Why did the English Electric Lightning have such a shiney co

[Alpha Two Zero]

Hi Guy's
Just love our latest edition the Lightning, I would like to ask all you combat aircraft fans, why did the Lightning have such a shiney coat? was it due to the fact that the reflection would taken on what ever environment she was flying in thus making her much harder to see in combat or what?
Regards
Timm

 

[joe bob]

No, many air forces were not big on using camouflage during that era. Especially high altitude interceptors.

 

[Motormouse]

As Joe Bob says, mainly it was that they never got round to painting them much, although the RAFG ones at Gutersloh gained a dark green top surface.
There were some schools of thought that paint would not 'stick' at high speed and other such fanciful notions; but it was basically a
development of the overall high speed silver (paint) scheme that was standard for the RAF fighter squadrons at the time of its' introduction,
it being easier to polish than to paint!

ttfn

Pete

 

[keithb77]

....
it being easier to polish than to paint!
Pete

Having spent a day polishing one in the seventies not sure I'd agree

I also thought polished metal was lighter than paint, though probably the lightning had enough surplus power to carry a can of paint or two....

Cheers
Keith

 

[YoYo]

For BVR mode of air fighting it isnt very important what do You have on the wing, red, orange or green. For sure Fire strike and Red top arent exactly missiles for BVR fight like Today missiles but for 6-12 nm too. Many Russian planes in cold war had only natural silver. Its better for speed too and cheaper .

 

[hae5904]

It was simply the time period of shiny unpainted planes starting during WWII. Only the tactical fighter/bombers were camouflaged.
Look at all those high altitude fighters of the Lightning period (starting late 50's) all were unpainted.....Lightning, Starfighter, Mirage III, Saab Draken etc.

It all changed after 1967. RAFG started to paint their F2/F2A plain green, to make them less suspious on the ground ....it also was the time where HAS (hardened aircraft shelters) were introduced.

Cheers,
Hank

 

[Bjoern]

Many Russian planes in cold war had only natural silver. Its better for speed too and cheaper .

Only up until the mid to late 60s or so. Even the MiG-25P got a lick of paint.


Maybe someone finally realized that the additional 5 KIAS just aren't worth being visible like a second sun...

 

[Motormouse]

Having spent a day polishing one in the seventies not sure I'd agree

I also thought polished metal was lighter than paint, though probably the lightning had enough surplus power to carry a can of paint or two....

Cheers
Keith

Ah, the wonder of wadpol!

Ttfn

Pete

 

[darklight]

...high speed silver (paint) scheme that was standard for the RAF fighter squadrons at the time...

It was simply the time period of shiny unpainted planes...

Can someone clear this up for me - are 'bare metal' planes really bare metal, or are they painted silver? I'm seeing two conflicting stories in this thread. I'm not sure if that 'silver paint' quote is literal or figurative.

If it really is bare metal (as I originally thought) then what about corrosion? The insides of the planes would have been coated in zinc chromate, would the outside not have been also? That would mean a paint coating right?

 

[falcon409]

Can someone clear this up for me - are 'bare metal' planes really bare metal, or are they painted silver? I'm seeing two conflicting stories in this thread. I'm not sure if that 'silver paint' quote is literal or figurative.

If it really is bare metal (as I originally thought) then what about corrosion? The insides of the planes would have been coated in zinc chromate, would the outside not have been also? That would mean a paint coating right?

Every bare metal airplane I worked on (F-100 and 104) were true bare metal. . .some polished, some simply well maintained but none were painted silver that I was familiar with.

 

[Dev One]

Darklight - I think you will find than the aluminium used on the external skins were 'Alclad', i.e. there was a thin layer of pure aluminium on each face. This of course would not be the case where machined planks were used e.g. wings. But if one kept it clean then corrosion not normally a problem.
Mind you on the other hand too much cleaning would wear away the cladding!
Keith

 

[wombat666]

'Bare Metal' is something of an oxymoron, most metal surfaces have a form of chemical treatment to protect against corrosion which may or may not be obvious to the naked eye.
Australian built Mustangs and Mirages were painted with an Aluminium 'Dope' overall, going further back in time the Canberra fleet arrived in factory applied 'Silver', and the Australian built Lincoln MR31 rolled out of the factory wearing the same finish.
(No offense implied or intended Falcon).
My father flew the maritime reconnaissance Lincolns and I remember asking him all of these questions about 'Bare Metal' aircraft decades ago.

 

[Deacon211]

I can't remember what the weight of paint is for a fighter aircraft, but IIRC it was several hundred pounds...not exactly insignificant.

While that might not matter much in a Lightning, I think it did make a difference on the Mustangs and B-17s where the trend seems to have started in late WWII. After all, wasn't part of the reason for taping over the gun ports also to reduce unnecessary drag and maximize speed/power?

I didn't know about the coatings applied to bare aluminum skins. It was not without it's limitations apparently, since I think there have been few, if any, naval aircraft similarly bare skinned.

I know our birds usually wound up at the end of cruise looking like they had some kind of bad rash!

