Sovietwarplanes

The NKAP order and the Air Force determined the procedure for the introduction of the new camouflage patterns in practice. Delivery of all necessary enamels should be provided by 25 July [1943]. For the release of the new camouflage fighters were scheduled from 15 July, the remaining aircraft - from 1 August, but before that date, from July 15, prescribed in the existing two-colour production machines to replace the black on dark gray. Prior to receiving the standard gray-blue and dark gray colours they were allowed to use a mixture of nitroemaley of AMT-7 (blue) and AMT-6 (black) or oil A-26m and A-28m, made by special instructions and standards of the VIAM. Such a blending of colours had never before been allowed, such was the special urgency of introducing a new camouflage. Documentary evidence of the use of mixtures of dyes were found as well as the ?special? guidelines and standards. However, to exclude their use in the initial stage of implementation of the new camouflage cannot be made. In this case, the colours of enamel might have significantly differed from the AMT-11 and AMT-12 (A-32m).

Let's see, how are we looking at wooden structure and skinned aircraft. Plywood was attached to the frame and was covered with two layers of nitrokleya. Then a thin layer of putty was applied, then again the nitrokleya layer, and finally the cloth was attached, which was covered with two layers of shpatpevki, primers layer dope AN Al (in wartime, this layer cannot be), and two layers of AMT dope.
In late 1942 - early 1943 NKHP factory in Chelyabinsk and Novosibirsk in nitroshpatlevke AL-22 short lead kroons, which is included in its composition, was replaced in iron minium. This shpatpevka was applied to aviation all winter and spring. During the summer heat the layer shpatpevki had internal stresses, causing the paint layer to crack. Through the cracks penetrated moisture, which sharply reduced the strength of the attaching skin and led to its isolation. Cracking happened for about a thousand aircraft painted with the use of this shpatpevki. ?Greshipi? this fighter Yak-7 plants,  number 153, Yak-1 plant number 292 and La-5 plants number 21 and number 99. Machines lost their fighting efficiency. Abandoned in front of the factory team for two or three weeks back in operation defective aircraft, and literally within two or three days after the completion of writes A.S. Yakovlev, began the famous battle on the Orel-Kursk direction.
Thus, the defect was the cause of poor quality coating, a formula which forcibly took the lead crowns. As can be seen, to solve the deficit problem by filling it was not possible. But the lead crowns belonged to the green enamel A-24m and AMT-4. If you cannot abandon it in the fillings, it may be to reduce the flow of paint on the [crown]?  Reserve formulae include the possibility of replacing the krona and milori with one pigment - green oxide of chromium, and chromium oxide was scarce: in 1943 according to the NKAP there was only 53.8% of the required amount.  Cannot proved and the replacement of lead krone to another - zinc: in March 1943 in ?with complete absence of zinc krone? halted production of soil ALG-1 and ALG-5. The answer remained one - drastically reduce the production of green enamel. ?Plans ...? 1943, just respond to such a solution: the most massive class of aircraft - fighters - green is missing completely, as for other machines the need for green colours was to be reduced by more than 1.6 times.

Again, the only other alternative interpretation that I see is the one of tractor green...
Regards
Massimo

Massimo, there was no Tractor Green!

looking at photos of Yaks, I am strongly suspecting that something should be rewritten.
.... a different scheme that we can describe as 'serpentine'

Massimo, there was no Tractor Green!  (http://karopka.ru/bitrix/images/forum/smile/ora.gif)

Neverthless, there is still something very unclear in VVS painting: why do the green appear so light in so many photos of Yaks, and not of Lavochkins and Mig and Pe-2s? Is it only a question of film sensibility? But why did they use different films for Yaks? So, if the tractor green explanation is wrong, there has to be another one.

There is another point you seem to be missing-mentality in the Soviet society at that time. Initiative was not welcome, it was even dangerous. I just cannot imagine some workers mixing "tractor" paint with black to achieve desired shade. They would rather leave the aircraft in primer (silver many time as we all have seen) once prescribed aviation paints were in shortage (and again we know it did happen).

Hi guys,

this photo was shown by Vakhlamov and Orlov in one of their 1998-1999 articles.
My russian is poor and I can be wrong but I think they said it's a black and green camo.
(http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e136/Apex1701/yak-1.jpg)

Jean

However, it's surprisingly interesting where it says that planes made in the same factory with the same scheme were already painted grey-grey in february 1943, months before of the release of the NKAP template.

It says that Yaks overhauled by a maintance unit in summer 1945 had been painted in similar pattern but in two gray scheme.

Summer 1945 ?
I am not good in russian but I am better with numbers and I can't see anything ressembling 1945 nor than лето ?
 :o
Could you explain. Thanks.

