Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: Best Paint Scheme?

  1. #11
    BusyLittleShop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Sacramento California
    Posts
    75
    I'm a strong believer in preserving the scheme that honors the history of the WarBird as far as can be known... I advocate keeping the scheme and change the WarBird if you don't like it...

  2. #12
    rwanttaja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,580
    Quote Originally Posted by BusyLittleShop View Post
    I'm a strong believer in preserving the scheme that honors the history of the WarBird as far as can be known... I advocate keeping the scheme and change the WarBird if you don't like it...
    Few warbirds have any combat history behind them. Those that saw combat were usually scrapped overseas rather than bringing them back to the US. The exceptions, like Memphis Belle, are locked into museums. So, if one reproduces a typical warbird's actual wartime markings, they'll probably be kind of plain Jane.

    So... why not duplicate the markings of famous aircraft?

    The other factor is having your warbird stand out from the crowd. There are over 600 T-6/SNJ aircraft on the FAA registry. Surely, if the owner of S/N 75-3473 does WANT to be one of the ~50 aircraft with Kelly Field markings, he or she should be able to opt for duplicating the markings of a more unusual example?

    Ron Wanttaja

  3. #13
    rwanttaja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,580
    Discussion on this thread has exposed yet another of my misconceptions. Can someone explain the difference between "flat" paint and "matte" paint? I've always used the terms interchangeably.

    Ron "Flat wrong" Wanttaja

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Omro, WI
    Posts
    172
    Quote Originally Posted by rwanttaja View Post

    The other factor is having your warbird stand out from the crowd. There are over 600 T-6/SNJ aircraft on the FAA registry. Surely, if the owner of S/N 75-3473 does WANT to be one of the ~50 aircraft with Kelly Field markings, he or she should be able to opt for duplicating the markings of a more unusual example?

    Ron Wanttaja

    I still find it hard in my mind to classify T-6's as Warbirds. Yes, they were used to train our pilots during war, but they were not really a combat aircraft. And when I think of Warbird, I thing of combat aircraft, or at least used on the battle field. But that is just my humble opinion.

    Kurt

  5. #15
    Airmutt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    NW. Atlanta GA
    Posts
    331
    Guess it doesn’t help when some vendors use flat/matte as a sheen and others use flat and matte as separate sheens. The way I understand it that flat has high porosity and therefore is less reflective. Matte has a somewhat less porous texture, therefore has some reflectivity. Not being a paint expert; not sure that the rule of thumb holds true for all types of paint.
    Dave Shaw
    EAA 67180 Lifetime
    Learn to Build, Build to Fly, Fly for Fun

  6. #16
    Airmutt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    NW. Atlanta GA
    Posts
    331
    Quote Originally Posted by krw920 View Post
    I still find it hard in my mind to classify T-6's as Warbirds. Yes, they were used to train our pilots during war, but they were not really a combat aircraft. And when I think of Warbird, I thing of combat aircraft, or at least used on the battle field. But that is just my humble opinion.

    Kurt
    You should lookup the history of the T-6. They have seen combat action by a number of governments and were used as FAC aircraft by the US in Korea and even early Vietnam.
    Dave Shaw
    EAA 67180 Lifetime
    Learn to Build, Build to Fly, Fly for Fun

  7. #17
    Mayhemxpc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Manassas, Virginia
    Posts
    753
    Quote Originally Posted by rwanttaja View Post
    Few warbirds have any combat history behind them.


    Ron Wanttaja
    I had to check that out. Quite a few of the "combat" airplanes in the WoA registry actually served in combat. (Airplanes beginning with A, B, C, F, O, and P, and Navy equivalents.) Most of the B's (B-25s...none of the B-17s), maybe 1/3 of the C's, 3 of the 4 O-2's and about 1/3 of the F and Ps. (Only 1 of the L's). I am assuming that if the airplane's description/narrative does not include combat assignment, then it didn't serve in combat.

    As for mine, I am fortunate enough to have several different pictures of my plane in SEA (in different paint schemes!)
    Last edited by Mayhemxpc; 08-31-2020 at 07:53 PM.
    Chris Mayer
    N424AF
    www.o2cricket.com

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Omro, WI
    Posts
    172
    Quote Originally Posted by Airmutt View Post
    You should lookup the history of the T-6. They have seen combat action by a number of governments and were used as FAC aircraft by the US in Korea and even early Vietnam.
    I did look them up and did see that, but still is a stretch to me to consider all T-6's combat aircraft when only a handful were used as FAC by the US military. But again, that is my opinion only.

  9. #19
    BusyLittleShop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Sacramento California
    Posts
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by rwanttaja View Post
    So... why not duplicate the markings of famous aircraft?
    Ron Wanttaja
    Would the real big Beautiful Doll please stand up...

    Name:  BigBeautifulDoll1.JPG
Views: 44
Size:  48.5 KB
    Name:  BigBeautifulDoll2.JPG
Views: 42
Size:  70.0 KB

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •