great looking builds! I went through all the pages and it is fun to watch these all come together. The color choice for the PR looks spot on.

Jim

Here's an update about tonight's progress.

Starting with one of the Tamiya Mk 1's, I cut out the "B" scheme patterns and applied them to the model.

Then using RAF Dark Green, I gave the plane a coat of paint in the places the masks didn't cover.

After allowing some time for the paint to dry, I removed the masking. This is how the plane looked.


I really like this color combination ! It's a very pale blue and represents a color used by the RAF during the switch over to the "Sky" color.

Then I gave the plane a few coats of "Future" clear acrylic to prepare the surfaces for decals.

This next photo shows the differences between the "A" and the "B" schemes quite well. They're pretty much a mirror image of each other...
The "B" pattern is at the top, and the "A" pattern is lower in this next picture.

I'll end tonight's posting with this:

"And then there were two."...

As always,
"comments are encouraged".

Thanks for looking !

Nicely done Louis.

Thanks Tom B
@tom-bebout
for the compliment.

Here's what I have found out in regards to the use of painting matts on Spitfires.

I agree with Tom that the odd and even number planes were "supposed" to be painted with the serial number determining which type of pattern was used. However my Intel states the "Odd" numbers received the "B" scheme. This is just the opposite of how it was mentioned above.

But there were exceptions, so if you can find an original era photo that would be the "Gold" standard to be correct.

As far as the masks are concerned, I have read where large rubber matts were used. A Spitfire "Expert" (who sadly is no longer with us), named Edgar Brooks, reportedly confirmed the use of the rubber matts.

These matts were not used in the field. The field maintenance units would have refinished the planes using the painting methods as described above by Tom C. There was a particular method prescribed to refinish the planes in order to maintain the finish and keep the performance up. Filler was used to fill in rivets on the wing ahead of the main spar, just as it was on the Mustang wing to keep the laminar flow. The final finish even used a prescribed sanding method to smooth out the paint.

Please keep in mind that the Spitfire underwent several different color changes during it's career. When these changes took effect in the field, or repairs were made, the matts again would not have been used.

This may help to explain Tom C's statement about the "correctly" restored Spitfires he has encountered. They simply may have been restored to a point in time to look like a plane that was repainted in the field.

I did a rather quick internet search to look for a photo of the painting matts in use, but so far I have not found one.

The Spitfire was not the only type of plane to use matts during construction. Curtiss used them too, even though Tom C has previously claimed they did not...

I do have a photo showing the matts in use by Curtiss. This photo clearly shows a wing being painted from a P-40. The control "Joystick" was mounted to the upper surface of the wing, as it was on the earlier P-36.

This P-40 shown in the picture was probably one of the ones destined for use in the RAF. As such, it would have been painted to RAF specs, but would have used "US Equivalent" colors. But that's another whole can of worms...

This picture shows just how they were used. It makes sense that Curtiss would have adopted the manner used on the Spitfire to produce planes that were destined for use in the RAF. It would also speed up construction and increase uniformity of the finished product, which would undergo an acceptance inspection prior to delivery. If it didn't pass inspection, they would have to repair the noted faults before it would. This is something you don't want happening in a wartime environment.

I hope this helps to answer your question. I will keep looking for a picture of the Spitfire painting matts as time permits. "If" and "when" I find the picture we are looking for, I will post it and send you a copy.

Tom C is correct that in order to replicate the very minimal overspray effect, you would get a better "scale" look if a mask was used. Just make sure the edges are not too tightly against the surface so a tiny amount of overspray can be seen.

Yes Pedro,
@holzhamer
one to one scale masking at it's best ! 🙂

I'll answer your question about the different type of patterns used but first I must conclude with a follow up to Stellan Schroeder Englund and his original question.
@stellan
I have not found a picture yet, but I did stumble across a document from the Air Ministry that goes into specific details on how the Spitfire should be painted. These were originally posted online by someone else, not me.

I am fairly certain these were found by the gentleman I mentioned earlier named Edgar Brooks. Unfortunately now he is deceased.

Here are the documents. The first set involves the surface finish. The types of paints are referred to as ”Type S”. This is making a reference to the paints being ”Synthetic” and should not be confused with the Sky type ”S” paint that was used on the undersides of RAF planes.

in this next picture I outlined the actual sentence where it states that ”Masks can be used”. I outlined the entire sentence and highlighted the area in red that specifically made a statement about the masks.

This next page was the last of this letter,

but I have a few more documents that go into detail on how the Spitfire was to be wet sanded with 400 grit sand paper to get a smooth surface.

When you wet sand using a sand paper it gives the surface a nice even shine. It's not overly glossy like what you would find on an automobile today, but it was not dull either. I was very fortunate to find these pictures that were taken by a "LIFE" photographer of a Spitfire during the War. You can see the effects of wet sanding on the overall finish. This was done to squeeze the last bit of speed from the plane.


Believe it or not, there was an "Acceptable" variation in top speed of planes when they were accepted by the RAF. As long as the plane fell within 3 percent of the "advertised" top speed, the plane was good !
These next two pictures are of the document that gets into the details on filling in the flush rivets on the forward surfaces of the wing, from the main spar forward, as well as panel fitment and how this all increased the performance of the Spitfire.


Stellan, I hope that I have answered your questions properly and that this helps to shed some light on the subject. As of now I have not found any actual photos showing the masks in use when the Spitfires were painted, but this document mentions them. Therefor I believe they were actually in use some of the time...

Pedro,
Yes there was an "A" and a "B" pattern in use for most planes. However from what I have read the use of both an "A" and the "B" was discontinued after some time, 1942 September (I think), as it was causing problems by interrupting the output of the fighters from the factory. They simply were having a time of it by trying to follow the letter to the law. An airframe that was supposed to be painted using the "A" scheme may not have been ready for painting at that exact moment when the painter was ready. So they would have to go down the line and find another airframe that was ready for painting. This ate up valuable production time, so they discontinued the use of both patterns, and simply went to using the "A" pattern only.

Now this is where I found out some other neat information, especially if you're an aviation history geek like me...

They initially had 4 patterns ! Back in 1936 I believe... They had an "A", "B", "C" and a "D" pattern but decided after a very short tie this was too complicated.

The Hurricane was also using this painting method, but they swapped things around and changed the patterns to be just opposite of what the Spitfire was. On Hurricanes, the "Even" numbers received the "B" pattern and the "A" pattern was used on the "Odd" serial numbers...

Confusing ... 🙂

Good stuff Louis, as most are aware that directives and instructions created during peace time are usually tossed out the window when war dictates the up tempo of production and aircraft upgrades as attrition takes their toll on men and equipment. With the enemy continuing there production and fielding modern equipment. The RAF had to counter with their own to keep up with the Luftwaffe. As the tide of war will at some point have someone just say forget about the protocols, get these planes built and delivered ASAP!

This is in response to Chucks comment. They did that with some P-51's some of the gear wells didn't get painted on some production blocks. If the engine life of 51 was 100 hrs heck they were through away planes...which now are worth millions.