Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 (edited) Almost done with the Pegasus Have Blue XST (which I bought 19 years ago yet only started last year). I'd like to hear if there's a current consensus on the camouflage on #1 (with the nose boom and anti-spin 'chute pack). EDIT: Colors updated below in post #6 Firstly, despite the kit's instructions that the lightest color is 33531 Sand, I was convinced the first time I saw the photos that it was 36622 (MM "Camouflage Gray"). Does that sound right to anyone else? Second, I *think* I'm okay so far with the other 3 suggested upper colors as being 30200, 35237 and black. Third, they speculate that the underside is the lighter color on the forward area, and the rear 2/3 or so is 36081, curving toward the middle, F-16 painting style. Not sure what I think of that, but I haven't really found any alternatives to the theory. I open the floor to you all. Your thoughts? FINAL COLOR SCHEME (I'm pretty sure): -36440 -30277 -35237 -black (who cares the FS...) Edited June 26, 2016 by Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy Posted July 11, 2013 Author Share Posted July 11, 2013 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
habu2 Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 I think you could paint it however you wanted and no one would be able to dispute the accuracy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jay Chladek Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 And I would be curious to see the results my self as I also have one of those kits in my stash. Whether any standardized shades were used or just what paint was available is probably something not easy to find given the classified nature of the project and how below the radar it was when the planes were built. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Andre Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 The few pics of HB1001 that are available (I have the Pegasus thiny in the stash as well) are quite open for interpretation, perhaps deliberately so - I've even seen pics where the colors look like the standard 70's Israeli scheme. Cheers, Andre Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy Posted July 18, 2013 Author Share Posted July 18, 2013 (edited) Update!! I am now almost 100% certain that the tan color is actually FS30277, which Model Master users will know as "Armor Sand." I've been experimenting with actually spraying the colors on a scrap airframe, and I am convinced I'm on the right track. So, that means the 4-color scheme is 36440, 30277, 35237 and black (who cares the FS...). For MM users, that equates to Flat Gull Gray, Armor Sand, Medium Gray, and Flat Black. :) ...still doesn't do a thing for the underside, though...I'm considering just leaving it solid light gray, although that doesn't do a thing to disguise the facets, which I understand was the purpose of the topside camouflage. Edited June 26, 2016 by Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Andre Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 although that doesn't do a thing to disguise the facets, which I understand was the purpose of the topside camouflage. I seem to recall reading somewhere that the upper colors were primarily meant to mislead prying Soviet sattelites. So, that would not conflict with allover 36622 on the lower surfaces. Cheers, Andre Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy Posted June 26, 2016 Author Share Posted June 26, 2016 One more color update. Change the lightest color I have listed in post #6 and all the problems seem to be solved. NOT 36622, but 36440 Flat Gull Gray!! Try it and let me know! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rob de Bie Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 Update!! I am now almost 100% certain that the tan color is actually FS30277, which Model Master users will know as "Armor Sand." I've been experimenting with actually spraying the colors on a scrap airframe, and I am convinced I'm on the right track. Please post some photos of your painted scrap airframe, that works a lot better than just some FS numbers.. Rob Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy Posted June 26, 2016 Author Share Posted June 26, 2016 Please post some photos of your painted scrap airframe, that works a lot better than just some FS numbers.. Rob Better than that, real one's almost done! That's why I'm so sure now.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Quixote74 Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 One more color update. Change the lightest color I have listed in post #6 and all the problems seem to be solved. NOT 36622, but 36440 Flat Gull Gray!! Try it and let me know! One suggested alernate to FS30277 tan that may suit the scheme is FS36307 gray. I don't know of any aircraft that use 30277 in that or any era. Granted Have Blue is a prototype so anything (theoretically) goes, but it's still more likely Lockheed would have used something readily available vs a somewhat obscure color for foreign armor (or a custom mix). FS36307 is a very warm gray that looks tan in many lighting conditions. It's probably best known for use in aggressor schemes and the Greek multicolor gray scheme seen on F-16s and late Phantoms. It was also one of the standard colors in the "Heater Ferris" splinter scheme worn by (among others) the F-16XL 2-seater. Perhaps not coincidentally, those schemes resemble the Have Blue in obscuring the shape/orientation of the airframe - and also use at least one other color (35237 blue-gray) that you've identified. Ultimately unless someone can dig up (literally?) the original or documentation of same you're down to a mix of educated guesswork and what "looks right" on your model. The "tan/gray" color is one of those that could easily generate a lot of differing opinions from people looking at the same thing (cf: A6M Zero grays, the infamous F-4J(UK), et al). Eagerly awaiting photos of this project! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy Posted June 27, 2016 Author Share Posted June 27, 2016 (edited) I completely understand what you're saying; first time I saw that color was in the late 80's on photos of the first F-16N, and I thought it WAS a subdued tan. But I've been staring at that photo (XST) over and over and I just can't see anything other than a pure tan. And it definitely isn't the traditional dark tan from the SEA scheme either, nor is it the other classic, 20400. Photos soon...I don't know why this subject has driven me 'round the twist for so, so many years. If it hadn't, this would've been done YEARS ago. EDIT: Another thought; I suppose it could've been whatever tan was on hand, even if I'm happy with what I've used (finally); after all, this was the same aircraft that had an engine heat shield improvised by cutting up a steel cabinet that just happened to be in the hangar during the first engine tests at Groom Lake. True!! Edited June 27, 2016 by Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy Posted June 29, 2016 Author Share Posted June 29, 2016 (edited) Here she is...the brown does NOT repeat NOT look as bright brown in person. Complete story (she's got a long story!!) in the Critique Corner forum http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?showtopic=293807 with a lot more photos. Not my best work, but I'm just glad it's finished. Â [Imgur](https://i.imgur.com/CRcPtNo.jpg) Edited March 24, 2019 by Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rob de Bie Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 Here she is...the brown does NOT repeat NOT look as bright brown in person. Complete story (she's got a long story!!) in the Critique Corner forum http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?showtopic=293807 with a lot more photos. Not my best work, but I'm just glad it's finished. That camouflage looks very good indeed! Maybe your lightest color is a bit more yellow than the original, but who says the print of the original is a 100% accurate. Very good! Rob Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy Posted July 5, 2016 Author Share Posted July 5, 2016 That camouflage looks very good indeed! Maybe your lightest color is a bit more yellow than the original, but who says the print of the original is a 100% accurate. Very good! Rob Thanks Rob! Actually the lightest color is good old fashioned 36440 Light Gull Gray as per USN schemes, so it really isn't as yellow as it looks in my poor photography. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rob de Bie Posted July 6, 2016 Share Posted July 6, 2016 Thanks Rob! Actually the lightest color is good old fashioned 36440 Light Gull Gray as per USN schemes, so it really isn't as yellow as it looks in my poor photography. Ah yes, 36440 has no yellow in it. Sounds good to me! Rob Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.