Request Intell On Wwii P-51 Colors

[VonL]

A friend is building a large scale, R/C P-51D for big-leagues competition in NMF markings of the 8th AF. He is aware that NMF P-51's typically had their wings doped silver and waxed.

 

QUESTION: Was there a Federal Spec or ANA number for that silver dope? If not, I recommended that he eyeball it and attribute any errors to 'weathering effects.'

 

Thanx for any help here.

 

 

[SkyKing]

A friend is building a large scale, R/C P-51D for big-leagues competition in NMF markings of the 8th AF. He is aware that NMF P-51's typically had their wings doped silver and waxed.

 

QUESTION: Was there a Federal Spec or ANA number for that silver dope? If not, I recommended that he eyeball it and attribute any errors to 'weathering effects.'

 

Thanx for any help here.

 

There was no Federal Spec (as in Federal Spec 595) because FS 595 did not exist until the late 1950s. None of my references show an ANA number for silver, either. Any old silver dope will do.

 

The wings of P-51s were not just doped silver and waxed, either. Because the wing was a laminar flow airfoil and very sensitive to surface irregularities, many skin panel joints on the wings of P-51s were puttied smooth before painting.

 

I believe both Hyperscale and the Aircraft Research Center forums have devoted extensive discussion to this topic.

[VonL]

Yowza - Thanx! Good intell here. I've just never picked up on the more obscure Mustang stuff cuz' I tend to shy away from subjects that get done to death. Can't remember the last Me-109 I did, either. :)

[ghodges]

THANK GOD! There's someone else out there who dares to challenge the "accepted" modeling habits and support the idea that there were variations in the field! In fact, my postion is that the exception was more the norm! Too many modelers are too concerned with getting their model "right". Why? It's not for contests, as accuracy isn't a criteria. I think it's for no other reason than percieved peer pressure.

 

The one regret that I have since the creation of Detail and Scale, Walk Around Books, the internet and every other major resource center is that I feel they've done NOTHIING to promote the hobby of plastic model building. In fact, I think this emphasis on accuracy in detail and markings has actually led to less modeling. I think that most of us build fewer models AND build them at a slower pace than we did 25yrs ago. The biggest difference between now and then is the creation of the "Aftermarket" (pe and resin parts), designed specifically to address detailing and accuracy.

 

The original reason for most aftermarket parts was to address a LACK of detailing in a kit. There were many kits from the 50's and '60's that had NO cockpit, or wheel wells, or were lacking in other items. You could scratchbuild them; but that took time and a degree of talent. Aftermarket parts were a God-send to those of us lacking in the time, ability, or desire to do that work. However, 25yrs later that same market is addressed to accuracy almost to the point of exclusion. Sure, one reason is that the kits are generally more complete these days. But, the main reason is that it's a method for competition between those aftermarket companies! Once there was a single resin interior for a 1/48 P-51, why would there be the need for another? Very simply, someone else wanted a piece of that market and the way to make the second one seemingly better was to tout it as being more accurate.

 

In contrast to the above seeming rant, I have no problems with accuracy in model building. I DO have a problem with accuracy being touted as a criteria for model building; and THAT is where I think the hobby has evolved to over the last 20yrs. Model building has always been a solitary hobby. There have always been people whose standard of building has demanded accuracy (to one degree or another) in their own builds. I'm glad that it is easier than ever for those people to be able to find the info they need to meet their own criteria. What I think I see, however, is a LOT of model builders thinking that they also need to meet those same criteria even though it wasn't important to them when they started building.

 

Just peruse some of the modeling sites and look at the questions and debates. What was the correct color of the canopy cut-out panels on the fuselage of the P-40 or the P-47 Razorback? Does anyone have accurate line drawings that show the panel line layout for the BF-109F-2trop? What was the color of the seat belts in a Fokker Triplane? All of can be very interesting on the academic side, but I believe it serves as a deterent to many builders even if it only gives the impression that there's a right way and a wrong way to build a model. After all, if there are questions about those items, what about all of the other things on the subject?

