Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /membri/massimotessitori/sovietwarplanes/board/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3
AMT-11 and AMT-12 Controversy
Sovietwarplanes
April 28, 2024, 10:59:24 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: This forum replaces the old sovietwarplanes.com whose domain has expired in January 2017. It has been updated with the posts of the year 2016.
The new location of the site 'Sovietwarplanes pages' is at http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9
  Print  
Author Topic: AMT-11 and AMT-12 Controversy  (Read 105942 times)
KL
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1678


« Reply #60 on: December 02, 2011, 12:05:54 AM »

Hi Istvan,  Smiley

Your questions really reflect views seen many times on various forums and sometimes in popular literature.  Factors you mentioned are used to explain supposed/assumed variety of colours on Soviet planes and tanks during GPW.
IMHO, effects of those factors are grossly exegerated.  Those who claim that variability of colours rely on photographic evidence and usually ignore the fact that b/w photographs are not reliable representation of colours

Quote
I always have the same questions stuck in my head.
-how did these paint reacted to the effects of weather ( snow ,rain etc)?

Soviet paints weathered and aged (as any other paint exposed to the elements).  Here we are talking about few months, maybe a year before plane was overpainted, or crushed or shot down.  Effects of such weathering were so small that b/w photos hardly recorded any diference.
 
Quote
-How many factories were producing these paints to the military?
Could these factories guarantee the shame shades of colors or warrant that they will keep them trough the years, because it was a problem even in the 70?s and 80?s, for example in the case of cars too?

V & O mentioned only two factories:  Zavod No36 Avialak (Moscow) and Zavod ?Free Labour? (Yaroslav).  Even if there were more factories, the total is probably very small and knowing how Soviet industry worked, larger portion of the production would be concentrated in few factories.

Quote
-How stabile was the resource supply in these factories?

There were many problems with raw materials spec in 1942.  Some key materials were substituted with local/lower quality materials.  IMHO, it wasn?t hard to replicate shade/colour of the original paint ? it was hard to make durable, high quality paint.  Standards did exist throughout GPW, and producers had to meet them.
 
Quote
-How were the colors influenced by the  conditions of  the  applying?

Not much?

Quote
-what kind of units did the troops receive, were these mixed or they had to do it themselves.

Field maintenance units received prepared paint (in cans), paints were not mixed in field.

Quote
-On the photos there are a few  where you could barely make out the borders of the colors , but in other instances the difference between the two colors are as clear as it can get.

Borders (sharp or overspray, wide or narrow) varied in different periods and between different factories.  B/w photo contrast is a different question ? for photographers.

Quote
-Right now the one and only reliable source is the France Jak-3.

N-N Yak-3 No18 was made in Nov 1944, delivered to N-N regiment in May 1945.  Most of the time before May 1945, it spend stored (probably in open, covered with tarp) at Saratov factory with many other Yaks.  Paint doesn?t look bad for 6 months of exposure.


Quote
This Jak has been made only for experimenting with colors.
The line were created by the Stankov book, unfortunately my photos doesn?t  give me a clear sign of whether is it a repainted plane or  is it a standard painting pattern.

Stankov, in general, is not a reliable source.

Hth,
KL
Logged
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6528


« Reply #61 on: December 02, 2011, 10:33:59 AM »

Hi Konstantin adn Istvan,
Quote
N-N Yak-3 No18 was made in Nov 1944, delivered to N-N regiment in May 1945.  Most of the time before May 1945, it spend stored (probably in open, covered with tarp) at Saratov factory with many other Yaks.  Paint doesn?t look bad for 6 months of exposure.
It sounds strange that a new good plane was stored for six months in factory during the war. I think that it was utilized by some other Soviet unit in the meanwhile. This would justify all those overposed numbers painted on the fuselage.
Regards
Massimo
Logged
xan
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 467



WWW
« Reply #62 on: December 02, 2011, 11:24:21 AM »

Hi
I think that it was utilized by some other Soviet unit in the meanwhile. This would justify all those overposed numbers painted on the fuselage.

Yes,
When Stalin offered the yaks at the normandie-niemen's pilots, they were not new planes. They received them in Stuttgard if i'm not wrong.
the gift was quite simbolic because they were given without piece to change, so they quicly deseapered in the arm?e de l'air.

the paint we can see in the fuselage are not very clear; the plane has been repeinted almost two time by the mus?e de l'air, and to have a really good idea of the original camo, we will have to wait the wings restore work...

Xan   
Logged

KL
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1678


« Reply #63 on: December 02, 2011, 07:44:16 PM »

It sounds strange that a new good plane was stored for six months in factory during the war. I think that it was utilized by some other Soviet unit in the meanwhile. This would justify all those overposed numbers painted on the fuselage.

OK... Some time with other Soviet unit, but most of the time at Saratov.  Smiley  Plane had low mileage (it was like new)  Wink when received by the French

Number 25 was factory number
Number 21 "other VVS unit"
Number 18 Normandie-Niemen tactical number



cheers,
KL
Logged
xan
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 467



WWW
« Reply #64 on: December 02, 2011, 08:57:35 PM »

Allright, but we are still waiting for the restore of MT611 AMT-12 colors...
Xan
Logged

KL
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1678


« Reply #65 on: December 08, 2011, 12:22:23 AM »

An example of standard 1943 gray-gray fighter scheme:







Is it only me, or there is the "splinter scheme" recommended by NKAP?Huh?



