You've just reminded me of a similar experience Jim, when I sprayed my first car at the age of 17, a Wolseley 1500. I sprayed it outdoors in British Racing Green, and my mother's pale green Austin 1800 was parked in the driveway barely 10 metres away. A couple of weeks later my father was washing it when he suddenly noticed millions of BRG dots all over one side! It was such an even coat you couldn't see it until you got real close. He was absolutely ropable, especially when we discovered it couldn't be removed with turps after so long. In the end it had to be rubbed off with a cloth and car polish, which took me the best part of a day's hard labour!

I'm glad you raised it Jim as I'll need to be careful if it can travel 50 metres and still stick to things. My neighbour often parks his brand new 4WD in the driveway, and it's white!

Got any mates in the auto trade, Tony?
 

If you have any connections in the auto repair industry, or know someone who may, you might be lucky enough to be able to use someones spray booth on a Saturday. I dont know what the going price currently is but it used to be roughly 1 carton of beer. Allowing for inflation in last quarter of a century, and adjusting for international exchange rates & wind direction..........maybe somewhere nearer......say....a bottle of scotch. Glenfiddich, of course :D

Start befriending your local panel shop foreman, Tony! Then, problem solvered!!

Actually I'm not too badly placed here Tony, I'm on an acre block, but I'll still need to be aware of any breeze direction, as the shed will be on the fence line adjacent to my neighbour's driveway. I can always ask him to move his car when I spraypaint, and I'm pretty sure he won't need to be asked twice!

Sounds like the voice of experience Wayne! BTW what paint did you finish up using on your FGT?

More on paint
 

I rubbed back a bit on the Stuart and found the following layers.

grey primer , US Lustreless Olive Drab, Black stencil, Australian Olive Drab , Australian light stone colour disruptive camo brush painted with plenty of runs, some red oxide applied in the seventies, Australian Vietnam era Olive drab put on in the seventies, areas of Australian dark olive put on in the eighties .

Photos below. I would be keen to know what the stencil ,means . It was original US marking XX! in an elongated diamond with ZZB below it. Looks a bit like a paint code.

Hi Gina,

I'll openly admit I might be way off, but I thought that the diamond like that was a USMC marking? I can't think where, but I had seen similar markings leading to USMC history being talked about with jeeps on g503.com.

I saw you posted this on there too, but perhaps go into the USMC jeep forum on g503.com and have a look?

I hope I'm not leading you on a wild goose chase, but thought worth mentioning.

Cheers,
Ian.

Thanks Robert for the entertainment.

:wacko: One would hope the exhaust is not connected to the air supply?:ergh:

Thanks Colin and Robert.

Both responses help . I will take your advice Robert and ask the Jeep folk.

I am glad to see it on another vehicle on top of the same coat of paint as mine.

I will keep you posted on what I find out :)

P.S like the fart joke ...will use it from now on !!!

Hi Gina,

While looking on g503.com, I found the post which made me wonder if your marking was USMC.

Have a look here (page 2 in particular). The scanned page of shapes in the post from Mark Tombleson is what im referring to.
http://g503.com/forums/viewtopic.php...33622&start=15

Cheers,
Ian.

Many thanks.

The diamond on its side it right but no explanation yet for Roman Numerals XXI and the ZZB below .

National archive references.
 

so this from the archives .

Australian camouflage information can be had at the Australian archives. Look for MP222/1 series
so MP222/1 13D part 1
then 13 A, B, C, D, E, F, G,
then MP222/1 part 2 , 3 and 4

That covers the information for pre 1942 , 1942 two tone disruptive and 1943 three tone disruptive . The files speak of types of paint problems with application and orders as to who should apply it.

http://www.naa.gov.au/collection/search/index.aspx

go to advanced search and put in the numbers

I am all miserable again.

O ordered the humbrol paints as listed earlier in this thread and in other places in MLU.

I mixed them up using measure then using weight.

The green pre 1942 is reminiscent of the colour on the Vickers Mk IV B so I think that is OK but its very dark.

Both the Stuart and the FGT are clearly not that colour. But the mix for the post 1942 green is way too dark. I have some places in the FGT that are pristine ( the lockers in the back and places like that ) and on the Stuart under some of the fittings I have unbolted.

