Artist - Vladimir Martinicky (11)

Vladimir Martinicky from Slovakia, sent over artwork he created for the Tainan Kokutai Mitsubishi A6M3 "Hamp" we featured in the Ferbuary 10 post.

Moc ďakujem.

Half-and-half China Zeros - follow up

Last Friday, 13, I posted the "Half-and-half China Zeros, The "Third Way"" on our Facebook page and there was a heated debate in the comments. Allow me to recap and evaluate the various hypotheses regarding these Zeros, some put forward by the commentators. A big shout-out to our friend Shawn Lydic whose passion, knowledge and dedication I’m sure we all respect and appreciate even if we don’t always agree on everything.

So, in Friday’s post I mentioned that reasons that have been put forward at various times for the “half-and-half Zeros” include experiments with colors and the application of primer on the front section only. Although entirely plausible, these hypotheses rely on no material evidence to corroborate these claims. They are only attempts to explain a phenomenon (“it could be this or that or something else”). There are no relics, official manufacturer reports, veteran memoirs or other evidence to confirm either of the two explanations. It doesn't mean they are not valid, it's just that they are only conjectures.

The other hypothesis was put forward by Asano-san and was supported by Shawn Lydic in Friday’s comments. The suggestion is that the repeated shielding of the aircraft's most delicate areas, such as the cockpit and the engine, with tarpaulins led to an uneven fading of the color across the other top surfaces. Unlike the previously mentioned explanations, this hypothesis relies on photographic material that may or may not prove its validity. Asano-san clearly explained that the same photos in different publications with less contrast, suggest that the fading was not excessive as has been depicted in artwork and that the lines between the two different “shades” are not “sharp edged and perfect”.

The "tarpaulin proposal" has several advantages but also presents numerous challenges. To begin with, as you can see in the attached photos

various kinds of tarpaulin were used by the IJNAF to protect the aircraft, which means we would expect to see Zeros with a variety of fading patterns. Not to mention that many other IJNAF aircraft types were protected by tarpaulins but do not show any paint differences. Another strong argument is that no Zeros on other fronts show this different pattern. Half-and-half Zeros could be found only in China. Although we can’t exclude completely the fact that such aircraft may have existed, there is simply no photographic evidence to support this claim.

But note the port wingtip of this Zero. Why the difference? Is it a replacement part or something else is going on here?

I would also like to put forward the fact that aircraft carrier based Zeros also used tarps to protect them from the elements

but, again, we have no photos of half-and-half carrier based Zeros. We don’t even have half-and-half later type Zeros or even half-and-half green-top Zeros during the last years of the war when we know the paint quality had degraded and tarps were still in use. In other words, the locality and the limited range of the phenomenon suggest that it is not a naturally occurring and widespread one.

On top of that, photos included in Sakai Saburo's "Ozora no Samurai - The photo story of Japan's greatest living Zero fighter" show clear demarkation and sharp edges.

Shawn mentioned in some of his comments that the pilot and ground crew members when they got in contact with these areas they naturally buffeted the paint and therefore we see this contrast between the buffeted and un-buffeted areas. Although again plausible, this suggestion cannot be supported by the fact that almost the whole inner half of the wing looks to be darker than the rest (see again top photo) and Shawn very strongly explained that the ground crews did not step on these areas. In other words, we would expect only the front edge of the wing to have been buffeted. Also, the area behind the canopy is also suspicious since crews rarely touched it. In any case, if this was a common occurrence, we would expect to see more Zero photos with buffeted areas around the cockpit, which is not the case.

One of my all time favorite Zero photos. One that gives and keeps on giving. Why the rear of "R3-116" look like that? Compare it with "R3-132" in the background.

Another explanation that Shawn mentioned in a comment is that perhaps the rear part of the fuselage was a replacement from a different aircraft. Again, this suggestion cannot be thrown out of the window without further consideration since indeed the demarcation line between the front and rear “fading” falls exactly on the part where the front and rear fuselage could be separated for transportation etc. But, unfortunately, this suggestion cannot account for the color differences on the wing areas since the wing could not be separated on the demarcation line.

