Sometimes I’m pretty sure I get more of a kick researching and preparing a build than doing the actual model. I suppose this is an example:
This is not news to those who regularly build Vietnam-era airplanes, but those new to them should be aware that your painting instructions may not be accurate for your particular plane. In that “disruptive scheme” of tan, two closely-related greens, and a gray belly (FS36622, which is almost white), known as the SEA Scheme, each aircraft type has a very specific pattern set out for it in Air Force Technical Orders. The F-4 has a specific place for the greens and tans, the F-105 has its own, etc. But when building a particular plane, use photos and don’t simply believe the kit’s painting instructions, because they usually rely on the tech order (which is available to anyone, BTW, and many modelers have them – wish I hadn’t lost mine). However, the point (yes, I have one) is that often the paint shops would reverse the pattern, putting the tan where the green goes and vice versa. This happens with many camo schemes from many countries, but just how common this was in Vietnam was brought home to me this morning on a Wings Over Vietnam doc on the Wild Weasels. I was really amazed at how many four-ship flights of F-105s or F-100s, or two-ship elements in the various film clips, had mirror-image camo. So I started going through my F-4, F-105 and F-100 SEA camo photos and, sure enough, it happened a lot more often than I had previously thought. To a lot of modelers this will make no difference whatever, but to picky ones who want to really make a tiny representation of the real deal, check photos before painting. Don’t rely solely on instruction sheets, and though they tend to be more accurate, don’t even rely solely on aftermarket decal instructions.
Sometimes, researching and finding the exactly correct scheme is like trying to nail Jello to a wall. Just try pinning down a dozen planes from the very first blocks of F-16s that look exactly the same. We tend to think they do, but they don’t, because in the 70s, the tech orders for the new gray paint schemes for F-16s (which later replaced the SEA scheme on many F-4s and other older planes) were not clearly understood by all the paint shop crews.
There’s just nothing better than a few photos if you don’t have that Thud parked in your driveway.
(Which reminds me: Does anyone remember that old National Guard commerical where they show this subdivision, and one guy has a tank parked in his driveway, then they show his neighbor, and he has an F-106 parked in his? That was a cool ad campaign.)
Hey Shark!
Thanks for bringing this up. I, too, have noticed the mirror image SEA schemes from photos of Vietnam era aircraft but, I didn’t realise it was as common as you have noted.
I’ll have to dig out some of my books and really look at them.
Randie [C):-)]
Look at the front half of Thud fuselages, in particular, where there should be a large area of brown on the right and green on the left – it’s often switched. Also, look at the tail of an F-4 on the right side, where there should be a long, wide sreak of tan extending all the way across the fin and rudder. This is occasionally painted green, surrounded by tan, which is the opposite of the way it’s ordered. When you see these things on the Phantom or Thud, it tells you the entire airplane has been painted in reverse.
When I was in Nam in '68, just after Tet, we were in desperate need of some replacement aircraft. We received a RF-4C aircraft from Shaw AFB still painted in Gull gray over white. It was an old '63 model and one of the first accepted by the USAF. It was put in the paint barn and when it rolled out we discovered the two greens, FS 34079 and FS 34102 had been reversed.
I remember a RF-101C from the 45 th that was painted in reverse. The tan (FS 30219) was much darker than all the others. It was more of a red brown (FS 30045) than a tan.
Years later, I saw some of the F-4D aircraft from the 497 th TFS, painted with three shades of green with black bottoms. The third shade of green, which replaced the tan, was a khaki green. I have no idea as what the FS number would be.
I remember those 497th birds (not, obviously, the way you do, but from books), and weren’t they some kind of special use squadron that had a reason for the black bottoms? I’ve always loved the look of the RF-101C and would love to build one in 1/48, but I’ve always been too cowardly to tackle Koster’s great-looking, but quite major conversion kit for the Monogram F-101B two-seater interceptor. There also used to be a nice PE set for that conversion by another maker, but I’m sure it’s not longer around. Was 45th known as “The Polka Dots”? One of their NM schemes was available with the old Hasegawa 1/72 RF-101, with navy blue sash on the tail with white polka dots. The outline of that kit is really good, but like that entire series from the old days of Hasegawa, almost all the 1/72 kits had holes where the cockpits went. Only pilot figures, usually sitting on a plastic shelf. But the decals, though thick, were beautifully rendered, as was the box art. But if you buy one on E-bay, caveat emptor for sure.
The 497th TFS was used for night bombing. They worked with EB-66’s and RB-57’s, which were equiped with IR detection gear. The main target area was the Ho Chi Minh trail that stretched from North Vietnam through Laos and Cambodia. North Vietnam thought they could move supplies at night to avoid detection. The 497th TFS along with a RAAF unit flying Canberra’s were specialized in hitting the Ho Chi Minh trail at night. From what I have been told, they were also very good at busting up river traffic at night.
You just hit on something that really interests me. I would like to do an Australian Canberra that saw combat in Vietnam. I don’t think I’ve ever seen one modeled, though I’m sure a lot of Australians have done them, and we have a lot of readers from down there, too, so I may get lucky.
I guess, since Vietnam remains such a wide-open wound in the American historical psyche, we unfairly overlook our allies in Australia, who are living with the very same wound. And I’m not even getting into our Korean Allies, who I think were even more numerous than the Australians.
But, without getting political, I certainly feel we Americans owe it to the Australians, and their vets in particular, to remember them just as we remember our own. I’ll bet that not one person out of a hundred you stopped at random on an American street could tell you that Australians were dying in Vietnam at the same time American boys were. And that’s just a shame. A real shame.
But to my original questions, any of you Aussies know of kits and AM decals representing RAAF a/c in Vietnam? And what types, besides the Canberras, operated over there? I always though those bombs hanging right under the very tips of the wings looked like they would really affect the manouvering of the airplane. I mean, a cleaned up Canberra, even with that enormous wing, has some aerobatic capabilities.
And finally, can any of you tell me how many Aussie troops paid the ultimate price over there? And how many are still listed as MIA?