Painted vs Unpainted WWII Bombers

[Snargfargle]

The paint for a B-17 weighed about 75 pounds. Why then did unpainted B-17s use more fuel and have a shorter combat range than painted ones? And why then weren't B-29s also painted?

 

 

[Tpaktop2_1 NA]

From what I am seeing is this:

Quote

The USAAF did a bit of experimentation during the war and discovered that not applying camouflage saved weight and thus helped increase the performance of their aircraft.

And modelers did discuss this point too:
https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235112504-b-17-bomber-paint-vs-no-paint-unexpected-results/

And I see this is a good point:

Quote

paint was something that needed maintenance

I think the paint vs non paint also varied on the aluminum development process between B-17's and the B-29's productions. I think the B-29's were higher technology in their development with a smoother aircraft surface (less rivets)

[Wolfswetpaws]

It is my understanding that paint adds weight and aerodynamic drag.  But, it provides camouflage.
Until airplanes could significantly out-perform their likely threats, the paint was considered necessary for its camouflage.
After aircraft performance achieved a desired margin of performance and air-superiority was established well enough, camouflage was deemed unnecessary.

Construction methods (flush rivets and etc.) along with materials improvements may have also affected the situation.

[Snargfargle]

1 hour ago, Tpaktop2_1 NA said:

B-29's were higher technology in their development with a smoother aircraft surface (less rivets)

My grandma built B-29s during WWII (and B-47s and B-52s afterwards, during her thirty-year career at Boeing). The aircraft industry kept women on as fabricators even after the war because they were smaller than men and could crawl into places many men couldn't. I still have grandma's Boeing riveter's manual that shows how to install a flush rivet on a B-29.

 

[Lord_Slayer]

On 3/7/2024 at 4:48 AM, Snargfargle said:

The paint for a B-17 weighed about 75 pounds. Why then did unpainted B-17s use more fuel and have a shorter combat range than painted ones?

actually I believe late model B-17s were slower then early model as the chin turret added drag.

 

On 3/7/2024 at 4:48 AM, Snargfargle said:

 And why then weren't B-29s also painted?

By the time B-29s came into service most US aircraft were unpainted.

Camo wasn't needed as as there really were no threats to the B-29 bases.

[Snargfargle]

3 hours ago, Lord_Slayer said:

actually I believe late model B-17s were slower then early model as the chin turret added drag.

Watch the video. The Army Air Forces took into account other variables when assessing painted versus unpainted B-17s.

Fun fact:

By the end of the war, my grandma's plant was producing four B-29s every day. The plant hired nearly 30,000 people. At one time or another, half of my family has worked for Boeing. My cousin had a fun job. His team flew all around the world and repaired Boeing airliners that had crashed in out-of the way airports. He finished up his career on the team that converted basic 767 air-frames into KC-767A aerial tankers for the Italian air force. That contract with the Italian air force is still ongoing. He and his wife lived in Italy for three years and loved it.

[Asym]

Time.  Ask, for anything but time... 

Aircraft paint isn't car paint BTW.  Ask the HIRF and Lighting engineers and they'll talk your ear off about painting aircraft.... Or, how not to paint, clean or wax your beautiful Learjet/Cessna/Hawker/Boeing....  And yes, I have seen it all....even DOC in parts,....the good (as approved by those same H&L folk);  the almost "are you nutts>?";  and the, "who cares...." white works for me, customers.  And, some hilarious stories about painting planes.  And, what happens if you do it wrong....

   John Denver's second go at camouflage...

another example:

Weight, drag, temperature and time.  Ask for anything but time.  Cost as well but, in wartime, Phfffff.  Time.  It takes a while to paint an airplane.......right.

Paint has very little utility in the air:  no one says "Oh look how pretty she is" before they blow that plane into tiny bits.....  BTW, ships were mostly "a shade of gray" as seen in the pictures of the KC above for a reason.... 

Paint was for when they were parked.....

[Snargfargle]

13 hours ago, Asym said:

Aircraft paint isn't car paint BTW....

When I was a junior in high school we went to Wichita and toured several of the industries there. It was quite an eye-opener for a bunch of kids from a town where it seemed that you only had your choice of four jobs: farmer, teacher, carpenter, or working in the petroleum industry. A lot of dads went on those trips as "chaperones" but mainly just to get away from their wives for a few days, the wives probably enjoying the time apart too.

