Aircraft camo: What's the purpose?

Roger that! I logged a lot of hours while I was in the AF and doing civilian flying, and the camo jobs do help, coupled with the suns effect in your eyes, and clouds, the camo paint can be a lifesaver!

Consider the SEA schemes since I was stationed there during the VN war...When your scooting along about .8- 1.5 mach over the green triple canopy jungles with a possible MIG over you about 2-5 thousand feet, that camo paint can be elusive to a would be attacking MIG...Don't forget also that in a war time situation, you can use every advantage at your disposal, and camo paint was just one of those benefits of the times!
Besides that, it looked good, <grin>! If you were basic early 60's late 50's shiney metal, in SEA you were a sitting duck!

R. Bell
USAF 71-77
Southeast Asia 73-74

While stationed in Europe in the mid to late 70s the USAF and USA went to a tone down policy for their installations. Buildings roadways and acft taxiways/runways were included. It is very effective. If you can make something disruptive or blend just the slightest you have negated that element of surprise. If the attacking foe cannot pick out details on that all important first pass then he is liable to be in the cross hairs on the second pass. Enough said!

I think most people would agree that in air-air combat, the pilot who sees his enemy first is starting at a huge advantage. Adolph Galland in his book "The first and the last" spoke very highly of the RAF green/brown camo.

The camo schemes visually break up the shape of the aircraft they're painted on. So by painting camo schemes or zig zags (As in case of some ships) the shape is visually broken up and may possibly conseal the enemy. Also remember radar was not widely used in WW II so relying on visual id was important !

In WWII, or so I'm told, late war B-17s, P-51s, P-47s were left aluminum because the allies had air supremecy. 'Zat true, anyone?

QUOTE: Originally posted by dannyandre In WWII, or so I'm told, late war B-17s, P-51s, P-47s were left aluminum because the allies had air supremecy. 'Zat true, anyone?

Partially; also (and this is from the Discovery Channel) the aluminum ones were more difficult to see in the winter with snow on the ground and very light monotones everywhere on overcast days than the OD ones. Some of the OD ones were actually stripped of their OD paint because of this.

QUOTE: Originally posted by VAPGULFVET The camo schemes visually break up the shape of the aircraft they're painted on. So by painting camo schemes or zig zags (As in case of some ships) the shape is visually broken up and may possibly conseal the enemy. Also remember radar was not widely used in WW II so relying on visual id was important !

Those zigzags were actually used on battleships and destroyers as well. Prior to WWII the use of radar was rare and much was dependent upon sight. Some planes were experimentally painted in disruptive camouflage in mid-1940. This disruptve camoflage seemed to work at sea level since it threw off depth perception, however these designs were evaluated under operational conditions for aircraft employed at sea and test showed that pattern camouflage was of little if any use for Navy combat aircraft. The camouflage schemes were designed by the noted artist and Naval Reserve officer McClelland Barclay.

Still, I bet these would make for a cool paint job... hmmm... Idea brewing for a project... I do have a Devastator in my stash.

A Brewster F2A Buffalo and a Douglas TBD-1 "Devastator" in disruptive camouflage [img=right]http://www.ryanahern.net/Files/Pics/h96164t.jpg[/img=right]