Info needed: correct colours for WWII Aust vehicles

[Mrs Vampire]

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

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.

[cliff]

Originally Posted by Gina Vampire

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.

[Mrs Vampire]

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

[cliff]

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

[Jacques Reed]

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,

[Keith Webb]

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.

[Mrs Vampire]

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.