We toured one plant that made paint for the aircraft industry. At one of the mixing areas the guy said that the specific paint that was being mixed cost $1500 a gallon. Later, when we were eating lunch, one of the dad's held up a painted finger and said "If I'd have know it was that expensive, I'd never have stuck my finger in it."

 

 

Edited March 21 by Snargfargle

[Asym]

12 hours ago, Snargfargle said:

When I was a junior in high school we went to Wichita and toured several of the industries there. It was quite an eye-opener for a bunch of kids from a town where it seemed that you only had your choice of four jobs: farmer, teacher, carpenter, or working in the petroleum industry. A lot of dads went on those trips as "chaperones" but mainly just to get away from their wives for a few days, the wives probably enjoying the time apart too.

We touring one plant that made paint for the aircraft industry. At one of the mixing areas the guy said that this specific paint that was being mixed cost $1500 a gallon. Later, when we were eating lunch, one of the dad's held up a painted finger and said "If I'd have know it was that expensive, I'd never have stuck my finger in it."

PAINT.  Aircraft Paint.  $1,500 a gallon aircraft paint no less...

Now, I could tell you about a Learjet owner whom contracted to have his M31A painted British Racing Green to match his favorite TR6.  It was really beautiful....  What he sort of didn't know, was that the M31A is a basturd child.  It's really a M55 wing cobbled onto the M35a fuselage. The flight test aircraft was 35-001,  which is mounted on a pedestal outside of Building one of the Bombardier facility on the North part of the Eisenhower Airport in Wichita if you are curious.....  And, having flow in it, since I worked in Experimental Flight Test there, was.......an experience......almost as good as the x-ticketed M60-001 (which, really was a M55 for the most part with very powerful prototype engines....oh boy...)  Point being, the M31A is a sports car.  A no joke hot rod. A lot of NASCAR teams owned them back in the day.  They are fast as it gets and, that means, if you pock up and use conductive car paint...........oooops.... Holy Zap-a-Romma and cooked electrical everything (to include ground crew whom.......well......should have known better....see below)

Well our British hero simply kept blowing his entire avionics package circuit breakers about 5 minutes after takeoff.  All of the time.  So, that little bundle of joy, clicked it's heels three times and made it back to OZ.........in a thunder storm, of course.  When they taxied to Building 6, the CS Building,  we saw the H&L lead running towards building 6 screaming at the top of her 5'2" frame lungs to.........."Don't"........too late...  The service tech went to unlatch the cabin door and BOOM !  He was several feet away, in the rain on his back out cold and the H&L DER, completely soaked said:  "Static buildup !  What about Static Build up don't you understand -  Geeze....!!!"  BTW, one of the smartest DER's I've ever encountered and, had an Attitude without a mouth limiter that included everything political, culturally, scientifically incorrect.  She was a hoot to work with !!!  I can still hear her:  "Ah, like ZAP, you be dead as a mosquito you idiot...  Don't do that, eh?  Pocking mechanics..."

Car paint is conductive.  Car wax is conductive.  Ever notice the static wicks on a plane's wings?  They are there to bleed off normal static when the jet is painted with "aircraft paint;" and, when you fail to read that in the maintenance section that starts with the word WARNING  - that, those wicks can't get rid of an immense amount of static that, "just happens to trip off most or all avionic CB's really quick.."  Car wax = BAD... They had to strip his jet of car paint and wax, and repaint it..........  Cha-Ching  !

Ah, the stories....   But, you haven't lived until you fly to Reno in the Corporate M45 to spend a week + with Moya in her runway box for the air races.....  Bill was known to be "difficult..." it was said (even in wiki !) and, the OG guys would tell stories of being fired every week......sometimes several times a week.....  Wow.  It was......sigh....fun !

Notice @Ensign Cthulhu not "to see the Total eclipse of the Sun"....so well sung....  Just Reno and all over the place all of the time....Not Nova Scotia...

[Snargfargle]

1 hour ago, Asym said:

too late...  The service tech went to unlatch the cabin door and BOOM !  He was several feet away, in the rain on his back out cold

I can relate. We medics trained with those "jungle penetrator" helicopter rescue seats. They could give you quite a jolt if you didn't let them hit the ground and discharge their static before you touched them.

What's even scarier is watching a hi-tension helicopter lineman equalize his charge to the helicopter's.

 

 

Edited March 21 by Snargfargle

[Ensign Cthulhu]

On 3/21/2024 at 12:58 AM, Asym said:

Not Nova Scotia...

😆