interesting application of a winter scheme

[Massimo Tessitori]

Here is an interesting photo of an Il-2M after a crash landing. The photo was probably taken in winter 1942/43, when the two-seater version was just introduced into units.

Unfortunately the photo doesn't allow to understand which factory produced it and if it had metal wings or wooden ones, so I've guessed that it was the typical production of Zavod 30 with wooden wings. In this choice, I've considered that the photo doesn't show any trace of the typical white outlines on the stars typical of Zavod 18, the only one that produced metal wings at that age.

The most interesting fact is the way how the white layer was applied: we can see that the well covered parts are forthemost those well visible from above, while the parts visible mainly from the sides have a more greyish look due to unperfect covering. This agrees with the fact that white paints camouflage well the plane on a snowy ground, as seen from above, but makes it too visible if seen against any other background, as seen from the side.

Another interesting thing is the low-visibilty fuselage star, covered with a thin layer of white paint giving a pinkish shade; an external outline was left unpainted and appears as a dark shape to put the star more in evidence without making the plane too visible.


Regards
Massimo

[learstang]

Very nice scheme, Massimo - good find (and yes, I do want it for the book)!  The treatment of the fuselage star is especially interesting.  A low-visibility red star.  It's also interesting how the gunner's canopy is removed, even in winter.  I suppose a greater range of firing motion was more important to the gunner than comfort.  From what I've read, the gunner had to obtain the pilot's permission before removing the canopy (I suppose its removal might have had some very small effect on the flying characteristics).

Regards,

Jason

[Massimo Tessitori]

Hi Jason,
probably the missing part of the canopy was of the tunnel type, that limits very much the lateral field of fire. I am sending to you the higher resolution file.
Regards
Massimo

[B_Realistic]

Massimo,

that's almost the way I made my wintersheme on the fuselage.
So this is a welcome picture.
My Il-2 is almost done.

Michel

[Massimo Tessitori]

Hi Michel,
it would be interesting to see a photo of your model.
Regards
Massimo

[xan]

very nice, good job Massimo!
Xan

[B_Realistic]

Massimo,

if my Il-2 is finished I'll post some pictures off course.
But I don't hurry.
It must be finished at end of November for a contest.

Michel

[KL]

IMHO nose and wings of this Il-2 are covered with snow.  Nothing unusual...  

Washable white paint was transparent and black/green camouflage was supposed to be seen through it.  These facts are known from V&O.

Fuselage red star treatment is unusual!  It's definitelly different than tail star...

It's an interesting case of field applied winter scheme, worth a profile because of the fuselage stars.

Cheers,
KL

larger image from http://waralbum.ru/39006/

[learstang]

Considering the landscape, there may be some snow on the nose and wings, Konstantin.  However, why isn't there snow on the propeller blades, the exhausts, and the top of the rear fuselage?  It is possible, of course, that the snow has been swept off there, and I have to admit that the port stabiliser and elevator appear to have snow on them.  Regarding the transparency of the white paint, although Orlov mentions it, I've seen many photographs where the MK-7 appears quite opaque, with none of the "summer" (or "spring", as Orlov calls it) camouflage showing through.  Certainly the top of the fin and rudder show a more opaque appearance, and that's not due to snow.

Regards,

Jason

[KL]

Snow is also more logical - why would anybody paint half of the wing in solid white and half in transparent white?

Massimo's hunt for unusual, nonstandard schemes is a slipery slope.  Every smudge, shadow, repair and like becomes a new painting practice...  Why not keeping it simple... 

Regards,
KL

[learstang]

Snow is also more logical - why would anybody paint half of the wing in solid white and half in transparent white?

Massimo's hunt for unusual, nonstandard schemes is a slipery slope.  Every smudge, shadow, repair and like becomes a new painting practice...  Why not keeping it simple... 

Regards,
KL

Because simple is boring, Konstantin, at least from a modelling viewpoint.  If I did a B-24, I'd probably do it as a formation leader, complete with polka dots.  Hardly normal practice, but it was done occasionally (and there are photographs to prove this) and it makes for a fascinating model.  Regarding this Il-2's wing, although you may very well be correct that it's just snow, perhaps it was painted more heavily on the front of the wing than the back.  I mean why paint a wing in bands of white?  Why put white bands on a fuselage?  Because it helps to break up the outline.  I'm not saying that's what was done here, but it could have been.  Although some of these schemes may be conjectural, they may also be correct.  Remember that we're not talking about the application of "AII Brown" or other fake paints that we know are rubbish.  What we're talking about here are field applications of MK-7 White.  We're talking about an aeroplane that was produced in enormous numbers, and especially when you're talking about white paint being applied in the field there was enormous variation.  That's not conjecture, as I've seen hundreds of photographs showing variations in the application of MK-7, showing everything from solid, opaque finishes that completely cover the topsides, to Shturmoviks that just had a few daubs of white on the rear fuselage.  If we just do endless black/green or three-colour schemes, and all in strict accordance with the NKAP templates, it gets pretty monotonous.  It's the unusual that make things interesting.

Regards,

Jason

[KL]

Jason,
I have nothing against unusual - if unusual is better documented.  One photo that can be interpreted this or that way is not enough...

Cheers,
KL

[Massimo Tessitori]

Please don't consider me so superficial, I always look for things that could have altered the perception of the painting, including shadows.
The snow is the first thing I've considered and then excluded, both because it would have revealed more irregularities in the profile of the wings and of the nose, both because it couldn't have adhered on the top of the tail. Besides the panelling of the nose is visible on the white part in front of the windshield, it would have been hidden if the white part was a layer of snow.
The reason to make such a thing is already explained in my first post, and resembles what was done on the Us Navy contemporary planes, whose sides had a compromise shade to mask the planes on the horizon, while the upper surfaces had the shade of the sea.
Eventually we could look for more photos of this plane to check, but if we don't find it, I am satisfied with this interpretation.
Regards
Massimo

[KL]

Please don't consider me so superficial, I always look for things that could have altered the perception of the painting, including shadows.

I didn't say you were superficial.  I appreciate your work and trying to help.
Regards,
KL

[learstang]

Jason,
I have nothing against unusual - if unusual is better documented.  One photo that can be interpreted this or that way is not enough...

Cheers,
KL

Konstantin, one photograph is certainly not enough to come to some grand conclusion regarding camouflage such as "every Il-2 was painted this way..".  I agree with that.  However, even single photographs can be used to reconstruct an unusual paint scheme.  In this I'm talking more from a modeller's viewpoint than as an historian.  Obviously as an historian you want to know what the standard colours and schemes were, and you have to base that on photographs, documentation, archaeological evidence, personal recollections, etc.  That applies to unusual paint schemes also - the example I used of the polka-dotted B-24 is well documented, and so is reliable.  I realise that trying to reconstruct a camouflage from just one photograph can be problematic at times, but, again as a modeller, sometimes I'm willing to take that chance, especially if the scheme is particularly interesting.  As long as it's made clear that the scheme is unusual, and taken from one photograph, I don't see a big problem with that.

Best Regards,

Jason