Is "3-176" a half-and-half Zero? Comparing it with the top photo, it looks like it could be one. Note the demarcation lines. Why is the fuselage line in different position than the other half-and-half Zeros?

On Friday, I put forward another hypothesis that was relayed to me by a Japanese researcher, that the front of these Zeros was a testbed for some short of anti-slippery application, either something in the paint or a top coat. Regrettably some commentators rushed to fixate on the “top coat” wording and completely or partially dismissed this suggestion. Some suggested that if there was a “top coat” it would have been already found on the surviving relics. First of all, I’m not sure if anyone has ever checked their “surviving relics” to see if the paint had any anti-slippery properties and second, AFAIK unfortunately no relics have survived of these half-and-half Zeros based in China; so I fail to understand what relics they refer to. Furthermore, I can’t even imagine how poor our Japanese aviation history would be if we relied exclusively on relics. But I guess that’s just me.

Contrary to this rather negative approach, Jacek Makarewicz, posted the following more constructive comment, which made this suggestion even more plausible:　

“The anti-skid layer is definitely the most logical justification for the Zero's two-tone color scheme. But only in combination with the type of exhaust manifold used. In early versions of the A6M, exhaust gases were directed OVER the wing, and because the engine “spat oil,” the area around the wings near the fuselage and the sides of the fuselage near the cockpit were “more than slippery,” which was dangerous for the pilot and maintenance personnel. Therefore, paint with an “anti-slip additive” was used in these areas. The exhaust was quickly redesigned and the exhaust gases were directed UNDER the wing, thus cleverly solving the problem and completely removing the “anti-slip additive” from use.”

I would also like to add that contrary to what was relayed to me, an official adaptation of such an “anti-slippery” coat or addition to the paint to cover the whole of the aircraft, would make areas not in need of such properties covered with such paint, like the wing under surfaces or the tail of the aircraft. And the whole exercise would end up being a waste of resources. 

In conclusion, the "anti-slippery suggestion" is the only one that has the potential to receive some official confirmation and perhaps become a theory (in the scientific sense) IF we ever see an article by Wataki-san explaining in great detail exactly who said what or perhaps some other kind of evidence that would support this claim.  (and, yes, in case you didn't get it, this is a call for him or other Japanese researchers to share with us their knowledge) For the moment, for me, it is just another hypothesis like all the previous ones and I leave it to our readers to judge if “someone is pulling someone's chain” (as someone exclaimed in the comments) or not.

Half-and-half China Zeros, The "Third Way"

In a small number of early production Zeros that operated on the China front, the front half appears darker when compared with the rest of the fuselage. This can also be observed on about half of the wing top surfaces.

A case of a half-and-half Zero, where the contrast between the front and back sections of the fuselage is more apparent. In the majority of the other pictures, the difference is more subtle. According to the caption, the aircraft belonged to the 2nd Kokutai and the tail number was “3-I 82”.

An illustration by Nohara Shigeru featured in FAOW #55, shows the Zero flown by many pilots including Lt. Suzuki Minoru having this half-and-half effect.

Reasons that have been put forward at various times include experiments with colors and the application of primer on the front section only. Asano Yuichiro in Issue #5 of our Arawasi Magazine, offered a different explanation. After having seen photos of Zeros covered by protective tarpaulins, he proposed that the repeated shielding of the aircraft's most delicate areas, such as the cockpit and the engine, led to an uneven fading of the color across the other top surfaces.

A 3rd Kokutai Zero with some areas of the fuselage covered with tarpaulins. Koepang Airfield, Timor, March 1942.

A couple years ago, I had the privilege of having a casual discussion with an elderly Japanese aviation researcher. He spoke in a formal and somewhat technical manner in Japanese, but my proficiency in the language allowed me to grasp most of what he said.

