Posted
By: Roy Wiggs <roy493@open.org>
Date:
Saturday, 10 August 2002, at 8:58 a.m.
I
don't know if this question has been addressed
before but
I'm
going to do a Ki-100 and I want to do it in the
dark
blue
over silver pictured in the Donald Thorpe
publication.
My
question is; has this scheme ever been documented?
Were
some
late war Japanese A/C painted in this color?
Blue
Dinah ?
Posted
By: JCC <modelarchives@free.fr>
Date:
Thursday, 15 August 2002, at 4:33 a.m.
In
Response To: Dark Blue on JAAF planes (Roy Wiggs)
Hello,
I submit this funny thought on blue aircraft here
: the aircraft pictured on page 63 of FAOW (red) n°38
(Dinah) looks to me like it COULD be Aotake
overall because the structure of the aircraft
shows up a lot through paint so the paint should
be a clear type . And this COULD explain the
"medium blue" Dinah illustrated in
Thorpe . From this I can see some debate but then
the "why" paint an aircraft Aotake . So
maybe it is all sillyness on my part but then at
least there is a picture to base the discussion on
!
Methinks
Posted
By: Peter <f14peter@yahoo.com>
Date:
Tuesday, 13 August 2002, at 9:51 a.m.
In
Response To: Dark Blue on JAAF planes (Roy Wiggs)
the
blue upper surface color has since been debunked
(Either as a dark green or maybe a dark grey).
That said, go ahead and do it! I did and my Okaki
Ki-100 looks great (The blue really sets off the
hinomarus!) and whenever someone calls me on the
color, I simply state it represents the aircraft,
"As depicted in Thorpe's . . . "
As
an aside, I do find it interesting that a country
(An island country, at that) that saw its aircraft
spending a fair amount of time over water, never
officially adopted a blue scheme. I fully
understand the grey-green as an air-to-air
camoflage and the green upper as a air-to-ground
camoflage, but even carrier based bombers early in
the war were painted green on the upper surface.
IJN
Greens
Posted
By: Bill Leyh <hawk81@pacbell.net>
Date:
Tuesday, 13 August 2002, at 12:43 p.m.
In
Response To: Methinks (Peter)
If
you look at most of the IJN greens, you'll see
they have a strong blue tint - they're blue-green.
After sailing across the Pacific, through the
Phoenix, Gilbert, Marshall, Mariana, Bonin, and
Japanese islands I can tell you that, especially
in the coastal areas, the water is predominantly a
vivid blue-green color. It's quite beautiful. And
stunning.
Re:
Methinks
Posted
By: Rich Leonard <rdkcleon@erols.com>
Date:
Tuesday, 13 August 2002, at 10:51 a.m.
In
Response To: Methinks (Peter)
Well,
for what it's worth, going ashore shortly after
the surrender, my father, a member of the TF38
staff, remembers seeing a B7A at Atsugi that was
dark blue with light grey undersides. He remarked
that it looked quite similar to USN types prior to
the overall dark blue adopted towards the end of
the war.
Blue
an unsuitable colour?
Editors
note: Some postings in this thread have not been
collected since they
wandered
way off topic.
Re:
Methinks
Posted
By: Roy Wiggs <roy493@open.org>
Date:
Tuesday, 13 August 2002, at 10:01 a.m.
In
Response To: Methinks (Peter)
Thanks
for the input Peter, I thought maybe the blue
scheme
had
been discounted like the lavender Rufes but like
you I'm
going
to do my Otaki in blue and I'll save the dark
green
for
the Hasegawa kit. I'm finishing up an Otaki Ki-61
that
I
started many years ago and it also is not totally
accurate.
I've
got the JAAF Blues
Posted
By: Nick Millman
Date:
Tuesday, 13 August 2002, at 3:20 p.m.
In
Response To: Re: Methinks (Roy Wiggs)
This
thread started as a question about JAAF aircraft
painted blue and drifted across blue-green waters
towards IJN types . . . .
