Today I found a paper from 1944 where scientists were analyzing accepted & rejected paint lots based on the Corps of Engineers Color Card as of 1944. I think I found the missing link (no pun) which totally fixes Steve Zaloga's OD article (MilMod2002).

Much of Mr. Z's research & conclusions are correct, but for those who have seen the standards mentioned like the CoE 1942 ColorCard, Spec 3-1 Color card, TT-C-595, & FS595 (1956), and the OD's in those like No.9, 319, 3412, & 34087 know that this is where Mr.Z's article breaks down. They are not the same. If you see the chips, No.9 of 1942 looks like 34087 of 1956, they are both dark OD's; Lane Wilcox & Jerry Smith reported this back in 1969. However, 319 & 3412 are a completely different color-much lighter. This is why 319 & 3412 are linked in TT-C-595 & the ISCC-NBS Centroid publications, & why FS595 of 1956 states that 34087 has changed coloration from the 3412 chip of 1950.

The key is that CoE OD No.9 changed from the darkish 1956 34087 color to the 319/3412 color sometime before 1944 (when this research paper was published). This is why late war tanks seem lighter, and the well known black/OD camo is so easily seen in color Normandy footage.

I was able to calculate the Munsell renotation for 1956 34087 based on CIE xyY data published in 1957. The renotation leads me to a chip in the Munsell Book of Color that is very close to No.9(1942)/34087(1956). The published Munsell renotations of the 1944 No.9 however lead to a color chip in the Book of Color very close to 319/3412. Anyone who has Bob Archer's first book on USAAF colors can see this 319 color...it is the same as the OD A-N chip in the appendix. The OD31 in the same appendex is more like No.9(1942)/34087(1956).

So the story as started by Mr. Z would be correct. The primary AFV color in WW2 started the war simply called 'Lustreless OD', which was a flat version of the glossy OD22 of Spec 3-1 in 1919. This 'Lustreless OD' finally acquired it's own number in the Spec 3-1 of 1943, which was '319'. But this was not the No.9 OD of 1942, it was the No.9 OD of 1944.

Hypothesis: due to the shortage of 'LOD' chips in 1942, CoE No.9 (dark OD) chips were distributed to manufacturers, as an interim color, which is why those Tunisian Lee's looked so darn dark in Ken Burn's documentary.

Then, the situation stabilized as the 319 chips got made in 1943 & the tanks then generally appeared more lighter than some lots earlier in the war.

Another note of interest, according to this 1944 paper, the CoE color No.6 Earth Yellow is significantly different from both the 1942 CoE color, and the Earth Yellow 305 color which is in Spec 3-1. It is more orangish.

I'd appreciate feedback either here or my email,

regards,

Mark

Who makes a good color match to these colors? What colors out there are good matches to the early OD, and which is a good match to the later OD?

Brian

Well certainly, Mr.Z's suggestion of Tamiya OD62 has always been valid for the darker OD (it's even a touch darker than the real thing). As for 319, I don't know.

There are 3 ways you can get to see the Monogram A-N chip.
1) buy the book...used copies are still available
2) borrow it via Interlibrary Loan
3) get this: http://www.monogramaviation.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=1&zenid=0038e2b25b33b639f8494c1a57096567

which is a very good idea as the chips are quite accurate, & it has a lot of the ANA chips (so you can see OD613 for example.

As for a good reference for the darker OD, you can:

1) get a very good idea from the OD31 chip in the Monogram book
2) I was able to contact the legendary J. S. Smith who just so happens to have 2000+ 1956 34087 chips somewhere in the garage. Currently looking for them.

Could you mention the title of the book?
The link stops, because you need to be registered first.


best regards,




Marc Brandes

Official United States Aircraft Colors 1908-1993 for $29.95

it's all of the paint chips from the 5 Monogram books (1 Archer & 4 Elliott).

Unfortunately Archer's 2nd book was published by Schiffer, & they did printed chips. That is the book that has several of the 3-1/1943 colors; however the one most important to us is 319 which is represented well by the A-N chip in Archer's first book (which is also in the book mentioned above)

When someone has a chance to compare 319 to available OD's PLEASE let us know what the best match is. I am getting ready to start an M36B1 and I would really like to start with the right shade. Thanks ahead of time for your efforts.

is this restoration paint (which is not usable for us-catalyst based)

http://www.tm9ordnance.com/research.asp

His shade #8 is pretty darn tootin'

I have the Monogram book and the chip for the airplane paint looks nothing like his #8 based on the on-screen image. Im not sure the airplane paint is the same as the tank paint anyway. But this seems overly complicated.