During our conversation about this and that, he explained that after he saw Asano-san's article on a Japanese blog, he conducted a "Mitsubishi guy" (a part I couldn't understand, likely someone connected to the manufacturing or painting of the Zero) he knew and asked for his thoughts on the subject. The "Mitsubishi guy" clearly stated that none of these explanations were accurate (the original Japanese word he used was a lot more "colorful" and dismissive) and clarified that on a limited number of Zeros, a paint element or a top layer (another part I didn't get) with anti-slip characteristics was used in areas that were more frequently accessed by ground crews. These Zeros were dispatched to frontline units for evaluation, and given the positive outcomes, this anti-slippery..."thing" was officially applied on all surfaces of every Zero; hence, no more half-and-half Zeros can be seen afterward.

I asked the Japanese researcher if he would be willing to detail all this for our magazine in an article, in Japanese... even just a single page, but he responded, "I'll think about it" (which typically in Japanese means "no"). Now that I think about it, perhaps he was reluctant to reveal the name of his source.

So, there you have it. Another explanation, quite official I would say. I know it's rough information, not properly documented and substantiated, but I would just like to put it out there, hoping someone might provide additional insights.

Mitsubishi A6M3 "Hamp", Tainan Kokutai - follow up

Since I'm not a color expert, in a previous post I raised a certain question and Shawn Lydic took the time to answer it in a most clear and thorough manner. 

Our comment exchange was interesting enough to justify a separate post, and yes, I'm fully aware that to all "Zero Maniacs" out there this is a dead horse that has been beaten too many times; nevertheless, I believe there are many who would benefit from some clarification and new, to them, information.

Regardless you agree or not, please, appreciate Shawn's effort to share his knowledge with us and be respectful and polite in your comments, as you always are.

Here's my original photo caption and question:

Mitsubishi A6M3 Model 32, serial number 3028, tail code is "V-187", "Hokoku-870 Kogen-go", Tainan Kokutai. Buna Airfield, New Guinea.

Color, not colorized, photos by Lawrence J. Hickey.

Here's a question for the color experts (I'm not): if the overall "light mustard" or "gray green" or whatever, color has faded to look almost white in this photo, how come the yellow band or the "hokoku" inscription haven't faded too? (the hinomaru are known to be thoroughly painted and stay well-preserved, so I won't mention it)

Shawn Lydic replied:

To show you the true original A6M3 Zero model 32 paint color. Here is some original skin sections that were cut from this exact airframe.

Shawn continued:

Here is another example here in my collection of the original A6M3 Zero "J3 leaning towards Ameiro" exterior surface color. This section is from A6M3 Zero model 32 m/n.3148.

And I asked:

Any idea why the overall color looks like this in the color photo?

To which Shawn replied:

The "J3 leaning towards Ameiro" paint color, is the original A6M2/3 exterior paint color. This paint "oxidizes" quickly in sunlight and sea salt air environments. Which leaves a "whitish/grey" color haze, rough feeling texture to the paint surface. This "whitish" haze could be "buffed" off, back to a shine returning the "J3 leaning towards Amerio" paint color to it's original color.

I can turn this example I have here at a slightly different angle and you can see 👀 the whitish oxidation haze on a portion of my example. Once you hold an example in your hands. This oxidation that is a rough feeling "whitish/grey" haze, will be apparent. Then you will understand the misunderstanding created by this paint that quickly oxidized "whitish/grey".

Here is a photo taken with the flash, to capture the "whitish/grey" oxidation haze that has lead to a common misconception of the original true paint color.

Nicholas Millman wrote a very good book 📖 on the "Early A6M Zero paint color". Even showing how a section of this paint color appears before and after being "buffed" to remove the "whitish/grey" oxidation haze. I hope this explains this very misunderstood Early A6M Zero paint color.

Then I asked Shawn:

I see. So, if I understood you correctly, the original paint ""oxidizes" quickly in sunlight and sea salt air environments" and therefore it looks white-ish in the photo. This doesn't explain the condition of the yellow paint, though. The yellow paint didn't oxidize? And then what is the process to "buff off" the oxidized top layer(?) to show the "original" color? Rub it? Clean it with a solvent? Something else?

