Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[greybeard]

Interesting thread with a lot of resources about this attractive livery.

But looking all the nice skins, for first time I noticed that they have two upper wing sides and only one lower!

This could be effective too, if not for the stars location: one only on upper left wing and one only on lower right wing!



The skins offered either have the star on lower wing side or not; as a consequence we get either both wing lower sides with star or both without!

Which, in your opinion, is the most historically correct?

[greybeard]

Two stars on the undersides seemed to me too many. Eventually I choose none.

[eMeL]

I think historically the stars and bars placed on both underwing positions is closer to the mark actually. Not with the Warhawks, but on many P-47's the Stars and Bars appeared on both sides on the wing underside (particularly so with the 56th FG 8th AF). The Warhawk wing-dilemma is a well known and old problem, so far nothing doing unless someone wishes to redo the UVmap for the Warhawk. I chose to apply the markings on the underside so as to prevent the surface from looking too "empty". Others may choose differently, matter of taste I suppose.

[Phas3e]

Its either or with this model of the P40, I', with Emel I prefer stars rather than nothing.

[greybeard]

I think historically the stars and bars placed on both underwing positions is closer to the mark actually.

Thanks, this was just the kind of comment I was expecting.

Not with the Warhawks, ...

Unfortunately, this brings again to the starting point.

... matter of taste I suppose.

ditto!

Besides, I would be curious to know what was the reason of this set for USAAF, I mean only one national marking for upper and under wing sides, different from the vast majority of other contemporary air forces.

[Typhoon Ib]

well, i would argue that from any point of View you need to see at least one marking to ID the aircraft's nationality.
and viewed from 6 directions, only from the front and the back will you have trouble - little is possible here.
but from most other directions you can always see one roundel, or a major part of a roundel.

so why waste time and paint to paint two of them? The more markings the less effective the camo...

[greybeard]

so why waste time and paint to paint two of them? The more markings the less effective the camo...

Well, that's a point of view; actually, we now have "low visibility" insignia. But when identification was visual, such kind of saving looks weird to me! Others even added special identification markings (colored bands and such)... It's a pity that there aren't official period standards.

[stalker]

http://romain-hugault.blogspot.ru/search?updated-min=2014-01-01T00:00:00%2B01:00&updated-max=2015-01-01T00:00:00%2B01:00&max-results=20
http://www.thecockpit.net63.net/?Le_Grand_Duc_Tome_2_%3A_Camarade_Lilya

[Ass Eagle]

The vast majority of American aircraft in the ETO/MTO came with a single upper, single lower national insignia.

[cuccos19]

I don't want to be off too much, but this guy is a genious! I mean Romain Hugault, this book Angel Wings (and all of his books) a must have one, I love his cartoons, his style.