Researching the red FS color number for the prototype F-106

F-100 John

I'm researching the red FS color number for the Convair F-106 Delta Dart prototype. Any info would be greatly appreciated. Does a certain web site or book exist that shows this info?

Thank you,

F-100 John

 

 

www.F-106deltadart.com 

John, if you can't find the answer here, the answer does not exist.

In Wings of Fame Volume 12 there is a picture of the prototype 56-0451 and the color is identified as day-glo, a flourescent orange that faded very rapidly.  Testor's makes a Flourescent Orange, most people think it need a white undercoat, usual for any orange or yellow in my experience.  A Google on "painting dayglo on models" will be helpful to learn a good technique.  The color faded and eroded rapidly, looking almost white in spots.  In the 50's the FAA proposed requiring dayglo on civil planes but that died a quick death because of durability.

Actually John, I believe that the F-106 color is Arctic Red as used on F-89D/J's.  The Day-glo orange is a bright orange such as on this B-57:

http://www.cloud9photography.us/Military-Aviation-9/Martin-B-57-Canberra-Military/i-JkrmzLD/A

Compare the color with the F-89's:

http://www.canaero.ca/Resources/59thFIS_F-89JDonMartin_moo-sb_FISGooseBay80_3_moo1-1p3_.jpg

And here is an F-89 with both colors:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/08/59fis-f-89-goosebay.jpg

Arctic Red also used on F-102's:

http://www.ejection-history.org.uk/BASES_USAF/DULUTH/mnang_F-102.jpg

Rich, this was a development airplane at Edwards and I am inclined to believe what the caption says.  The serial is of the number two airplane I think, and notice it still has the F-102 wing fences instead of the notch in the leading edge.

If I were to use the arctic red, I would use Guards red, like I did on my C-46.  It would be a lot less work than trying to get a good dayglo, that's for sure.  However, so far I have never seen an F-106 with artic red markings, even though they did operate in Alaska and Iceland.  The 87 FIS had what may be a red close to arctic red on the fin, covering quite a bit of it.

Actually, further research by way of Dana Bell and summarized by Steve Eisenman shows Arctic Red (not known as that by AF) as being Insignia Red until 1958 way past the first flights of the F-102B/F-106A in December 1956 through 1957.

http://www.network54.com/Forum/149674/thread/1313000556

The fluorescent colors weren't used till 1958.

I believe the caption of the photos in Wings of Fame to be correct. Notice it says "later in its career . . . " which would indicate sometime after its first flight (26 December 1956) and it is also a test ship. "Arctic red" technically is insignia red, although photos suggest a brighter red was also used in later years. The advent of the fluorescent yellow-orange (and red-orange) in the late '50s was eagerly accepted by the USAF and US Navy, but only used for a few years as it erroded quickly as stated above. The use of "red" on test aircraft was for increased visibility, and test aircraft and other aircraft used "conspicuity markings" which is what we see here. The fluorescent paints were first used as conspicuity markings, and generally not as "arctic" markings. There are photos and drawings in Dana Bell's excellent article on arctic and conspicuity markings in the March 1996 issue of FSM, even some that show both "arctic red" and conspicuity Dayglo markings on the same aircraft at the same time (C-130s)!

I also see in the above photo that the red on the bottom of the wings is rather bright, leading me to believe that this is Dayglo fluorescent red-orange (FS 28913). Insignia red (FS 11136) would not look that bright in shadow.

PaulBoyer

I believe the caption of the photos in Wings of Fame to be correct. Notice it says "later in its career . . . " which would indicate sometime after its first flight (26 December 1956) and it is also a test ship. "Arctic red" technically is insignia red, although photos suggest a brighter red was also used in later years. The advent of the fluorescent yellow-orange (and red-orange) in the late '50s was eagerly accepted by the USAF and US Navy, but only used for a few years as it erroded quickly as stated above. The use of "red" on test aircraft was for increased visibility, and test aircraft and other aircraft used "conspicuity markings" which is what we see here. The fluorescent paints were first used as conspicuity markings, and generally not as "arctic" markings. There are photos and drawings in Dana Bell's excellent article on arctic and conspicuity markings in the March 1996 issue of FSM, even some that show both "arctic red" and conspicuity Dayglo markings on the same aircraft at the same time (C-130s)!

I also see in the above photo that the red on the bottom of the wings is rather bright, leading me to believe that this is Dayglo fluorescent red-orange (FS 28913). Insignia red (FS 11136) would not look that bright in shadow.

 

Then again, old photos do tend to fade over time as well. Just sayin'....

True. But it's more the contrast between the top and bottom (faded photo or no) that makes me think it is Dayglo (fluorescent). Dayglo colors have that "lit from within" appearance. In period B&W shots, Dayglo colors appear bright white!

The thing is I am old enough to remember DaGlo, so there is little doubt in my mind that that 106 is DayGlo.  It was really fragile paint and faded unevenly to yellows, and eventually had white spots.  It had a very short life in service, and as I said the FAA was moving in the direction of requiring DayGlo to be applied to civilain airplanes over 20% of the surface.  That went nowhere.  I can just see a Lear 23 running around with faded DayGlo on the tail and wings.  An alternate furture we escaped.

If you look at the nose on the 106 photo you will see the uneven fading starting to happen.  A C-119 was never pretty, but with with dying DayGlo it is a sight to behold.

If the paint faded quickly, the pigments are most likely no longer in use so getting an exact match isn't going to happen. Then again it might fade away in your display case. 

Not only does old film fade, so does photographic paper. Also the photograph may have been taken with a filter. So the actual color might not be in the picture. Besides a polarizing filter to get rid of glare, they may be an additional filter to reduce long wavelength light (red light) to perserve detail. Another problem is your monitor which may not reproduce the color faithfully. It might be good but not exact.