And Shawn replied:

yes.... Physical buffing/polishing removed the oxidation haze. The yellow paint band wouldn't oxidize. The yellow paint color would be derived from "yellow zinc chromate" pigments. Which yellow and white zinc chromate is used as a corrosion inhibitor in aircraft grade paints for both WWII Allied and Axis powers aircraft. German 7122 f.flieglack single coat paints are based on yellow and white zinc chromate. These pigment colors have to be "offset" with opposing colors to create the final shade desired. Any Green color paint that would include 25% yellow zinc chromate would have to offset that yellow with "Blue N.C.B." pigments. So.... Yellow paint doesn't oxidize in aviation grade paints, because it is derived from yellow zinc chromate.

Also:

Below is my perfect 👌 condition original example of the "J3 leaning towards Ameiro" paint color. This section was taken from the underside wing/fuselage surface from A6M3 Zero model 32 m/n.3148. This fuselage section sat on neutral PH volcanic ash, devoid of any U.V. Sunlight or water degradation. This example still has the original polished shine of the "J3 leaning towards Ameiro" Early A6M2/3 Zero paint color. There are not many better condition original paint examples remaining today.

Shawn added:

below is the original frame from an 8mm color film 🎥 🎞 taken of this A6M3 Zero model 32 "870". This film was damaged on the left edge. However this is truly the clearest color photo there is of this aircraft.

And finally:

here is 2 photos from 2 different angles and different light sources to show the "whitish/grey" oxidation haze.

Mitsubishi A6M3 "Hamp", Tainan Kokutai

Recently, some "US Army" or "USAF" photos were for sale on eBay, prompting me to compile all the photos I could find in my files on this Mitsubishi A6M3 Model 32, serial number 3028, belonging to the Tainan Kokutai.

The tail code is "V-187" and, according to Japanese sources, the yellow band indicated that it was flown by a "shotai-cho" (section leader).

The aircraft also carries the "hokoku" inscription "Hokoku-870 Kogen-go". Kiri spent quite some time investigating the inscription and she's positive that the plane was donated by the citizens of Kowon County, in South Hamgyong province, North Korea; not "by a civilian volunteer group in Japan" as some online sources claim. It is worth noting that other known "hokoku" aircraft with numbers close to "870" were also donated by groups in Korea; a Japanese colony at the time.  

The aircraft was found abandoned at Buna Airfield, New Guinea, and after its engine was sent to Australia where it was used to build a single A6M3 with tail code "EB-201", the rest gradually fell pray to souvenir collectors.

According to the original caption:

"Members of the 41st Division looking over Japanese Zero which was wrecked on the Old Jap[sic] Air Strip, Buna, Papua, New Guinea by bombing. 11 March 1943."

Color, not colorized, photos by Lawrence J. Hickey.

Here's a question for the color experts (I'm not): if the overall "light mustard" or "gray green" or whatever, color has faded to look almost white in this photo, how come the yellow band or the "hokoku" inscription haven't faded too? (the hinomaru are known to be thoroughly painted and stay well-preserved, so I won't mention it)

The Model 32 had significantly reduced range compared to the Model 21, making round-trip offensive operations from Rabaul to Guadalcanal impossible. The Tainan Kokutai primarily used it for combat operations in eastern New Guinea, particularly around Lae and Buna. This explains why most of the Zero fighters abandoned at Buna were Model 32s.

Edward has released a kit in 1/48 of this specific aircraft; check here . Box artwork by Piotr Forkasiewicz. 

Yokosuka K4Y, Tsuchiura Kokutai, "Kessen no Ozora e" - video

A video excerpt today from the movie "Kessen no Ozora e" (Into the Skies for the Decisive Battle), produced by Toho and released on September 16, 1943.

It was shot with the full cooperation of the Tsuchiura Kokutai and it features, in the beginning, Yokosuka K4Y trainer seaplanes and later, from 02:52, the very rarely seen Watanabe K8W1 seaplane trainer in flight (note the cowling ring and the shape of the tail fin).

