Info needed: correct colours for WWII Aust vehicles

[Lang]

Tony and Mike

The effort you blokes are putting in is great.

In your latest collection of carrier photos I can see 5 different patterns - 6 if you count the two different patterns on the same vehicles, presumably from the same unit, in the last photo - (and the actual colours seem to be in doubt with the experts as well).

The field photos look like an exercise - Puckapunyal? Carriers running through a prelaid corduroy bog hole with a bunch of "observers" looks like a visit from the boss and his staff or a PR shoot. What makes you think it was a camo field trial?

I am really interested in what actually happened and am hard pushed trying to follow the changes in the patterns. The dates, numbers and various orders and instructions went past me long ago and I will leave that to you!

Gina's RAAF file is a great read (there would have been similar Army files). Unfortunately many researchers take correspondence on these files at face value and use them to back an argument but unless you have worked in a Headquarters you can not read between the lines.

Without that background most people do not understand the relationship between various ranks and particularly jobs. You see this a lot on MLU. It is not a straight rank line and much more collegiate than outsiders think. I spent 15 years in the Army and never once had a senior officer say to me like in the movies "And that's an order!"

Armies are made up of people with opinions, prejudices and various abilities. Pieces of paper may be guidelines of intent but nearly all final results are achieved by people talking to each other of which there is little record.

Not all correspondence carries the same weight. A researcher may not realise a letter from a Captain may have far more significance than one signed by a General. There is often a story between the lines. There are contests between personalities, many letters are just going through the motions with little intent to proceed further and whole pictures can be built up from a few words in letters weeks apart.

As mentioned before, it is easy to read into things but once you start saying the date in the photo is wrong - you may well be right - but without real evidence you may as well say any annoying contradiction is wrong and offer the cleansed evidence as perfect proof.

All the research on dates, numbers, colours and instructions in the world is not going to overcome the fact that at no time did the entire Australian forces vehicle fleet actually carry a standardised colour scheme. There were so many changes that the factory colours may likely be tracked but the new schemes may have been retrofinished on very small numbers of issued vehicles or large numbers according to the period but certainly not all.

There appears to be some idea that there were huge groups of vehicles available for repaint jobs. That may be true for transport companies, artillery and armoured units but half the army vehicles were spread throughout hundreds of smaller units ranging from headquarters vehicles to Infantry battalions to many 1-3 vehicle operators.

Getting all those random vehicles into somewhere to repaint them was impossible. Most could not afford to lose their vehicles because they had no back up and the Chaplain did not know which end of a paint brush to hold when they decided not to bring him in but sent him a can of paint and a drawing for his single vehicle.

Trying to track paint dates from photos in the field (not factory lines) is a pretty hard ask as I would hazard a guess that the further away from Victoria Barracks the units were, the less likely they would be to have brought their vehicles in for their weekly repaint.

I think the whole target of this exercise should be to find what were the actual colours - the mystery colour chip. Trying to put written instructions for patterns and colours against field photos, neatly into date boxes is impossible. You could say a scheme could not be before a date but certainly not after.

You have a big job in front of you.

PS I just had someone say they had the full WW2 period paint chip books from both the Ford and GMH factories. Should he just throw them out?

Lang

[Mike K]

The most accurate colour evidence would be actual surviving cans of Australian WW2 paint.

I had a can , it was a musty yellow with a very slight orange tinge . The tin, holding about 1/2 gallon, was rectangular shaped with a small spout and a cork seal . A few of the same cans were sold at Colin Andersons auction in 2003 .

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by Lang

In your latest collection of carrier photos I can see 5 different patterns

Lang the pattern of interest here is the Chullora Workshops pattern which appears again in the parade. The only carriers not to receive this pattern are the AT and Mortars carriers as mentioned.

027536 Sydney 12 Dec 42 carriers parade pattern.jpg

Originally Posted by Lang

and the actual colours seem to be in doubt with the experts as well

I feel sure the disruptive colour is Young’s Vehicle Light Grey as it appears much lighter than the disruptive colour on the AT and Mortar carriers, which we could reasonably assume is Light Earth. Also of course we know that Vehicle Light Grey was the authorized colour at the time and paint stocks were ordered several months earlier. There’s really no reason to think it’s NOT Vehicle Light Grey. The burden of proof here is upon those would claim it to be Light Earth, in contravention of official instructions.

However I’m not so sure about the basic colour, which doesn’t look dark enough to be Young’s Dark Green 3 (ie. Dark Green M with 1/8 Night Black U). I suspect it may be KG3 as the carriers were already painted in KG3, so they may have just freshened it up before applying disruptive coat. This may have been fairly common with repaints, as opposed to new vehicles where the correct basic colour could be applied in production, ie. Vehicle Dark Green which was authorized soon afterwards. Such practice would lead to 3 different schemes under MC319 and Variations, with Vehicle Dark Green / Vehicle Light Grey becoming the de facto standard in 1943, as a result of 3-tone scheme under SM4809 being so impractical to implement.