for a hobby paint is no longer available. It was Testors ModelMaster 50111 OD which was the predecessor to their current acryl line. This old paint was called an 'acrylic enamel', and ironically, it says '34088' on the label which is absolutely wrong. But for 319 it's real nice

The best match available, really, the only one I can find, is the current ModelMaster 1711 OD, on condition it is overcoated with a layer of 2015 flat clear lacquer. Put some 1711 on a card, overcoat it with 2015, & you'll see what 319 looks like

Testors 1165, nearly as good as the old 50111

If you look at Steves Osprey Modelling 35 (M4 Sherman) the printed chips in the back (1&2) are good duplications.

Mark:
Sorry, but you don't have a clue how the AGF worked in WW2. The US Army in WWII (and now) is a very bureaucratic organization, and major procurement actions require a paper trail.

Why your references to books about AAF aircraft colors? Different paint, different colors, different procurement chains than AGF tactical vehicles. What the AAF did had no bearing on AGF; they had two separate chains of command and two separate procurement systems.

You don't have a "smoking gun" unless you have the OCM recommendation and AG authorization for a color change of OD for tactical vehicles. A change of that magnitude (which would involve thousands of contractors changing their paint) requires the Ordnance Department's Ordnance Committee to discuss the issue and to make a recommendation for the change (which formally appears with the publication of the OCM: Ordnance Committee Meeting minutes), and then the Adjutant General's office must rubber-stamp the recommendation for it to come into effect. Then there would be the orders to the contractors as well as a corresponding set of instructions to relevant US Army Ground Forces organizations notifying them of the change (such as Technical Bulletins authorizing the use of a new color and specifying whether it was to be implemented immediately or only when vehicles were undergoing rehabilitation and required re-painting). Keep in mid that sub-contractors provided many of their components to the assembly plants pre-painted in OD; changing the paint color is a major event in the procurement cycle and given the wartime pressures, something that was not undertaken lightly.

If you want to prove your point, read the OCMs, AG authorizations, and TB's. They are very informative (and voluminous). There is a full set at NARA II and a partial set at MHI. I've worked in the US defense industry for nearly 30 years now, dealing with contracting on an almost daily basis- Government Rule # 1: no paperwork, no action.

No, you're missing the point. I'm referencing those two Monogram publications because they contain a paint chip that can show the masses what 319 looks like. The Spec 3-1 Color Card has been OOP for ages.

Mark, can you please summarise in a couple of sentences what your find adds to the OD picture?

My summary would be that tanks (in general) appearing lighter as the war progressed is not a myth, and has a solid explanation. There was not one camouflage lustreless OD, but two during the war. A dark shade (No.9-1942), and a lighter shade ('Lustreless OD'; 319-1943; No.9-1944). This is why you see camo patterns with so much contrast, such as the popular OD/black scheme, on late war tanks.

And as time proceeds, you see the same two shades repeating over & over again, right up until tricolor Nato.

------------

Going deeper, it all begins with No.22 (1919) as Mr.Z stated. This was a gloss OD to which most preWW2 OD's attempted to match in color. The Army developed their camo tank color to match OD22, and called it 'Lustreless OD', and it stayed with that name, and no number, until 1943 when it was given '319'. The Monogram book also has the glossy OD22 1919 chip. You'll see the similarity with the OD A-N chip (which is what the 319 chip happens to look like in Spec 3-1).


This guy has his answer:

http://www.network54.com/Forum/47208/thread/1188399400/

Mark,

This is the first I've ever heard of this debate about early war OD being different than late war. I never thought that the OD/black showed up that well in period photos, late war or otherwise. And as a more or less daily (often many times a day) visitor, I don't ever remember big discussions about this. Perhaps I missed something.

Rob

I don't spend as much time looking at the production records of armored vehicles as some other guys here. But I've spent a great deal of time looking at the production records of soft skins.

The very first MB and the very last MB were painted the same color, per Willys records. Same with Ford GPW and GMC CCKW, again, per the factory production records. A new paint was authorized VERY near the end of the war, with the cavet that it was to be used when existing supplies were exhausted. But at least the three manufacturers listed above never changed colors - because the war ended before the existing supplies were exhausted.

IIRC, there was some change in paint formulation prior to this to improve its performance, but this did not change its color. It MAY have changed how the paint weathered, which in turn would change what observers saw.

My .02,
David Doyle

Sure, it would make sense that if Lustreless OD chips were in short supply in 1942, the major players would have had them...therefore they were painting 319 all along.

