I really don’t know if this adds to the debate – but there is an interesting observation on page 88 of the Lucas book

he states “……….although it (Sky – sk) fell from use by the RAF post war, its continuing use by by Naval Aviation ensured that it was retained in the MoS colour range. Confusingly the MoS range contains two versions of Sky, Aircraft Finish 9 and Aircraft Finish 9A. These colours are so similar to be almost indistinguishable to the naked eye. It was Aircraft Finish 9A which was included in BS 381C in 1964 as No 210 Sky”

This suggests that there was variation – and it was sufficiently different for there to be a need for the two different shades to be available.

I do know that if I go to different motor factors and ask for BS 381C No 298 Olive Drab – (for the jeep – apparently a good enough match for SCC15- the British version of US Olive drab) there may be slight variations even though it is the same colour specification – this need for different Aircraft Finish 9s seems more than that though.

Lucas strangely does not quote the reference of the letter referring to the intoduction of “Type S” paints but says

in late April (1940) a circular was sent to all RTOs (Resident technical Officers at factories)entitled “improving Surface finish of aircraft;adoption of Type S paints”.

the introduction of Sky was promulgated on 6th June 1940 in Air Ministry signal X915 which referred to Sky Type S. Apparently the Fighter Squadrons had no idea what this colour was – so the Air Ministry sent another signal on 7th June which said

the colour of Camouflage Sky Type S, repeat S, may be described as duck egg blueish green”

Signal X915 was rescinded on 10th June………..

On 14th June the Air Ministry informed everybody concerned that aircraft received from contractors with the black and white schemes should be covered in no more that two coats of Sky Type S – paying due regard to the cellulose or synthetic composition of the original paint – implying that Sky type S was available in DTD308/C and DTD314/S formulations – as confirmed by the different stores references

It seems however that sufficient supplies of this new colour were not available for squadron use until August.

On the basis of the Lucas Book – the Hurricanes in the BoB film may well have matched the colours of some of the Hurricanes in the real BoB.

Given the difficulties of supply and the vague (see above!) descriptions it is not really suprising that there were an infinite number of variations until the supply position was regularised. After all the RAF were fighting the Luftwaffe – not the colour police.

All DTD 308 cellulose surface finishes used for camouflage had the Type S suffix, Type S, for smooth, distinguishing them from normal matt paints. They were developed because the smoother finish would be less detrimental to performance than the rougher pure matt paints.

DTD 308, the specification for matt cellulose paints was issued in July 1936, long before the development of the Type S specification during 1940.
This would have been presented as DTD 308 with a C underneath

DTD 314, the specification for sythetic paints was issued in September 1936
This would have been presented as DTD 314 with an S underneath

DTD specification paints of both cellulose (DTD308) and synthetic (DTD 314)formulation for aircraft finishing and refinishing paints would have generally been type S after the end of 1940, although presumably stores would have held stocks of the original matt specification paint as well for the refinishing of in service aircraft

No!

Perhaps it was the third one or was it the fourth? 🙂

Mark

No wonder some WW1 pilots affectionately called their flying machines “buses”

You have none for ninety years and the four come along at once

Just what are they getting back from Oman in return for the Single Pin?
The RAFM are obviously flush with the things if they can let one go.
I smell filthy luker and fear we will never see the aircraft again (unless you go to Oman) 😡

My own thoughts exactly – as the sole UK survivor of its breed (and one of only two worldwide), I find it hard to understand why it is being loaned to Oman – unless we get something in return like a Wellesley or Vildebeest or other such inter-war years exotica.

Is it me or does progress on the Hampden seem to be very slow at the moment.

According to War Prizes (MCP – Phil Butler)
See page 151 for picture at Eggebek with RAFM Stuka and now lost Me 109 G-14 “863”

Me 110G Wk Nr 180850

originally destined for museum display
47MU Sealand by January 46
German Air Force Equipment Centre, Stanmore Park during 1949
to Kenley 1952 ground shots Angels One Five
Scrapped

If the National Trust can use volunteers to open their properties to the public , why couldn’t the RAFM use volunteers to ensure that all their galleries at Hendon are open all the time – or does nobody want to volunteer there?

Surely a mix of paid and volunteer staff in all the hangers would free up trained staff to oversee the volunteers in the GW hangar – and judging from some of the comments in this thread about the unapproachableness of the permanent staff, the presence of volunteers who are there because they want to be rather than it just being a economic necessity might help lighten the atmosphere.

The difference between Duxford and Hendon is simple. Duxford is alive, Hendon is dead. Until you address that little will change. In it’s earliest days, Hendon was a bit like an art gallery with planes as the pictures. The hangars were hushed places of pilgrimage. The “life” of the place strangely actually came from the displays in the galleries that are now closed – the nissen hut displays, the tented hangars with erks working on airframes, the RAF Escaping Society, and the bloke in the pith helmet looing at the RRAC etc etc. I liked the sepulchral halls but that’s a personal view no shared by everybody. Museums have moved on but Hendon always seems to be playing catch-up and failing. Why do you need a cafe in the middle of the historic hangars? What purpose does it serve – can’t people last a trip round two belfast hangar without having a cup of tea – there used to be a separate cafe adjacent to the BoB Hall – what happened to that – presumably contractorised with little or no effective performance management by the museum

I seem to recall there were once ideas to run some of the engines-whatever happened to that idea?