Info needed: correct colours for WWII Aust vehicles

[Mrs Vampire]

Lanf

I am not as pessimistic as you in that regard.
If the evidence is overwhelming I must be looking in the wrong places because in documents and photographs I have never found it.

I would be eternally grateful if you could direct me to it .

[Chris Collins]

Gina,

let the naysayers say what they will, what happens in the field in a in unit depots is one thing but armies even one as allegedly unregulated by doctrine as the Australian army. Vehicles started with specified colour schemes at points of their lives, who knows? but we rarely display vehicles as an "in the field" example most look factory fresh.

Colour pigments used in the British army were tightly regulated due to the use of Infrared non-reflective paint, which is precisely why Mid war the brits whent from KG3 to scc2 brown, as most readily available green pigments are highly reflective, and easily observed using IR cameras in PR aircraft. Despite anectdotal evidence and "i spoke to a bloke" stuff, id say very difficult to prove with any authority.

Colours and variability in batches, colour can be very difficult to pin down, pigment particle size, resin matrix, background colour, age, lighting conditions all affect paint. but if you at least start with a reasonable facimilie and natural variation does it s thing, then you're interpretation is as valid if not more valid than the usual 'I reckon its..."

Were all vehicles the specified colour scheme for ever? Unlikely. were all vehicles a hotchpotch of locally sourced colours? also unlikely. Were most probably the specified colours, at least once at some point of their lifetimes? I'd say almost definitely. Are either incorrect?

I think personally Gina has done some amazing research using extant examples that corroborate much of the official literature, and I'd think twice before scoffing at work like that.

Is research a waste of time? I defer to the Duke of wellington. "Time in reconnaissance is seldom wasted"


Kind Regards

Chris Collins

[Mike K]

I think the official colour sample swatches should be looked upon as being what they were intended to be , that is " in the ball park " and nothing more than that. Unfortunately some of us being academic , we try to get down to the tiniest details .

The following are my own observations and I am hoping I am not offending anybody.

Reading through Mike Starmers research, for one particular colour , the early G3 or whatever it was , he matched a paint sample that was found inside the headlight shell of a motorcycle found in Belgium , the m/c was supposedly left behind by the BEF . He based his published results on that single example of paint found inside the headlight body . Going on from this, we are expected to believe, all of the BEF British vehicles finished in G3, were painted with the same brand of paint , and all of them had the same amount of matting agent as found in that headlight shell. It's total rubbish. It is ridiculous . It's a wild assumption and we should not be fooled. Mike Starmer should have added proviso's and made it clear to his readers that much of this colour research is, in the real world, an educated guess. The booklets I purchased from him have no proviso's anywhere , instead, you get the impression , this IS the correct colour and that's it , no arguments .

The matting agents added into the mix will have a big effect on the final colour to begin with. The paint factories weighed the colour pigments, OK that's fine, but did each brand of paint manufacturer buy their colour pigments from the same source.

The paint shops these days use computer scans to work out whats going on, even this technology doesn't rule out all possible variables . And why were the scanners installed in paint shops ?

The official vehicle colour guides are really just a " in the ball park " guide and we should be aware of this.

[Chris Collins]

well actually lets directly quote what Mr Starmer says about KG3, and i think he is the first to admit that its a difficult colour to pin down,

Starmer, M "british army colours & disruptive Camouflage in the United Kingdom, France and NW Europe 1936-45"

"... no colour chart with a named sample has so far been found although research continues the mixed colour sample hereis an average of three artifacts of known provenance. First was a replicated paint sample from canada matched to compnents of a 1941 ford built universal carrier undergoing restoration. second item was a date stamped steel helmet of original interior colourm the owner and light free storage of which was well known to the author. the third sample came from preserved components of a late 1939 norton h16 motorcycle under restoration in belgium whicj when found still carried original full BEF colours and the narkings of 2nd infantry division. sinse this machine was diuscovered another motorcycle fuel tank in the same colour has been found."