Both the FGT and the Stuart seem to be the same base green colour though the Stuart even when rubbed back is clearly faded tending to whiten off .

The Vietnam era green is closer than the mix of humbrol paints I made for the post 1942 green. So now I guess I have to do a colour match on the pristine parts of the FGT...so I will remove a door and see if I can get a formula for that colour and use that as my base green for both vehicles.

Mikes formula for the light stone is crisper than the colour on the tank but it seems about right given the Tank has faded. I am happy to go with it... I think :confused

Trouble is of all the events I have been to and all the museums visited I have never seen tanks painted in the schemes I will use I have only seen old B&W photos ... maybe I will paint up a model or something but it seems they will they look quite startling.

really. here are two of mine...pre and Post 1942. I think it looks correct. :thup2:

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n...AmbulanceA.jpg



http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n...tPattern03.jpg

I mixed exact amounts according to the formula and mine are much much darker than your mix.

The Vickers that I owned was a much darker green than that on your first truck . The FGT has a more green colour. Closer to vietnam era jungle green but brighter.

http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/P08521.005

My feeling is my green is greener and my light stone is paler, greyer and lighter than the formulas produce. The Humbrol Pale Stone 121 is very close to the pale colour on the Stuart and the green start colour 159 is closer to the green than the mixed colour.

The Vickers was painted very much the same as the one at Pucka which I took to be the dark pre 1942 green .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_Tank_Mk_VI

Vickers is a later dark green and Not WW2 in my Opinion. A lot of the colours were different from unit to unit due to the way they were mixed and applied. Sun faded everything anyway so I will still do my models to the paint formulas I have.

Your FGT may also have had a full army rebuild later in it's life with the old paint being removed and a different green added but who really knows as the vehicles are older then a lot of their owners :D

Paint comparisons
 

Hi Gina,

There has been volumes written on the subject so I am posting this purely as a matter of interest and not as any attempt at a definitive answer on matching WW2 Australian Army vehicle colour. The only way that could be done with certainty is to find the original Australian Standards paint chips of WW2 era.
I have tried over the years to find a copy of them through Standards Australia and contacting paint manufacturers but to no avail. I believe the AWM has a copy but doubt a mere enthusiast like me would be allowed to borrow it.

The attached photo of paint samples, needless to say, are for comparison purposes only.

Last year out of curiosity I mixed the Humbrol paints as mentioned here in this post and airbrushed a test card of the colour on a grey primer base.

The attached photo shows the Humbrol test card at the top.

The middle sample is the voltage regulator C/B panel from inside the cowl of my Blitz and therefore less faded than an exposed part of the vehicle in what I assume is an original WW2 colour.

The bottom piece is my .303 holder painted in current Australian Army Camouflage Green (Olive Drab). The paint was obtained from Wattyl from stock prepared for the Army. My research shows it complies with APAS 0154 (Australian Paint Approval Scheme) which specifies Camouflage Green (Olive Drab) as matching US Federal Standards 595B, colour 34088.

As can be seen there is quite a variation between the three colours.
So when it comes to colours I think the old model maker's saying "If it looks right, it is right" applies even to full size vehicles. I have yet to see a gathering of military vehicles with all of them painted the same colour but in the end if they are all well-preserved and look the part that is the most important thing.

So unless I can find the correct WW2 paint chip I am happy to leave my truck in current Australian Army Olive Drab and viewing other vehicles on this forum it appears a few others are painted the same colour.

Cheers,

Best place to find a sample colour
 

If you are taking a cab off a chassis, the inside of the cab mounts when unbolted from the chassis have usually been completely shielded from light and grime.

To Take them one at a time.

The vickers was painted in three layers of paint. The 1930s paint was standard dark green as shown on the Pucka vehicle and the colour it is currently painted at Duxford. There were sufficient panels when removed to show its original from the factory colour and the subsequent layers. All the layers until its last sandy colour were dark green like british 1930s green

The final coat was post 1942 desert sand colour very much the same as the light stone mix suggested by Mike Cecils mix. It had been used as a small arms target vehicle and had quite a few coats of that colour overpainted.
The vehicle is on display at duxford and painted in colours that match its appearance in 1940 photographs...that is a very dark green .