Deacon

 

[Dev One]

In the 50's the airline my father worked for had Vickers Vikings & later HP Hermes & they were bare metal & kept clean manually. This had a beneficial aspect as a good cleaner would identify loose rivets, cracks & damage. Later on they started to paint the top surfaces of the fuselage white to help keep the interior cool. When corrosion started to become a problem & with the improvement in paint technology the fuselages were painted overall, but not necessarily the wings & tailplane. As an apprentice in the late 50's the Viscounts on the Weybridge construction line were normally bare metal except for the paint scheme ordered by the customer - usually a white top, with a 'cheat line' along the windows & with the Fin & rudder used as the billboard for the airline logo. The Valiants though were painted overall, having a good undercoat which was rubbed down by hand & then given the final paint overcoat which at that time was anti-flash white. & think the material used for the Valiant was not Alclad as this is weaker than an unclad aluminium of the same gauge, so painting became necessary. The next aircraft, the Vanguard used a lot more machined skins & they were treated with 'Alochrome' - a cheaper method of surface coating than Anodic treatment - of which there are two types - Chromic acid or sulfuric acid IIRC. This Alochrome also acted as a primer for the paint, although if the Alochrome was not correctly applied it could peel off, but it could be repaired by hand painting the fluid on the area, where you could not repair anodising.
Keith

 

[delta_lima]

I think there have been few, if any, naval aircraft similarly bare skinned.



Deacon

Very briefly, between Korea (deep sea blue) and the late 50s (2-tone), USN and USMC fighters were left "unpainted" - though likely treated, as has already been discussed. The corrosive air/water environments are not kind to even treated "bare metal".

Squadrons operating F2H Banshees, FJ-2/3 Furies, F7U Cutlasses, and a few others bore these schemes - though for just a few years - 55-57 or so, until the two-tone (gull grey and insignia white) if memory serves ...

Some aircraft, though active in this period, never saw it operationally. The F9F Panther skipped this altogether, stayed in deep sea blue all the way through to the start of the grey/white period, by which time they were no longer active front-line aircraft anyway. Many prototypes (A-4, F3D, F-8, etc) were unpainted during their test/evaluation periods, but I think we're speaking operationally.

But this was a very rare period, and as far as I know, unique to the USN/USMC - no other fixed wing embarked naval air arm of the cold war (Australia, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, France, India, New Zealand, UK, Spain) operated "unpainted" schemes on their aircraft, to my knowledge.

DL

 

[hairyspin]

The OP asked why the EE Lightning was shiny: maybe part of the answer was the Lightning never actually went to war (iirc). Shiny and colourful schemes were not confined to post-WW2 RAF aircraft, they were used in the 30s too. This 1937-built, 2009-restored Hawker Demon in 64 Squadron livery is from the Shuttleworth Collection, known sticklers for authentic colour schemes. Silver dope on the fabric and you can see your face in the cowlings.

 

[delta_lima]

The OP asked why the EE Lightning was shiny: maybe part of the answer was the Lightning never actually went to war (iirc). Shiny and colourful schemes were not confined to post-WW2 RAF aircraft, they were used in the 30s too. This 1937-built, 2009-restored Hawker Demon in 64 Squadron livery is from the Shuttleworth Collection, known sticklers for authentic colour schemes. Silver dope on the fabric and you can see your face in the cowlings.

Ah yes - preware Hawkers were such lovely planes ...

You're right, the Lightning was never used in anger.

That said, in light of the times, at least for land-based aircraft, these "bare" metal schemes were worn on other interceptors (MiGs, Mirages, F-100, F-104) and many fighter bombers (F-100, F-105, Vautour, etc) of the time (very late 50s to mid 60s), where tactics were employed around the weapons then in vogue - high altitude point defence interception with missiles, nuclear bomb-toss for the fighter bombers - and visibility - or the need to mask it - was largely irrelevant. Highest possible speeds played a huge role in those tactics, as opposed to maneuvering and/or using terrain - where the visual element is crucial.

While it's difficult to say what would have happened if the Berlin Crisis or any similar hotspot near the UK would have gone hot, I'd guess at least for the short term, and the Lightning paint scheme would not have been an issue. Vietnamese and Arab MiGs, Israeli and Pakistani Mirages and Ouragans, Vautours, etc all were engaged in hot wars/conflicts during the 60s - largely in unpainted schemes, and even though the tactics were largely more cut-thrust guns/low level, etc.

Notable exceptions I can think of are the Hunter (in Aden, etc), which always served in painted schemes. I can only surmise that from early on, it had a more low-altitude air-to-ground combat focus, hence it serving throughout its life in darker painted schemes. Just my guess, though ...


DL

 

[joe bob]

Bare aircraft grade aluminum isn't that bad corrosion wise as long as some basic maintenance and treatment is done. It is the galvanic corrosion , where different metals come into contact, that is more prevalent.

I think much of the post WW2 attitude was zeroed in on flying faster and higher. They might be more inclined to view combat as high altitude affairs like much of the European theater or Korea where it made little sense to camouflage an aircraft that was going to be pulling contrails anyway.