Nowhere does he claim its "the colour" but its case is compelling, he also suggests that KG 3 is a range of very close colours not one Identical shade. But regardless the chemical industry was very sophisticated in the 1940s, they worked to specifications as exacting as todays techniques using methods that while not as fast as digital colour matching, they were probably a more direct method of analysis.

Besides, what do you suggest as an alternative? At least these peices of research have given us insights of what these vehicles "may" have looked liked to the best of recorded knowledge.

Ultimately its your toy you paint it whatever colour you like, but I'd rather base my choices on informed research based on physical evidence and reasoning.

[Lang]

Gina

I think I will just let you get on with the good work and try to figure out in my mind how this argument rages all over the world 80 years later about colours and schemes in the face of thousands of plain written standards, regulations and policies.

The rules are there for all to see, millions of production vehicles were painted "to the rules", hundreds of thousands are still with us and nobody can gather enough supporters to gain a worldwide consensus on what actually existed.

It just seems to me the standards were far wider than we would admit existed, the variations getting wider and wider as vehicles reached service and the adherence to every change by operators far less rigorous than we care to admit.

I don't think there will ever be a clear single answer on actually applied colours.

I think you should keep searching and getting everyone's ideas but should always be open to even anecdotal comment. Hundreds of missing body murderers are in jail convicted - quite rightly - on circumstantial evidence. As they say "Science without discussion is merely propaganda"

Lang

[Mike Cecil]

Some several entries back, Gina stated that 'I am equally certain they did not purchase paint locally... there is an absolute lack of evidence to support the contention and an ocean of evidence that the Army supply chain worked', a premise more or less agreed with by Lang in the next post.

To what extent camouflage paint was purchased locally is, I think, one of those great 'unknowns'. It was certainly officially sanctioned during the 'dark days' of early 1942, viz, Mechanization Circular 301 of 2 January 1942, para 3:

'Gas resisting paints should be used, if available, but disruptive painting is not to be postponed on this account. Camouflage paint, Type "B" Australian Standard Specification Emergency Standard No. (E) K.507 is to be used for colours other than gas resisting. Paints are to be purchased locally. Australian Paint manufacturers are at present supplying gas resisting paints in Khaki Green No.3 and Light Stone BSC No.61 (British Standard Colour No.61).'

The circular also states clearly that the basic colour was KG3 - in this case, I doubt the authorities got their KG3 and KG(J) mixed up, so I believe we have to take it as read that KG3 was in production and on issue at that point. (KG(J) was the non-gas resisting equivalent to KG3 and available as one of the camouflage paints of the Emergency Standard (E) K.507, which was first issued by Standards Australia in December 1941. So KG(J) was the alternative to KG3 when KG3 gas resisting was not available through the normal army supply chain.

MC301 is one of the many camouflage documents not reproduced in Taubert's book. It was held at NAA Canberra in file A705/1 Item 211/9/430 when I copied it in the early 1980s, but I can't seem to find it under that ref in Recordsearch.

My two bob's worth..... back to my mid-morning brew!

Mike

[Richard Farrant]

Originally Posted by Chris Collins

Colour pigments used in the British army were tightly regulated due to the use of Infrared non-reflective paint, which is precisely why Mid war the brits whent from KG3 to scc2 brown, as most readily available green pigments are highly reflective, and easily observed using IR cameras in PR aircraft. Despite anectdotal evidence and "i spoke to a bloke" stuff, id say very difficult to prove with any authority.

Hi Chris,

I know this thread is strictly about WW2 Australian paint colours, but as you brought up the subject of WW2 British paints and colours, I have to comment on your paragraph above.
It is infrared reflective paint that fools the IR camera, not non-reflective.
The Khaki Green No.3 paint was not formulated as an infrared reflective paint, it was the fact the one of the colour pigments in this green paint was chromium oxide (which has an IRR quality to it) and there was a shortage of it and desperately needed for important uses such as plating, so SCC No.2 Brown was used in its place for a few years. The British camouflage colour range is very complex and different colours and patterns ran alongside each other at the time as there were overlaps and painting for the sake of it was to be avoided.
It was not until the 1970's that the British Army developed IRR (Infra Red Reflective) paint and in service from the 1980's. When I worked in army workshops from early 1970's, new vehicles inc. armour were still coming into service in gloss Deep Bronze Green

[Chris Collins]

Thank you Richards, you are quite correct, my confusion on what would've beneficial reflective and non reflective.