I am quite confident they were army supplied paint not local purchases. The colours match the unit orders. Local purchase paint BTW was not something easily done in the forties and oil paints uncommon and expensive ( in the era of calsomine ) due to quite stringent rationing of such things. ( the archives show even vehicle manufacturers had difficulties with paint quality many complaints of poor adhesion and easily marked paint being recorded,,,,the formula standards were changed substantially ) I think it would have been much easier to get it through the unit supply chain and the war diaries and files indicate that is what they did.( see my earlier reference to the archive files which are viewable on line) Mixing up a local colour likewise doesn't make sense to me as I would imagine the unit got the paint in cans flipped the lid and brushed it on .

My Information is from the artifact itself. I am attempting to make sense from what the artifact is telling me compared to current information. So far there is a disparity sufficiently large to have me hesitant to make a final choice.

The FGT has three cabinets in the rear and two on the floor between the rear and front spaces. All of those cabinets have original factory painted finishes. There are no layers of paint on paint just the original factory finishes. Given the cabinets have been closed nearly all of their life I think little fading has happened.

That paint is congruent with a NOS sump guard I have. It is also congruent with the layer of paint directly over the American olive drab paint on my Stuart.
The Stuart was received in US Olive drab Nov 1942. It was immediately subjected to a modification program which entailed fitting various things in it and welding bits and pieces on to it then being repainted . The rub back reveals the paint used was certainly 1942/43 green. That green is substantially different from the green produced from the suggested humbrol mix even allowing for fading.

I understand from the archives my Stuart was modified in a facility in Melbourne.

My Stuart was then transported to Queensland being received in Feb of 1943 by the 13 Armoured regiment. This is about the time the disruptive camouflage order was issued. The Stuart then took part in beach landing exercises around Bribie island with other elements of the 3rd armored including the 2nd 4th. Photographs to hand show 2nd/4 Stuarts engaged in the same exercise, at point of entrainment and in action, painted in two tone Disruptive paint. This is congruent with paint existent on My Stuart.

The evidence from the artifact shows the Disruptive scheme was Light stone painted over the single coat of green paint applied at the time of the modification program . The Light Stone was applied, roughly , by brush. Rubbing back the Stuart indicated the disruptive pattern follows quite closely the drawing in the orders of the time ( Archive reference previous)

I conclude the vehicles of the 3rd Armoured division were all painted in Disruptive camouflage in the early months of 1943 prior to their engagement in exercises around Bribie island.
The Light Stone on My Stuart is sufficiently thick so that, with careful rubbing back, unfaded parts are visible and there are areas around the grouser rail and so on that make me reasonably confident that it is very different to the sandy colour obtained from the Humbrol Mix. The 1940s black and white photos show what appears to be a very pale disruptive colour.
Indeed the Humbrol mix is very reminiscent of the top coat on my Vickers when I purchased it but Humbrol 121 is very much like the disruptive paint on my Stuart
My next step is I think to remove one of the locker doors from the FGT and get some kind of colour analysis done. I would be grateful to hear from anyone knowing someone who does that .
I am very grateful for all of your insights and suggestions....I have unfortunately become a top twenty micron fanatic...

I would like the appearance of my vehicles to appear as far as is possible as they would have appeared in june of 1943 during exercises in Queensland.
I would like to know more about the manufacture of My FGT.... It was made in 1942 but I don't know where.

These 2/4the GM Diesel Grants on the way from Northern NSW to Murgon in Qld to join the 3rd armored Div clearly show the two tone disruptive scheme and how contrasting the light stone was with the green.

It roughly matches what My stuart looks like. The rub back shows two starkly contrasting colours.

Spartan paint chart 1943

Gina I admire your quest to get things exactly right as per 1943 and wish you luck on this quest. :) :thup2:

Tanks Cliff :)

there are some great sketches in the archive...really cute.

Gina, Is this your Vickers LT?
If so this is her, as she was, on 24th July this year.

With my restoration I was fortunate to be able to borrow a little colour book, produced in Jan 43, from a fellow VMVC member. I had the light stone colour sample matched at the paint shop and now have 4Lt of light stone paint for my camouflage pattern on my BGC.