2-tone evolution 1942-43.jpeg

Originally Posted by Lang

The field photos look like an exercise - Puckapunyal?

Many reasons for believing this is NSW including reappearance of AT carrier in Sydney parade, with gun shield displaying identical pattern repainted Light Earth (presumed colour). Also the photos were posted together by Cam Finlay (who may be able to shed light on their origins).

Originally Posted by Lang

What makes you think it was a camo field trial?

Because we’re seeing unusual camo schemes freshly painted on one or two vehicles only, plus various forms of makeshift camo on display (netting, foliage, canvas sheet) and even a disruptively painted helmet in matching colours! Plus the very fact these professional quality photos were taken in the first place indicates the need for accurate visual record.

I find these images highly reminiscent of photos taken during camo trials at Puckapunyal during October 41 but I’m quite sure they’re NSW trials in mid-42 evaluating new camo schemes after the early schemes proved unsuitable. In fact I wouldn’t mind betting we’re seeing Young himself with the G.O.C. and could that be Dakin lurking in the long grass…? How’s that for an overactive imagination!

Cam Finlay FB Dec 2016.jpg

Originally Posted by Lang

once you start saying the date in the photo is wrong - you may well be right - but without real evidence you may as well say any annoying contradiction is wrong

Yes I’m extremely uncomfortable about having to do this, as it really damages one’s credibility. However I did present incontrovertible evidence first, namely OFFICIAL AWM photos of identical carriers in Dec ’42 parade, and my wording in conclusion was carefully chosen:

“I therefore believe the NSW Railways archive photo has the year wrong”

Note that the date was always in question, which is why I posted the photo in the first place, and rudely challenged Mike to explain it! Apologies Mike!

Note also that we no longer need the Chullora photo, because we have evidence of carriers in the field in KG3, and subsequently on parade December 42 sporting freshly painted disruptive camo. It’s of no consequence WHERE the work was done, only WHEN it was done.

Originally Posted by Lang

I think the whole target of this exercise should be to find what were the actual colours - the mystery colour chip.

Yes, that’s precisely what I’m trying to do with Vehicle Light Grey. The first step is to establish its existence, which can only be ascertained from documents. The second step is to establish its usage, which can only be ascertained from photographs. The third step is to match the colour, which can only be done from artifacts. That’s why I suggested No.6 gun tractors as likely candidates for this colour.

Originally Posted by Lang

Trying to put written instructions for patterns and colours against field photos, neatly into date boxes is impossible.

Nevertheless that’s essentially what’s been done with MC301 and MC319 already, and we have ample photographic evidence of these schemes confirming the general timeline. The next instruction is SM4809, which cancelled MC319 in March 43, but we find no photographic evidence until mid-44, on a couple of semi-trailers and some genset trailers at 5 BOD. Meanwhile during 43 we continue to see MC319 pattern freshly painted, in colours of much higher contrast than KG3 / Light Earth. PLEASE EXPLAIN!

[Lang]

Tony

Appreciate your well thought out replies to my queries and doubts. You really have put a lot of work into this.

Lang

[Tony Wheeler]

Likewise Lang, I appreciate you taking the time to critique my thoughts and ideas and the evidence I present. I find that I learn a helluva lot more trying to defend my pet theories than I do in isolation. Sometimes I prove myself right, and sometimes I prove myself wrong, as with the Chullora date, but I find it equally satisfying as long I’m finding answers, and discovering new pieces of the puzzle. For example I wouldn’t have dug up Cam Finlay’s photos if you hadn’t queried the Chullora evidence. And I wouldn’t have presented the Chullora evidence if Mike hadn’t challenged my “leap” from Special Variation to production. Here again I proved myself wrong, because it turned out to be a repaint!

[Lang]

Tony

I assume it is in the same parade. What is it with the two last vehicles in the parade collection? Same unit, different scheme from the other carriers and from each other?

Lang

[Tony Wheeler]

Lang if you’re referring to the two Mortar carriers and the 2pdr carrier, I believe these are in Khaki Green / Light Earth scheme, which Young criticized on 13 Sept 42: “These colours are useless for disruption as they are much too close in tone and merge at a very short distance.” You can see what he means in that photo.

027529 Sydney 12 Dec 42 carriers parade KG3 Light Earth camo - Copy.JPG

Note also the enlarged frontal pattern on the AT carrier and gun shield compared to the trial pattern, which is otherwise identical. Early disruptive patterns under MC301 were way too small, especially 3-tone patterns, and instructions were issued to make them “bolder”. I believe they were designed originally by Victorian DHS committee and not Dakin himself, although he seems to have approved them. I guess we need to bear in mind that disruptive camo was in its infancy.

4120551 (2).JPG

[Lang]

Yes, I can see the panels in direct sunlight do merge their colours.

Lang