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...
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...
Larry L
Inventor of a Go Pro mount especially for aircraft external surfaces...
http://eaaforums.org/showthread.php?...y-for-aircraft
1952 De Havilland Chipmunk
1994 Honda RC45 #2
https://www.youtube.com/user/BusyLittleShop/feed
https://imgur.com/user/BusyLittleShop
http://www.flickr.com/photos/55532474@N00/?saved=1
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10503451@N07/
http://s1036.photobucket.com/albums/...usyLittleShop/
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
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
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
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
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.
Larry L
Inventor of a Go Pro mount especially for aircraft external surfaces...
http://eaaforums.org/showthread.php?...y-for-aircraft
1952 De Havilland Chipmunk
1994 Honda RC45 #2
https://www.youtube.com/user/BusyLittleShop/feed
https://imgur.com/user/BusyLittleShop
http://www.flickr.com/photos/55532474@N00/?saved=1
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10503451@N07/
http://s1036.photobucket.com/albums/...usyLittleShop/