I mean, Pilawskii says that:  there are no photographs that show any VVS fighter wearing such an angular pattern application. Indeed, this scheme is anathema to Soviet camouflage in general, which tended to be organic and rounded in execution; such angularity would be completely out of character. As such, this pattern was never painted by any of the factories to match this Template.

qote from  http://vvs.hobbyvista.com/Markings/NKAP/nkap.html

Hth,
KL

Logged
mholly
Full Member
***
Posts: 117


« Reply #66 on: December 08, 2011, 02:44:23 PM »

Quote
Is it only me, or there is the "splinter scheme" recommended by NKAP?
No, it makes two of us.
Thing is, as you know, that still so many don't know what they should be looking for. And if they do
they still don't believe it! Even if Pilawskii is/will be shut up there are "Ballbusters"
coming out of the bushes. "There was no system in VVS..." If not there was no system
in pretty much anything in USSR. That they won the GPW and became world's nuclear
power later is just, well I don't know, miracle maybe?
Cheers,
Mario
Logged
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6528


« Reply #67 on: December 08, 2011, 05:50:27 PM »

Hi Mario,
if you have something to write about Ballsbuster, why don't you do this in the forum where he posts, so he can answer?
Regards
Massimo
Logged
KL
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1678


« Reply #68 on: December 08, 2011, 08:15:31 PM »

I posted photos primarily for Istvan (aka Ohotnyk) to show how NKAP scheme was followed on upper wing surfaces of many (probably most!!!) Yaks made after the July 1943 directive was issued.

Mario has a valid point:  many modellers (and profile artists) beleive in very loose attitude toward  the standards/regulations/orders - reality was different, Soviets were hard pressed by Nazis; they did not have time to care about standards, they fought in primitive conditions, Ivan was primitive, Ivan was illiterate peasant, etc.

Pilawskii's aproach is somewhat different:  he is in love with the subject - he doesn't think anything bad about the Ivan, but his interpretation of GPW reality incorporates stereotypes popular among many modellers.  At the end, Pilawskii will allways have readers and followers among them.

More of Pilawskii's romantic interpretation of 1943 NKAP scheme:
Grib's famous Yak-9D "22" is a classic example of an actual VVS scheme based on the NKAP fighter Template, and in the realities of production these applications tended to look like this example.



How did he get this pattern is unknown, photographic evidence shows classical splinters


In all, it should be stressed that there was no real "standard" for these patterns. Simply, many factories responded by incorporating some of the NKAP's ideas into the schemes they applied to their fighter products, and by no means whatever were these the only camouflage patterns of the 1944-45 period in AMT-12/-11 colors.

Those who read his book know that he means green/dark green "loops", brown/ochre "desert" scheme, overall "wood aehrolack", etc...
Logged
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6528


« Reply #69 on: December 09, 2011, 07:52:44 AM »

Hi Konstantin,
no doubt, EP is wrong when it states that the angular camo was never seen on photos of Yaks and Lavochkins. A wide amount of photos show straight lines, or at least an attempt to do straight lines with an airbrush operated without masks. 
In other cases, the lines are curved. One should look to the image of a single plane to see how angular, or not, the painting was.
Plane n.22 is interesting, the use of straight and sharp lines on the left wing is undeniable. But t seems that it was so on the left wing only. The fuselage and other wing shows the usual attempt to make straight lines with air brush and free hand, or even curved lines and repainting patches.
Besides, n.22 seems to have been partially repainted: the 'blue-green' on the front of fuselage isn't comparable to that of the rear fuselage. Probably this is due to weathering and repainting.
Regards
Massimo
Logged
KIKKO
Newbie
*
Posts: 19


...Frangar non flectar............


« Reply #70 on: December 17, 2011, 07:02:38 PM »

Hi all,I'm painting my La5 Fn with the  mix color tamiya like you've suggested,only a least question: what should be the final coat finiture?I think semigloss.....or not???!!!Ciao Enrico.
Logged
KL
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1678


« Reply #71 on: December 19, 2011, 02:21:17 AM »

what should be the final coat finiture?I think semigloss.....or not???!!!

Not semi-gloss!!!
AMT paints were matt.  Letter "M" in their name is for matt...  they differed from previous AII paints because talc and other additives were introduced to make them matt.
  
Hope this helps,
KL
« Last Edit: December 19, 2011, 03:35:51 AM by KL » Logged
KIKKO
Newbie
*
Posts: 19


...Frangar non flectar............


« Reply #72 on: December 19, 2011, 08:32:12 AM »

Thak you KL!!!!!!!!!This advise is hopefull!Merry Christmas!Enrico.
Logged
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6528


« Reply #73 on: December 19, 2011, 04:05:57 PM »

Hi,
the article of Vaklamov and Orlov on M-Hobby 2/99 gives FS numbers starting with 2 for all the colors of AMT range, and beginning with 3 for al A-xx-m oil equivalents.
The drawings related to their articles on many issues give the same numbers.

http://postimage.org/image/s7srhpqc/
http://postimage.org/image/s7zdn3pg/
http://postimage.org/image/s84c956s/
http://postimage.org/image/s89av6o4/

Regards
Massimo
« Last Edit: December 19, 2011, 04:11:19 PM by Massimo Tessitori » Logged
xan
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 467



WWW
« Reply #74 on: December 20, 2011, 01:23:10 AM »

A friend of mine reworked the kikko's work, giving to the pic the right white...

[

I put those colours on that sheme; I know it's not the correct way to do, but i like the result:



Xan
Logged

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!