Warbird Information Exchange

Here is an example on how a painting job should always be done : matte colours, accurate markings.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUZEIcDDStc&hd=1

A real beauty, when you look at this plane, without chroming or stupid modern pinups or personal markings, you are just being taken back seventy years ago, looking at the real thing !

Also look at the latest Grand Champion at Oskoshk, matte colors, accurate markings, just beautiful :



I do hope it's a beginning trend.

THAT is a fine looking aircraft!

_________________
S.

It is a trend, but a looong, slooow trend.

1982's Oshkosh Grand Champ also had matte paint, accurate shades and markings and looked, paint-wise, as good as 2010's winner. That was Ray Stutsman's P-47G Little Demon. Several restorers by the early 1980s were getting it not just right, but near enough perfect.

The matte look with no anachronistic markings has always been a minority, but the trend in the U.S. has been that it's a gradually bigger minority. For restorations coming out of the UK or down under, it is more of a majority, and has been for some years.

August

August I wonder if the reason that is, may be because the aircraft here are usually painted up to try an honor a vet with is markings rather than just a producion line paint scheme. Not saying that I don't enjoy each one, just a thought.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Manager

Not sure it's really true that US aircraft are usually painted to honor a vet. But anyway I don't see what difference that would make. If you paint your plane to honor a particular vet or noted ace, it is possible to color and mark it accurately (assuming you have the right kind of plane). It's when you paint it to honor yourself or your wife that it becomes not so easy to maintain accuracy.

August

I'm one of those who likes to see bare metal finish. Understanding the need for paint in order to reduce the maintenance workload, weathering etc... Would it be possible to clean it up and then clear coat it?

_________________
Cheers!

Lance Jones

Paint does not stick well to polished surfaces. The smooth surface that makes it shine is a direct conflict with a "rough" surface that paint needs in order to adhere.

_________________
Expert:
Ex: Former.
Spurt: A drip under pressure.

Hey...I see all sides here.

A few pet peeves...

-Some of our friends in Europe (and here) seem to put nose art on any American warbird.
Sorry, but most of the time it just makes American service members look like a bunch of horny high school boys.
Nose art on a 1950's SAC marked C-45?
I don't think LeMay would have gone for a pin-up.

-GA planes with faux military markings. Sorry, most of the time it just looks stupid. Despite the name, the Navy ever flew Navions . There is a Cessna 150 in Trade-A-Plane with bad USAF markings....come on guys, if you're going to do it please TRY to get it half correct!
--RVs seem to get a lot of that...I've always assumed they were 4Fs Walter Mittys ...but someone earlier made the point that they might be honoring a family member or friend who's a vet. Point well taken. Still I don't think I'd paint one in my dad's unit markings....I don't think the 15th AF flew RV-anythings in Italy.
--I'm not going to tell Jack Roush that he can't paint his Premier or Citation in quasi-military markings. He's a warbird owner and pilot..and has done a lot for the hobby with his work on Merlins.

-If a guy wants to put his initials on his warbird as a squadron code, Okay by me.
Heck, I'm smarted that the average warbird fan, and I don't know off the top of my head what the correct letters are(feel free to cancel my membership for admitting that sin ).
If a guy wants to paint his wife's name on his cowl, well maybe that's the price of having a warbird instead of the new vacation home/new Lexus/new kitchen/new baby his wife would prefer the money going towards rather than an airplane.

Okay I'll admit...
--If I ever get a Cessna 310 B or C, it will have U-3A paint & markings on it as soon as I can fly it to the paint shop. So sue me.
Likewise, I've always like straight-tail, early rear-window 1964 Cessna 150D. If I get one, I'd do the tailwheel conversion and then paint it in O-1/L-19 markings....and try to pass it off as a side-by-side L-19 variant. Wanna call the cops?

If I ever get a L-5...it will probably have "Bob, Wayne & Bill" on the cowl in small letters. Bill was my B-17 pilot dad, Bob was my uncle who flew gliders into Normandy and later L-5s, and Wayne was another uncle who was a B-24 nav who spent time in a Stlag Luft camp.
I don't think many here would object to remembering these guys.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.

I don't see that's the distinction. There are aircraft in 'tribute' markings of various kinds all over the world, and some of them are accurate and many of them are half-assed. There are far fewer aircraft in their own original markings (flying) and most of them are in reasonably accurate renditions of those markings - as you'd expect, thinking about it, if you are going to try to be original, you'll probably try to do it properly, rather than, as seems to be the case from reasoning backwards, a rich guy with a Mustang wandering into a paintshop and saying "Do me this" with a page ripped from his well thumbed Big Kid's Coloring Book of W.W.II Fighters...

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

I had a Cessna 150 that I was going to paint in Bolivian Air Force markings (They did fly them as trainers). Would that have been wrong?

_________________
Cheers!

Lance Jones

No...but then, I wouldn't fly it anywhere near the border.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.