WWII airplanes weathering

[flundstrom2]

To what extent did aircraft actually get dirty before being shot down or decommissioned?

I imagine exhaust dirt on the fuselage next to exhausts, and dirt from grass and mud airstrips on the landing legs.

But I've tried to watch how current commercial aircraft get dirty : white SAS planes barely get dirty on top of the wings. Just a little, almost invisible behind rivets. But their high speeds and constant flights through rain and clouds maybe cleans them in a way not done to WWII airplanes?

And did the material of the planes affect weathering? Esp early were made of cloth and wood, while later planes had metal fuselage.

[digger303]

To what extent did aircraft actually get dirty before being shot down or decommissioned?

I imagine exhaust dirt on the fuselage next to exhausts, and dirt from grass and mud airstrips on the landing legs.

But I've tried to watch how current commercial aircraft get dirty : white SAS planes barely get dirty on top of the wings. Just a little, almost invisible behind rivets. But their high speeds and constant flights through rain and clouds maybe cleans them in a way not done to WWII airplanes?

And did the material of the planes affect weathering? Esp early were made of cloth and wood, while later planes had metal fuselage.

Modern aircraft actually have a self cleaning paint which helps.

[Gary30]

I think this is where we are granted a little artistic licence to bring a model 'to life'.

Possibly we are all guilty of over weathering a subject to show off our skills and make interesting effects, it's the old dilemma of whether we want a good looking model or a 100% accurate model. So personally I think it's ok to over emphasise weathering effects.

It's whether we weather for the wise or whether we stop when we have the wherewithal to weather for whoever, that is truly the question.

[flundstrom2]

I think this is where we are granted a little artistic licence to bring a model 'to life'.

Possibly we are all guilty of over weathering a subject to show off our skills and make interesting effects.

Yes, I totally agree. Weathering is fun, and it really gives an impression of reality. But, nevertheless, I'm qurious and really would like to know what really happened to the planes during their lifetime.

[alextheblue]

To what extent did aircraft actually get dirty before being shot down or decommissioned?

I imagine exhaust dirt on the fuselage next to exhausts, and dirt from grass and mud airstrips on the landing legs.

But I've tried to watch how current commercial aircraft get dirty : white SAS planes barely get dirty on top of the wings. Just a little, almost invisible behind rivets. But their high speeds and constant flights through rain and clouds maybe cleans them in a way not done to WWII airplanes?

And did the material of the planes affect weathering? Esp early were made of cloth and wood, while later planes had metal fuselage.

That's an excellent question. Most of the pictures we see are black and white, or have had colour added and examples in museums have always been restored to look like they have rolled straight out of the factory.

As you say, a lot depends on the materials involved. Plus, you have to take into account the theatre they were used in, how heavily they were used and their availability.

I'm no expert on aircraft. Tanks are more my thing and the good thing with those - they're almost always covered in crud and dirt!!!!

[Twokidsnosleep]

I think this is where we are granted a little artistic licence to bring a model 'to life'.

Possibly we are all guilty of over weathering a subject to show off our skills and make interesting effects, it's the old dilemma of whether we want a good looking model or a 100% accurate model. So personally I think it's ok to over emphasise weathering effects.

It's whether we weather for the wise or whether we stop when we have the wherewithal to weather for whoever, that is truly the question.

Oh I like that mate