Yes, I know, the plane could have been repainted, but take in account that who repainted it saw the original colors. Besides, for what I know, the exhibits of the Yakovlev collection are all painted in credible way.

Who has any information on that Kleshchev?

(http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/colors/1943-45-fighters/yak7b8b.jpg)
Maybe this was his last plane... but I see much less victory marks.

But the most promising possibility is to find a better photo of the line of Yak-7 behind the n.27; they have to be green/black and would allow a comparison.
Regards
Massimo

thank you for these images, those of Za borodo were new for me.

That's easy - it's one of these:



...although there's no way of knowing if it might have been repainted or not; the image Konstantin posted doesn't have very good resolution (I think I've seen it published somewhere where it's a bit clearer) but the Komsomol inscription is still faintly visible. I know I've seen some discussion of this photo elsewhere; Scalemodels.ru, probably.

Mikoyan's Yak-9 carried inscription "Za Volodyu" ("For Volodya").  It referred to his brother Vladimir Mikoyan who was killed in action in Sept 1942.

All photos were taken in March 1943 when Mikoyan was with 32th GvIAP.  The plane was most likely camouflaged in black-green scheme.

Interesting pictures, Konstantin!  I notice that even though the photographs are from 1943, the Yak still has the prewar type red stars with the thin black outline.  Do you know how late these were used - did any aeroplanes use them until the end of the war (in other words is there any photographic evidence for this)?

Do you know how late these were used - did any aeroplanes use them until the end of the war (in other words is there any photographic evidence for this)?

... but the green... again this high contrasting camouflage typical of so many Yaks...

Two reasons why green AMT-4 looks dark gray on some b/w photos and light gray on others:

1.   Photos were taken with different types of film (different spectral sensitivity) combined with different optical filters
2.   AMT-4 had some special spectral properties ? it was non-decodable (nedeshifruemya)

LaGGs camouflaged in black-green scheme also show wide range of grays for AMT-4 painted areas:
 
(http://www.lietadla.com/lietadla/ruske/lagg-3/lagg-3-10.jpg)

(http://ww2warbirds.net/ww2pics/ww2lagglagg3-1.jpg)

Two photos above were taken with different types of film - red star is dark on the upper photo and almost white on the lower photo.

Interesting pictures, Konstantin!  I notice that even though the photographs are from 1943, the Yak still has the prewar type red stars with the thin black outline.  Do you know how late these were used - did any aeroplanes use them until the end of the war (in other words is there any photographic evidence for this)?

Regards,

Jason

I read your post, but I continue to see that nearly all photos of Yaks shows high contrast, and photos of other planes not.

Hi all,
looking at photos of Yaks, I am strongly suspecting that something should be rewritten.
Probably the first application of AMT-11 and 12 on many Yakovlev planes, in 1943, was made according to a different scheme that we can describe as 'serpentine'.
(http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/colors/1943-45-fighters/yak9-niivvs.jpg)
Image from SAFFC by EP It has often interpreted as a tricky black-green or tractor green-dark green scheme, but the photo here allows the comparison with the colors of the MiG-3, Il-2 and Pe-2, and it's clear that it can't absolutely be the same. So, it's likely that this was a first application of AMT-11/12.
Note the high contour of the AMT-7 light blue demarcation line on the fuselage sides, that encourages the interpretation as a blue-gray plane, and the early style marks.
Note the wing of a La-5, believed to be white or light grey overall.

Massimo

I have a picture on the other side. Indeed color Yak-9 look like 11/12. But I think that this is non-standard experimental painting, which is just at that time was tested. Two-color on the Yak-9 and three-color on the Yak-1. As a result, two-color scheme was approved by the camouflage, but with modified forms of spots. La-5F really looks like a very light gray.
http://propjet.ucoz.ru/photo/1-0-4-3

All other photos are listed in this thread with other aircraft is likely to relate to the aircraft passed the PARM s Field aviation maintenance workshops, where planes were painted in a completely non-standard camouflage with a completely non-traditional spots. As proof of this is the set of photos.

Hi Walker,  :)

thanks for the interesting photo!  I had to register to your page to view it.  :D

Do you have any additional information about these photos, like the date when the photo was taken?
That must be He-100 in front of La-5?

Cheers,
KL

looking at photos of Yaks, I am strongly suspecting that something should be rewritten.

Obviously you need a better translation of V&O texts - some answers on your questions are there.

But, why would anybody waste time and effort translating it if you believe that history based on documents can be rewritten because there is a "photographic evidence" that may, or may not, show something else? ???

Regards,
KL