 

There are times when acuracy can be demanded in our hobby. Personal criteria is one. Building on commission can be another as you try to satisfy the criteria of your customer. Building for a museum night also be that demanding. Outside of those, I can't think of any reasons to worry about it!

 

There are people who build models who actually build "engineering miniatures". You know these models when you see them. These people cast and lathe things to correct and add detals even the best kit manufacturers miss. These are people to whom accuracy is personally paramount; and it shows in their work. It also has little to nothing to do with building plastic models! I contend that our hobby isn't about bringing a commercial kit up to "engineering" levels; it's about building a plastic kit to our own degree of satisfaction and not someone else's perception of correctness.

 

In my opinion, we're a group of people who buy and build commercially available kits. We do it because we like the history attached to the subject. We do it out of admiration for the original engineering of the subject. We do it because we could never afford to own the real thing. We do it because we like to work with our hands. We do it to distract ourselves from our jobs and other stresses in our life. We do it to satisfy an "artistic" side to our personality. And, some of us also do it as a form of compitition in place of sports or games. The compitition side of the hobby has fed the need/desire to do more to kits than is provided in the box. That, in turn, has led us to where we are now.

 

So what can we do as IPMS members? We can be VERY accepting of all types of models and of all the ways they are built and presented. If someone puts a month's research into a subject and details and corrects it to their satisfaction; good for them! And, if someone builds a model without all of that effort in detail and/or accuracy; good for them too! And by that, I mean that YOU do not walk up and say "you know that's not right"......Yea, I know you'd never do that, but how exactly do you think IPMS got its stellar "reputation"?? Sure, you were just trying to be helpful, but it plants a seed of "wrong" in the mind of the builder.

 

I hope this rant doesn't really offend anyone. I expect several people to challenge the point. But, I'll stand by my premise that emphasizing accuracy does little to nothing to promote model building. I'm donning my body armor; toss your grenades if ya like! Cheers!

 

GIL

[VonL]

Great rant, Gil! You've tapped into the difference between a hobby and a (less healthy) obsession. "Artistic License" is always my last, best maneuver.

 

FWIW, my bud doing those R/C Mustangs is a good natured guy who likes his subjects that much and enjoys seeking out new, untried techniques in building each one. Will pass along the bits about the P-51 crews stripping off the paint.

[mrpolk]

Gil: I think Chris B. should consider running your rant as an editorial. Over the years, I have heard any number of critiques, from local meeting nights to National Conventions, that started out along the lines of, "you know, your model is really nice, but you should know that the (fill in the blank) was never loaded with( blank2) or painted(blank 3). Other than some projects done on commission, my base line has always been to have fun building and associating with model builders. Once it stops being fun, it ain't a hobby any more.

[Jeff Herne]

I had a fellow approach me at a model contest as I was putting a model down on the table. His first words were, 'That's painted the wrong color', to which I replied, "What's that smell? Is that YOU?" It ended the conversation rather quickly, thankfully.

 

Gil nailed it on the head. I've had people tell me not to buy a model because the nose was 1/64 of an inch too long, or that the cockpit floor was too shallow. The only ones I listen to are the people that tell me I can get it for $25 less somewhere else, or if the kit is unbuildable (some of that Eastern European stuff from the late 80's, early 90s...sheesh).

 

I've built kits and scratchbuilt models for museums, private collectors, and even major defense contractors. Unless it's blatantly wrong, 99.9% of the people who look at aren't going to know if that's a Revi 16 or 14 gunsight, or if that particular version of P-51 had smooth or diamond tread tires.

 

Build it and have fun doing it. When it stops being fun, its time for a new hobby.

 

Jeff

 

[Keith Pruitt]

Gil, I love the rant...good points, and it would make a great editorial!

 

Jeff, ROTFLMAO!! I was at a show/contest this year...walking around looking at all the beautiful models on the tables with a friend of mine, and actually passed a guy who DID smell...like fried chicken of all things...I turned to my friend, and said, "do you smell..." He responded, "Yes", before I'd even finished the question. I had almost forgotten about that!!

 

Sorry, didn't mean to get so far off subject...