My point in bringing that up is there were reasons to adhear to guidelines on paint that are just as important as its appearance, that may not be immediately obvious.

cheers

Chris

[Mike K]

another diatribe ha ha

In wartime UK, with so many vehicle factories spread around, from AEC London to Albion Scotland and many other places in between , and the many thousands of vehicles produced in a given week . I feel that in time of a emergency as in WW2 , there was very little chance that each and every vehicle rolled out of those factories finished in the same colour, shade, hue or however you wish to describe it.

[Bruce Parker (RIP)]

Originally Posted by Richard Farrant

hi Chris,
I know this thread is strictly about WW2 Australian paint colours, but as you brought up the subject of WW2 British paints and colours, I have to comment on your paragraph above.
It is infrared reflective paint that fools the IR camera, not non-reflective.
The Khaki Green No.3 paint was not formulated as an infrared reflective paint, it was the fact the one of the colour pigments in this green paint was chromium oxide (which has an IRR quality to it) and there was a shortage of it and desperately needed for important uses such as plating, so SCC No.2 Brown was used in its place for a few years. The British camouflage colour range is very complex and different colours and patterns ran alongside each other at the time as there were overlaps and painting for the sake of it was to be avoided.
It was not until the 1970's that the British Army developed IRR (Infra Red Reflective) paint and in service from the 1980's. When I worked in army workshops from early 1970's, new vehicles inc. armour were still coming into service in gloss Deep Bronze Green

It's interesting that the decision to go from khaki to brown in 1943 might not have been based on some field guys evaluating the effectiveness of one colour over the other based in observations at Salisbury Plain. This is the first time I've heard it might be based on war time chemical shortages or technological advances.

[Richard Farrant]

Originally Posted by Bruce Parker

It's interesting that the decision to go from khaki to brown in 1943 might not have been based on some field guys evaluating the effectiveness of one colour over the other based in observations at Salisbury Plain. This is the first time I've heard it might be based on war time chemical shortages or technological advances.

Hi Bruce
Not sure where you got 1943 from. It was late 1941 that the regulations were issued to use SCC No2 Brown as a the base colour for vehicles. This reverted to olive drab in early 1944.

[Bruce Parker (RIP)]

Originally Posted by Richard Farrant

Hi Bruce
Not sure where you got 1943 from. It was late 1941 that the regulations were issued to use SCC No2 Brown as a the base colour for vehicles. This reverted to olive drab in early 1944.

You're probably right, however on Canadian production CMPs almost all 1942 vehicles (based on scraping down to original paint) were khaki and 1943 were brown, then OD early 1944 as you say. This might be the manufacturers not catching up with (or caring about) the regs?

One running board on my February 1944 HUW is OD, the other OD over brown which you can only see when it's taken apart. The parts supply ran on a different schedule than the regs too it appears.

[Richard Farrant]

Originally Posted by Bruce Parker

You're probably right, however on Canadian production CMPs almost all 1942 vehicles (based on scraping down to original paint) were khaki and 1943 were brown, then OD early 1944 as you say. This might be the manufacturers not catching up with (or caring about) the regs?

One running board on my February 1944 HUW is OD, the other OD over brown which you can only see when it's taken apart. The parts supply ran on a different schedule than the regs too it appears.

Bruce,
The British army's Army Council Instructions 1160 30/5/42 declared the SCC No.2 Brown be used on A, B and RASC vehicles or KG3 until present stocks are exhausted. Further on it states 'in future SCC No.2 will be considered the general purpose Basic Paint. Existing stocks of Khaki Green No.3 will be exhausted.'
The Canadian army backed this instruction up with one of their own Divisional Orders, dated 6/7/42