The Mark IV in Brussels, still in original paintwork, is a chocolate brown. The Mark IV Female in the Museum of Lincolnshire life in Lincoln is painted a milk chocolate light brown.
The Mark I tanks of C Company had a multicoloured livery.
Were tanks painted olive-green? When did that happen, for the Mark V and V* tanks?
Were Mark IV tanks painted Olive Green?
Is the dark Yellow paint colour of the Tank Museum, Bovington's Mark V Male correct?
Been in the archives today and stumbled across something on colours. I haven't sorted out all my notes yet, so from memory, it was decided that tanks should be painted "battleship grey" at the factory. Metropolitan came up with three different battleship greys, and the committee chose the lightest. Also serial numbers were to be painted yellow, though personally I think only Fosters paid heed to this.
Hi Gwyn, that sounds like a great find, keep in touch.
As for Grit, putting aside whether it was repainted or not, I had a play colour correcting the photo and I could not get a brown finish without putting the other colours visible out of a natural range. Although there is no colour chart being held in front of the tank (something I really wish people would do on at least one photo), knowing how rust and old metal should look on these metal beasts, I can be pretty sure the top coat of paint is a green. I've tried the same with a few of the photos and I don't get a brown.
Colour photos are not always perfect but normally it is possible to pull something close to right from them. The human eye on the other hand can have issues with the colour green when it stops being of a bright hue. Having sold paint for many years I never cease to be surprised by the number of people who show a mild form of colour blindness when it comes to the colour green. It's why on the issue of colour I am healthily skeptical of witness accounts and will always go with physical evidence with a provable history.
Grit shows signs of a dark grey base coat matching that of the inside photos, which has then been over coated with a light grey with a top coat of dull green. The green on the underside of the sponson shows it to be painted over a paint that has flaked away. It matches the style of weathering of the dark grey on the sides in this view. I'm not saying the dark grey is original but certainly older than the green.
There are areas of graffiti scratched into the paint, it would be interesting to see if it can be dated by its style and content as it would help determine if all the the tank was repainted.
My 'opinion' on Tank colours are....
MK1 tanks light blue/grey... most but not all then camouflaged.
MKIV tanks a brown of some hue, then later green as things become more standard Army colours.
MKv tanks green
I don't think anything that makes us all look again at the past and what we think we know is ever wasted time.
So what do others think?
Helen x
Original and corrected photo attached
-- Edited by MK1 Nut on Wednesday 12th of July 2017 12:34:18 AM
It reminds me of discussions about the russian R-7 rocket. Photos showed it to be green in colour, but it turns out that some shades of grey together with artificial lighting appear greenish on photographs. I wouldn't trust these. Colour correction on the computer can not add the information which was lost in the camera in such cases.
Also, there are photographs of Lodestar III on which it appears greenish, even if it is undoubtedly brown.
I would be rather interested to look at the contemporary evidence like documents, black-and-white photographs, paintings and tellings.
Thanks Hellen and Gwyn about your feedback and help
The only " authentic" colors that I saw for british tanks ( MK IV) are the ones from parts of tanks collected on battle fields ( buried and out of UV actions )
For the brown it is between the Humbrol 26 and Humbroll 29 ( for the modelers)
The parts not painted in " finishing color" seems to be a kind of dark primer gray ( The one you coat the ship' s hull prior final coating)
Olivier
It seems unusual that there is no documented source about what paint should be used on the tanks as they come out of the factory.
I have just finished writing a book on German artillery SPGs in WW2. The German high command issued dated orders to all factories telling them what paint to use. You can trace when it changed from Panzer grey to dunkelgelb (dark sandy yellow).
The British army being hot on paperwork would have had similar instructions you would have thought.
I have not found any documents at the IWM London so far.
I was hoping to find the same historical evidence about paint continuity across different production plants in the UK and in expeditionary tank maintenance workshops in France.
How did the repair mechanic or the storesman not what paint to order. What was its central supply number?
We have had over 100 years to find out this sort of information. It must be somewhere.
Hello all
For German paints during WW2 ( At the end of war), the difference between instructions and things done were huge...
They used what they had on hands regarding " yellow " paint, the finishing was their last worry. Dilution of the camo paint done on the field was done even using gasoline as thinner and they painted over spare tracks , tools , towing cables , mud ..
Regarding WW1 documents , Tanker posted ( Forum 14 18) an official document related to the paint of the French chars ( 17 Dec 1917 ) and the color description is " evasive ":
" peinture mate a marbrures claires couleur verte " , " marron mi café au lait veinee et stratifiee de noir "
So , the French storekeeper , to make his purchase request , was able to order any light green , light brown...There was no RAL numbers.
Best Regards
Olivier
Craig, Contrary to the assertion that there is no documented source on what colour tanks should be as they emerge from the factory, there is, and I have given that information in previous posts. It may not be as precise as you would like but that's not to say it doesn't exist. I would also point out that it is notable that the Supply Branch of the Mechanical Warfare Department, even at the end of the war, did not have a section dealing with paint. This suggests to me that firstly there was no real standardisation of paint supply, second that it was not regarded as a matter of any consequence and thirdly that there was no one tasked with producing the records you're looking for. Gwyn
[Edited to correct embarrassing error - apologies Craig.]
-- Edited by Gwyn Evans on Sunday 16th of July 2017 12:25:54 AM
The British did use a dark brown color for their vehicles in the middle of WW2 when they ran out of the green color, but that was a dark brown which I assume would be too dark for WW1 vehicles.