The light stone was matched up very close to Champagne Y52.

I did get paint sample cards from the hardware store that were of a similar match to the main colours in the little sample book. They are a guide for later.

Most good automotive paint shops will have a colour sample book (these books have 1000s of shades in them) that can be used to place over the sample colour and this chip has a code. This code will then allow the paint place to make the paint for you.

Records mention paint colours, but I don't know of any old paint formulas, and I doubt that they would translate to modern paint codes/formulas of today. My understanding is that units ordered the paint and mixed it and thinned it down with what they had at hand. This method would produce varying results, but as long as it was within shades of the sample book, I think they would have been happy.

That had formulas ...for all the good they were :/

There may be more than one camo scheme present Gina, which is often the case on tactical vehicles spanning '42-'43, as the official camo scheme changed several times during this period. For example, if the Stuart was repainted on arrival with 13 Armd Regt circa Feb '43 it would be expected to receive the November '42 camo scheme: Vehicle Dark Green / Vehicle Light Grey. It's possible we're seeing traces of that scheme in your photos, as there appears to be a band of light grey applied directly over Light Stone, followed by dark green. You need to do some more rubbing back to identify all colours present. I find the best method is to rub back small patches and take close up pics of the paint layers, as seen below. This reveals the repaint history chronologically, which enables the various camo schemes to be separated and identified.

Attachment 67214

Attachment 67215

Good Idea Tony I will do it .

I am at this point fairly certain the build is grey primer, US olive drab, Australian 1942 green , Light Stone disruptive , 1970's Australian army green ( put on by me) . The history of the Stuart does not auger for more than one coat of OZ paint. It was only used from Feb to October 1943 then put into storage until sold of post war.

I spent today plotting the pattern and its nothing like any of the drawings in the orders. All of the disruptive light stone is brush painted on with lots and lots of runs. Looks like it was done double quick .

I'm amazed you can find any pattern at all with those paint runs Gina! Fortunately you can take a bit of license with camo patterns, main thing is to get the colours right. Like you I'm extremely fussy on that subject. In due course I plan to match the '42 factory camo on this door and establish the formula for these two colours with one of the reputable paint companies. Need to expose a large area for accurate matching and give them the whole door, none of this small component nonsense. I don't care how long it takes or how much it costs but I won't settle for anything less than a perfect match, because once it's done it will never have to be done again. I've had a gutful of chasing WWII paint specs and it's ridiculous that we have to reinvent the wheel every time we want to paint a vehicle. These are standard factory colours, just like any modern car colour, and there's no earthly reason why we can't simply ring up and order them. Imagine if panel beaters had to go through this paint matching rigmarole for every minor repair.

Attachment 67229

Great to hear Tony. I am in urgent need of the green as I have started on small components already .

So count me in ony any effort to get it right .

The exact edges of the disruptive camo on the Stuart are not possible to find ...well some are... but the general pattern is still there. I can get to within a few inches of the edges doing a sort of join the dots exercise.

It is very clear the pattern is nothing like those in the archive orders. I am happy with that given the Camo committee was not really established until August 1942 and I suppose by the time My Stuart was painted things were still a bit of a work in progress. Archive photos tend to suggest some variation in the actual patterns.

As to the colours I agree with you they would have been standard. I disagree with suggestions that there was variation on account of local purchases/mixtures.

Two of the main aggregation of tanks on the East coast at that time were around Narrabri in NSW and Murgon in Qld ....I just don't see the local Bunnings of the time having the couple of hundred litres of paint needed to paint the fleet disruptive. Paint was strictly rationed at the time and Oil Based paints of the type used was not at all common .

The army managed to get food Building material ammo and fuel out to the camps ...it seems to me getting some paint into the supply chain would have been easy enough.

The Archive does speak about paint shortages at one point but the order is to delay the process of applying disruptive paint until stocks are available and until that happens to only paint vehicles that have an immediate operational need. No where in the archive is an order to source stocks locally .

So I am with you on the Army using paint manufactured in bulk by the leading paint companies of the day to laid down specifications ....as the little Australian Standards pamphlet above indicates.

Which has a fascinating side effect: if you search for it on line it comes up ! but only to take you to a scam site that leads you to a junk PDF converter....:(