I'm
surprised we're still talking here about
"de-bunked" blue when there is clear and
unequivocal contemporary evidence from both sides
reporting blue-painted JAAF aircraft, whether it
falls on receptive ears or fits a particular
theory or not.
Thorpe
and more recent Japanese sources (more than one)
have cited clear evidence for a blue paint. In
addition to a BROAD DAYLIGHT close encounter with
a BLUE Oscar in which the RAF pilot was close
enough and clear enough to be able to note the
hinomaru were "outlined in a darker red"
(I constructed a profile based on this report) we
have an RAF intelligence officer's detailed notes
providing primary, contemporary evidence, obtained
in close proximity (i.e. standing next to . . .)
to static examples, of at least two
blue-camouflaged Oscars in Burma.
Then
we have reports from 20th Sentai personnel stating
that their Ki-43 aircraft were painted a dark
purplish blue on arrival in Formosa.
Of
course all this could just be a trick of the light
. . . . . . . or a particularly blue-ish green . .
. . . or the particularly elusive blue-ish, green-ish,
blue-green hue of Scotch Mist.
To
paraphrase a well-known president - what part of
the word "blue" don't you understand?
Re:
I've got the JAAF Blues
Posted
By: Franek Grabowski <frantag@friko4.onet.pl>
Date:
Wednesday, 14 August 2002, at 7:11 a.m.
In
Response To: I've got the JAAF Blues (Nick Millman)
Sorry
Nick but you've presented absolutely NO EVIDENCE!
Perception
of colour is quite an interesting however very
long subject. Least to say everyone of us is
seeing in different way.
The
colour seen is also very prone to the surrounding
colours as well as lighting conditions. The colour
seen against deep blue sky or in the sunshine will
be much different from the same seen in moderate
conditions.
As
an interesting sample I may say that a renowned
Luftwaffe colour reasearcher and a friend of mine
was once examining the bit of fabric from the
German a/c. Having it outdoor in nice sunny
weather he found it a good match for RLM74 or dark
blue gray as described in CEAR. Nevertheless,
being a pro, he took out his paint chips and much
to his surprise found the colour was pristine
RLM70!
I
wouldn't bother much with the pilot's account
either. Please have in mind that apart of natural
trouble with perception of colours, perhaps
multiplied by being in the air, he was in highly
emotional condition with plenty of adrenaline. He
was simply 'on drugs', so it's natural his
perception was rather limited.
Finally
concerning CEARs, quite recently I had a
disscussion concerning certain Fw 190. CEAR stated
that the a/c had numerals with white outline while
photos showed them black! I suppose that hand
written note 'with outlines' became 'white
outlines' during typing the report. Such errors
are unfortunatelly common in those reports and
they should be backed by other evidence.
I
wouldn't be surprised if those 'Peregrine Falcons'
(Japanese names are so pretty, why you use US
ones? ;) ) were in dark green-grey colour without
any tint of blue!
Evidence
Posted
By: Nick Millman
Date:
Thursday, 15 August 2002, at 9:17 a.m.
In
Response To: Re: I've got the JAAF Blues (Franek
Grabowski)
I
think you are getting mixed up between EVIDENCE
and PROOF.
The
various researches provide EVIDENCE but may not
PROVE the existence of blue painted JAAF aircraft
beyond a reasonable doubt.
Your
dismissal of the evidence provides no
counter-evidence and your dismissal of the visual
evidence which I cited is more subjective than
that evidence itself. i.e. you are doubting its
veracity on supposition. You are supposing that
the combat and intelligence reports were mistaken.
Were they? How do you know? It is a huge leap of
faith for you to propose the dogma that trauma
induces distorted colour perception. Scientific
medical evidence indicates that the brain actually
processes information more slowly, and therefore
more meticulously, during adrenalin surges (hence
the feeling that everything goes into slow motion
during a traffic accident for example).
Primary,
contemporary accounts and descriptions are
historical evidence and of value. We may doubt
them or believe them subjective but they are
nevertheless evidence - albeit not proof! It is
the sifting and evaluation of historical evidence
which makes the study of history so rewarding.