I patronized a hobby shop earlier today. I accidentally found a color, Tamiya TS-90, which looks rather like the medium brown I've seen British Mark tanks depicted in.
although its perhaps risky to extrapolate from track to the complete tank, we found some paint still on the remains of the tank track from the excavations of Bullecourt in June. We PRESUME this was a part of tank 796 (2nd Lt Skinner) - a Mk II Male, as it was found precisely where the maps and WW1 air photos suggested it would be. The track plates had been undercoated in red, with a 'British Racing Green' top coat when the tank was in action on 11 April
Oh wow. That has upset the apple cart. The Tank Museum painted their WW2 Covenanter tank light brown khaki. I was part of the team that dug up the Covenanter tank in Dorking in May. It was fantastic to find original olive green paint and regimental markings and serial numbers still on the tank after it had been washed of chalk soil. What colour Humbrol paint do you think best matches Pantone 560c?
-- Edited by MooreTanks on Thursday 14th of September 2017 10:34:40 AM
Report will be out soon Charlie - only excavated in June! The find was at the SE edge of the village - as per the 'x' marks the spot on the mapping in the Australian War Memorial (Battalion diaries), and contemporary air photos from Dr Birger Stichelbaut (uni of Ghent) and other sources. The track and other element including a link of the drive chain and the remains of two German infantrymen were located at the edge of a large crater. The stratigraphic relationships show only WW1 materiel above the track (including much ordnance). Its WW1 paint.
The "apple cart" does not appear to have been destabilised...at least not yet.
Perhaps someone could explain to me the purpose for painting any part of the track, and the reasons for drawing any inference that that related to any other part of the vehicle tank, preferably citing contemporary precedents?
I am also puzzled as to the purpose of painting the track, when there are contemporaneous accounts of it being covered in hot oil during maintenance to keep it lubricated. Paint is a strange lubricant.
I agree it's green, but is it paint?
Gwyn
-- Edited by Gwyn Evans on Thursday 14th of September 2017 06:50:27 PM
Painting the inner part of the track ?
I have a doubt about way it could be achieved ......
Ok for the red oxide primer ( At the manufacture , prior installation ) , But the " final color" in an unreachable part of the tank ....
I have doubts.
No parts of tanks found at Cambrai were with green paint.
Best Regards
Olivier
I am also puzzled as to the purpose of painting the track, when there are contemporaneous accounts of it being covered in hot oil during maintenance to keep it lubricated. Paint is a strange lubricant.
I agree it's green, but is it paint?
Gwyn
-- Edited by Gwyn Evans on Thursday 14th of September 2017 06:50:27 PM
Hot oil - sometimes called slushing oil - would be a good solution to lubricating the track joints and preventing corrosion. The track elements must have been
highly stressed from manufacture - hot riveted forgings and armour plate rectangle. Dipping in hot oil would have been a quick way to stop corrosion. It's going
to be nearly impossible to paint over an oiled surface though.
So allow me to make a suggestion, that any paint applied to the track elements would only adhere after those elements had been separated from the tank and exposed to weather... So if the material is indeed paint, the evidence may only imply that there was an application of paint or spillage at some later date.
I recall that a male sponson door was excavated and had apparently been used at the entrance to a dugout. I do not recall if it retained any of the original paint.
Incidentally, am I alone in finding battlefield archaeology potentially distasteful, particularly when human remains are disturbed?
This is an interesting possibility, i.e. that track was later used for some other purpose, like reinforcing a dugout, and was painted after it became separated from the tank. It would make a good deal more sense than tank tracks painted green.
No, I don't find battlefield archaeology distasteful provided any human remains are treated in a proper manner. (By the way, I have a relative amongst the missing.)
I saw many archaeological finds of the Second World War, including the remains of armored vehicles. I can confidently say that paints can vary very much during their stay in the ground, as well as in water or in a swamp. The most striking example is the red inscription on the turret of the T-34 tank, which became light yellow after 70 years of being in the ground. This is due to the fact that the colored pigments are destroyed at different rates. I'm sure that the Mk-2 tank could not be painted completely in such a bright green color.
Could this turquoise colour be the original blue/grey now oxidized and appearing darker and more green in colour? I'm sure I read somewhere that heat can have the same effect on blue pigments back then... so maybe the hot lubricants.
If someone decided to paint their track then some could easily find its way to the underside of the links. Why would they paint their track.... maybe it was worn and they decided to paint over any bare patches to make it less visible to aircraft.
It's a really interesting artifact but unfortunately provides no answers... so far.
Thanks for showing us.
There are various possibilities of increasing implausibility, I suppose.
Ned, this topic has been the subject of debate on this forum, and it would not appear that records have survived from factories or elsewhere. The best information would seem to be from extant material which survives in several museums. There are some records indicating the materials used on artillery equipment and some military vehicles, and inferences may be drawn about pigments and the content of paints, which goes some way towards explaining possible variability. There are also published written descriptions of tanks from those who operated them, or encountered them.
Never underestimate the power of bad photography. On another forum, I mentioned how an Imperial Japanese car came in both green and khaki versions. It turned out it only came in khaki and the green color was the result of faulty photography!
Something that has occurred to me is that maybe this MKII Tank had track links from a MK1. They did borrow sponsons from MK1 tanks so track is not out of the question. Also if I had to describe the green used in the camouflage on the Mk1, I would say Racing Green would be as fair a candidate as any.