Anyhow, a lead to follow up on is:

Keith F. Stultz
The Engineer Board
Fort Belvoir, Virginia

http://s223.photobucket.com/albums/dd62/AgitatedInbound/Olive%20Drab/

You need to be familiar with Munsell and/or CIE. If I can figure out how to convert this to CIELAB, we can have RAL Design matches.

On the top line you see the standard. The following table comprises data from 28 sample lots-both accepted & rejected. The graph is included showing the scatter of the samples. So you don't need to fret about perfection here.

I will start by saying here ....I have over 15 of research on this subject and have a great deal of documentation on it.......

There was no "early vs late" Lusterless Olive Drab paint used on tactical vehicles in WW II.

As my friend D. Doyle has stated, the entire production of jeeps both Ford and Willys were painted the same color of Lusterless Olive Drab. The only exception were the direct contracts for Willys MB's for the Canadian Government and USMC which were painted in Lusterless Forest Green.

ALL Ford GPW jeeps were painted in Lusterless Olive Drab. (as were Ford built M-4 and M-10 tanks, GPA's, GP's GTB's, G-8T, Studebaker M-29 and M-29C Weasels and other vehicles built by other MFG's.)

Lusterless Olive Drab was a new paint finish circa 1940. Before that a full gloss paint was used.

Lusterless Olive Drab was later (circa 1943)given the designation of color No. 319.

319 OD is the same color as Lusterless Olive Drab.

#319 Lusterless Olive Drab PAINT is an ORD paint intended for ordnance items such as bombs and not for vehicles as it was an infra-red reflecting paint that showed up the same as grass and trees in infra-red film.

#319 Lusterless Olive Drab PAINT is the same COLOR as Lusterless Olive Drab paint used on vehicles but the chemical composition of the paint is different.

OD 9 and OD 8 are colors/paint used by the Engineers as camo paint. While the color of one or the other of these paints may match the color of Lusterless Olive Drab they were intended to be used as a cover coat and are not referenced in any Govt. contract for vehicles that I have seen.

All contracts I have researched state the same ...."Lusterless Olive Drab"...even Studebaker M-29C painting specifications dated 1945 show this as the color to be used. Semi-gloss OD was not released for distribution until August 1945 and was only authorized for repainting of vehicles.


As to the question of what full size vehicle paint made today matches the original Lusterless Olive Drab........

I have 4 gallons of WW II dated # 319 Lusterless Olive Drab paint. Two were from one maker and two were from another. Three were sealed and never opened since they were filled.

They were thoroughly mixed until the pigments and vehicle were suspended. The gallons were then properly "boxed" as per NBS standards.
The paint was reduced with the proper reducer and to the correct volumes. The paint was then sprayed on PPG sprayout cards using two coats. After drying several days the cards were compared to each other for color consistency between the two makers paint. The colors were judged to be the same between both. They were then compared to various NOS parts just unboxed. These parts were from Ford, Willys, GMC and White.

The color was the same on all we compared.

This then leads us to make the statement that these parts matched original WW II OD paint and the WW II paint matched the parts. Paul from TM -9 has matched this paint with his OD #8. The original WW II paint also matches WW II OD color chips.

Paul can state that his #8 OD matches the color of original WW II Lusterless Olive Drab paint.

While the chemical composition of # 319 Lusterless Olive drab that we used is not the exact same as Lusterless Olive drab used on vehicles the color is the same.


as for Olive Drab # 22......?

My 1940 dated Ditzler QDE data sheets show this to be a CCC (Civilian Conservation Corps.) color. It is a full gloss paint as far as I can determine.

Do any of you have hard data that this color (OD 22) was actually used by the US Army on military vehicles prior to 1940?

Jim Gilmore

Jim Thorpe, PA

That's why this is important. In modeler terms, Tamiya OD62 is about as close to Lustreless OD as Panzer Grey is to Dunkelgelb.

Jim:

Excellent post. The OD thing has driven me nuts for years. One of the problems I've always had with OD is that the same color chip is darker as a semi-gloss and even darker as a gloss.

So I have two questions: What is the definition of "luster-less?" Was it a true flat? Or a slightly sheened nearly flat "semi-gloss?" Flat paints do not clean well and are easily stained by Petroleum products. But thos whith a sheen or semi-gloss can be cleaned. So what are the WWII era parts you have, dead flat or slightly sheened.

And then the big question of them all:

What model apint best matches 319?

Thanks and sorry to drag thsi back up.

Fred