If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Here is a question that has bugged me for some time now wrt the splinter camo. It didn't make sense to me why they would put such straight edges on wings ,then I noticed the small straight edged fields and hedges of the UK and France with different greens.
It's a form of disruptive camouflage, the idea being to disrupt and hide the outline of the aircraft rendering it much harder to see. There are various forms of this, from the splinter camouflage used on ships to the stripes of a Zebra, but I have copied the two most relevant pages of the 1942 publication 'Camouflage Simplified' by Eric Sloane which may help.
The colours are not 'dazzle' colours on a Bf 109 but are chosen for another aspect of camouflage, concealment by colour resemblance and also counter shading, a way of dealing with the problem of shadows.
Colour resemblance is self explanatory.
Many animals, from fish to Springboks are counter shaded. In simple terms areas that would normally be in shadow (undersides) are painted in a lighter colour than those which would receive more direct illumination (typically upper surfaces). Fish and Springboks may not be painted but the colouring of their scales/skin or fur reflects the same principle.
There's a lot more to this camouflage lark than meets the eye and a lot of time, effort, research and money went in to developing the schemes.
I just found it interesting that the Germans used straight "mathimatical lines" and the commonwealth used more flowing rounded lined to break up the plan'es shape.
The most effective I saw, although very limited to where it could be used was German desert "mottle" like on 109 black 8. Over the Med it would stand out like a sore thumb!
That's pretty cool! The biggest problem is the shadows, highly visible in photo reconnaissance but there are many techniques to break them up and 'hide' them.
One photo I saw in a camouflage book showed a brilliantly camouflaged aerodrome, except for the area of black skid marks in the landing area which gave the runway away. All that hard work compromised by one small detail
There would have been a werknummer on the fin. It is usually left off decal sheets when it is not known.
I've seen it claimed that Munchenberg received a new aircraft in Sicily (W.Nr. 3826) but that doesn't agree with other sources which agree that JG 26 received there Emils months earlier. The photos of 'White 12' don't support the idea that it was factory fresh either.
What weathering would be expected on white 12 ? I suppose in Europe it would be relatively light, maybe slight prop leading edge chipping and a little on the left wingroot walkway only?
Was Muncheberg in France aswell during '40 with this plane?
Was Muncheberg in France aswell during '40 with this plane?
Theuns
From memory III./JG 26 was withdrawn from France in the early summer of 1940 and were re-equipped and made good losses from the Battle of France whilst in Germany. The unit certainly returned to France in time for the Battle of Britain in late July/early August (I haven't checked exactly).
7./JG 26 was detached from the rest of the group moving to Gela in Sicily during February 1941, taking their Bf 109 Es with them. They were then stationed at various places in Sicily and North Africa, not returning to convert to the Bf 109 F until September 1941.
If, as we suspect, III./JG 26 received their new Emils in late 1940 then they certainly served over the winter of 1940 in France.
I did a bit of research on Muchenberg when I built his 'White 1'. He is credited with 135 enemy aircraft shot down claimed in over 500 combat missions. The majority of his victories were claimed over the Western Front with 33 claims over the Eastern Front. Of his 102 aerial victories achieved over the Western Allies, 46 were Spitfires.
Muchenberg claimed 14 kills during the Battle of Britain and was promoted Staffelkapitan of JG26 during that time.
'White 1' was depicted in February 1941 in Sicily. So I suppose 'White 12' was a replacement machine for some reason. I was interested that 'White 1', being so late in the piece, lacked any mottle camouflage. Maybe 'White 1' was his Battle of Britain period aircraft?
'White 1' was an E-4. White 12 was an E-7/N. I'd be surprised if Munchenberg wasn't flying 'White 12' by preference in early 1941, it certainly carried his pennant, though I know he flew both from Sicily.
It was the E-7s that other 7./JG 7 log books show to have been delivered in late 1940, before the change of camouflage schemes and long before the move to the Mediterranean.
'White 12' may have had the werknummer 4148, but I can't find the source from which I took that. It was well photographed.
Damn! just looked at the decal instructions now and there is shows the fuel decal I plainly omited!
I should probarbly next time look at the stencil location AND the other decal instruction together and not assume all stencling will be the same on all planes.
Comment