We can also sense the training regimen of these young pilots, initially introducing themselves to the commanding officer of the training course and subsequently to the advisor positioned in the front cockpit. Those who completed their training flight write their names and activities for the day on the board.

Here's what we were able to translate of the dialogue:

(Name) Trainee, No. 1 [the number indicated the seaplane]

Airborne operation, co-pilot

[Introducing himself to the instructor]

Trainee Akimoto, co-piloting

Departure preparations complete

Instructor: What about your glasses?

What's in [inaudible, probably instrument pannel]?

Trainee: It's a photograph of my mother.

Instructor: I can see exactly what you're doing over there, you know

Instructor: To your left is the Tone River

To your right front is Mount Tsukuba

Mind your left

Trainee: Yes

Instructor: Pull the control column right and the aircraft banks right

Push it left and it banks left

Push the control column forward and the nose rises

Instructor: Straight right flight, towards Mount Tsukuba, "Yōsorō"*

Trainee: Straight right flight, towards Mount Tsukuba, "Yōsorō"

* "Yōsorō" is used to mean ‘proceed as directed,’ ‘understood,’ or ‘no problem.’ Within the Imperial Japanese Navy, it was used not only aboard ships but also within the air squadrons. While there are various theories regarding the origin of the term, the most widely accepted explanation is that it evolved from ‘yoroshiku sō’ during the late Edo period when ship handling techniques were learned from the West. There is also a theory that it dates back to the era of traditional Japanese sailing vessels.

Mitsubishi MC-20/Ki-57, Japan Airways Co.Ltd

A fairly well-known and very interesting photo, features a Mitsubishi MC-20 or Ki-57 Model 2, with Mitsubishi Ha-102 engines, found at the end of the war at Kumamoto Airfield, Kyoto.

Credit: photo found by Sebastian Sułek at the US Marine Corps archives and forwarded to Arawasi by our friend Danny Jackett (thanks, Danny).

The photo is also included in Joe Picarella's "Japanese Experimental Transport Aircraft of the Pacific War" p. 138.

 Let's see some details.

At the top of the tail there is a red band with a white or yellow border with the kanji "大日航" (DAI NICHI KO) in white, indicating that the aircraft was flown by "Dai Nippon Koku Kabushiki Kaisha" (Japan Airways Co.Ltd).

Almost at the bottom of the tail there is the number "43" in red with a white border. Note that it is painted over the camouflage. On the far right, on the rudder trim tab, we can see the aircraft's serial number applied in black on the uncamouflaged overall paint. I think I can make out a "3" but nothing else.

Curiously, on the rudder, under the camouflage, the aircraft had an older number(?) applied; maybe at the factory? Perhaps an "8"?

The aircraft sports surrender "green crosses" inside white squares, so maybe it was to be used to transport surrender delegations. 

The "green cross" set is not applied over a fuselage hinomaru. "Topsys" often didn't have fuselage hinomaru. If they did, it would have been applied in the area around the small window behind the door. However, this particular aircraft has camouflage applied in that area, so no fuselage hinomaru.

There is also a white band that either wrapped or didn't wrap around the fuselage; there is too much dirt in the lower part of the fuselage to be sure.

Finally, note that the aircraft does not seem to have any "J-" civlian registration applied on the fuselage sides. It would have been applied on the area in front of the fuselage door.

The aircraft sports a typical civilian aircraft anti-glare panel on the nose and the marking of the "Nippon Koku Kabushiki Kaisha" (Japan Airways Co.Ltd) on the nose side in front of the cockpit. An airline's sticker with the company logo is on the right.

Judging from the uncamouflaged area, the aircraft was most probably finished in overall IJAAF "hairyokushoku" (gray green) then received a roughly applied green camo with a spray gun.

Last but not least, the aircraft has a rather unusual radio mast; compare with the more common Ki-57 radio mast on the right. There is also something like a box-shaped object in front of the radio loop antenna.