F, the first of it's type to be brought down intact, on 10th July 1941, was described, in the crash report, as being painted "..dark olive green on the upper surfaces", with pale blue sides and under surfaces, although the B&W photos of this aircraft (and there were many), distinctly show the common splinter pattern associated with the BoB period 'Emil's', and a tonal reproduction which suggests RLM 71/02 upper surfaces.

Now, returning to the actual shade of what we call RLM 02.
As I mentioned in a previous response, I have long had doubts about the shade currently offered by most model paint manufacturers, as I believe that this 'current' shade is too light, compared to the colour used as an upper surface camouflage, for the reasons previously stated, including a distinct difference in tonal reproduction, when compared to the 'real' RLM 02, seen on undercart legs, cockpits etc, in contemporary photos, B&W and colour.
I still believe that the actual shade used was slightly darker, the same as the original model paints offered by Humbrol, Compucolour and others, in the late 1970's and early 1980's, and close to the shade I now mix for my models, as previously illustrated.
Now whether this really was RLM 02, or a variation in shade of this paint, I don't know, and it could be that modellers and historians have been referring to this as such, incorrectly, for decades.
Whatever the reason, what we now refer to as RLM 02, either in its 'true' form, or slightly darker, was used in 1940, and was distinctly different from the previous greens, and the later greys, although it was a greyish-green hue.
To offer a comparison of the the two schemes, that is RLM71 and RLM 02, and the later RLM74/75/76, below are B&W photos of two of my models, showing both schemes, and the tonal reproduction differences are clearly evident.

 

[fubar57]

I don't know how accurate or up to date this is but its all in one ....