Variability of Spitfire Camo Patterns

[Guest]

I have just noticed that some Spits have different patterns for the upper surface camo. Here are four pics of the camo pattern of the Port wing.

The first shows my Airfix 1/72 MkIa (Airfix A01071A) (pattern 1)

My Airfix 1/48 Mk1/1a/IIa (A05115A) pattern 1 (not shown).

The second is an original IIa (pattern 1)

The third is san original Mk I (pattern 2)

The fourth is an original Mk I (pattern 2)

I am not a slave to nitpicking, but it would be nice to know which pattern is correct for my MkIa

It could be that Spits manufactured in different factories used their own Masks.

[ATTACH]63977.vB[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]63978.vB[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]63979.vB[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]63980.vB[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]65218.IPB[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]65219.IPB[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]65220.IPB[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]65221.IPB[/ATTACH]

[Adrian "Marvel" Reynolds]

I only found out on Sunday that there were two different patterns as in 1 and 2, something that was also passed onto me was something about odd and even numbers determined whether it was pattern 1 or 2,, for the life of me I cant remember which way round it was though, lol.

From what I gather there were marks placed on the surfaces as to where the pattern would start and end, but within reason it was open to the painter to fill in between those marks so some varied in between but not where they started or finished.

I'm only passing on what I was told so if its wrong,,,, not my fault

Adrian

[Guest]

Interesting. I read somewhere that the camo painters used big rubber masks placed on the plane as a guide when painting the second colour (presumably green). Whatever the nature of the instructions to the painters, they must have been quite specific because there is very little variation within each type of pattern.

[stona]

There were two patterns A and B.

The aircraft were sprayed using mats as masks. I'd refer to this piece of evidence reported by Edgar Brooks.

"When Supermarine raised their drawing 30064 sheet 7C, in June 1937, which illustrated the camouflage pattern and colours,and sent it to the Air Ministry, they added a few notes, one of which read (in capitals, but I won't shout) "Stencil mats to be made approximately to the scheme shown."

Several drawings of the pattern from which the mats were to be cut survive. Since the B pattern was a mirror image of the A pattern it was simply a matter of turning the mats over and placing them on the other side or wing. The B pattern was abandoned in the interests of facilitating production quite early in the war (I'd have to look up a date). Manufacturers were asked to settle on one pattern, Supermarine and most others went with A.

All the mats would be roughly the same which explains why there are only slight variations between the camouflage patterns on various Spitfires. It also explains the hard edge to the demarcation on factory applied schemes. What happened later was outside the control of the factory and MAP inspectors. An aircraft repaired or resprayed at Aboukir might not retain its factory demarcations.

I think I have a copy of a Supermarine camouflage drawing somewhere and will endeavour to find it.

Cheers

Steve

[Adrian "Marvel" Reynolds]

Thanks for the info Steve, is there any truth in what I was told then about the odd and even numbers been used to alternate the masks?

Adrian

[mossiepilot]

Thanks for asking the question Steve, I did wonder how it was done.

Tony.

[stona]

Thanks for the info Steve, is there any truth in what I was told then about the odd and even numbers been used to alternate the masks?Adrian

Yes.

The schemes we are familiar with date back to 1936 when drawings were prepared for the various aircraft types. AD (air diagram) 1160 was for single engine monoplanes. Supermarine would have submitted the drawing I mentioned above to the Air Ministry based on this.

It was the intention that the schemes be applied to alternating serials.

For Supermarine built Spitfires even numbers had the A scheme and odd the B. However, Ted Hooton, who did a lot of research on this, discovered at least ten batches where the rule was reversed.

For Castle Bromwich the A/B serial rule alternated between batches.

The two schemes were dropped for Spitfires in December 1940 (X4912 from Supermarine and P7810 from CB were the last marked with the B scheme). Everyone else followed suit around the same time and although manufacturers were instructed to use only one scheme, not specifically A or B, everyone settled on A.

Hawker and Gloucester seem to have very generally applied the B scheme to even serials and the A to odd on Hurricanes but there are many, many exceptions.

The only way you can be absolutely sure is to have a good reference for your subject, otherwise have a 50/50 chance of being right, or wrong

This is a good excuse to post a picky showing both schemes. The variation was to avoid repetition or uniformity (both of which compromise camouflage) on the ground and had nothing to do with camouflage in the air.



Easy to spot the one with no upper wing roundels!!!

I can't find that Supermarine camouflage drawing.......lost in my filing system somewhere!

Cheers

Steve