Dismissing primary visual, verbal and written
evidence out of hand is a flawed approach to
historical research and if applied to the era
before photography would result in an historical
"black hole".
My
own personal, objective view is that there is more
evidence for blue JAAF aircraft existing than not
existing. An old saying goes "there is no
smoke without fire".
This
topic always seems to stimulate passionate views.
Re:
Evidence
Posted
By: Nick Millman
Date:
Thursday, 15 August 2002, at 1:55 p.m.
In
Response To: Re: Evidence (Franek Grabowski)
Well,
I don't believe I have accepted these sources
"blindly"!
I
proposed a number of "pieces" of
evidence to support the likely use of blue paint -
only one of which was a combat report - and a
rather detailed combat report at that. The combat
report tends to corroborate the other evidence. Is
it a reliable report? I don't know - but to
dismiss it as unreliable on the basis of your
experience with ETO reports is a bold conclusion
indeed! With the greatest respect, I suggest that
to challenge the reliability of a document you
have not even seen by comparing it to the
"type of documents" you know well cannot
be a credible methodology. Is that not blindly
refusing to accept them?
The
intelligence report (not combat report) I referred
to was not written by memory but was a
contemporaneous record of what was seen close at
hand when analysing the remains of abandoned JAAF
aircraft. The inclusion of measured dimensions (of
markings) and sketches suggests the analysis was
meticulous and I cannot believe such a witness
would record "green" as "blue"
because of some trick of the light. The more so
because the presence of green, "olive",
"bright" and "dark" was also
recorded! If this is not evidence then I don't
know what is!
Jim
Lansdale has positively refuted your assertion
that there is no record of JAAF blue paint so I
will not linger on that topic - other than to
reiterate that Thorpe identified a dark blue paint
- possibly from the study of relics - as A22 - and
associated it with a Ki-100 of the 5th Sentai. Jim
has gone further in presenting some very
fascinating further evidence of blue Oscars from
more than one respected and learned source.
I
cannot accept your proposition that unusual colour
schemes would not have escaped the camera and that
therefore the absence of photographs is negative
evidence. To begin with, Jim has rightly pointed
out that true colour cannot be accurately
determined from monochrome images. We are not
talking about silver or yellow Oscars, but dark
blue ones - any discernable difference between
dark blue and dark green in a monochrome image is
inconclusive either way.
Further,
there were almost 6,000 Oscars produced. The known
photographs of Oscars account for only a small
proportion of the total. The absence of
photographs of Oscars in "unusual
schemes" proves nothing.
Finally,
I cannot usefully comment on your assertion that
stress induces a "blueish" caste to what
is seen nor that recollections become hazy. We are
all individuals with individual capabilities,
characteristics and flaws. A witness is not a
witness per se. Some are more reliable than
others; some blessed with almost photographic
recall of exceptional clarity - others only able
to provide the vaguest of details. I would expect
combat reports to reflect that individuality.
What
makes them fascinating is that they are direct
windows to historical events, warts and all. When
something in them links to something else they may
become valuable. My open mind accepts them as
potentially valid pieces of a bigger picture - but
hardly "blindly".
If
the possibility of blue Oscars has been
persuasively presented from an accumulation of
evidence - which I believe it has - then surely
Flt Lt "Jimmy" James' Oscar with
"dark blue fuselage paintwork", its very
red roundels outlined in a darker red, is more
rather than less likely? If that is the case, his
report could be considered reliable.
What
was the reason for this colour? Was this colour
originally blue or the result of a colour shift -
a change? Now that - that - is the worthy
objective of our further research!
Re:
Evidence
Posted
By: Franek Grabowski <frantag@friko4.onet.pl>
Date:
Thursday, 15 August 2002, at 3:54 p.m.
In
Response To: Re: Evidence (Nick Millman)
Regarding
PCRs, ICRs, CEARs etc.
Personal
Combat Reports are the reports filled by
individual airmen after the sortie. It's important
to note that the available reports were retyped
and often altered to be more readable (IIRC This
was eg. the case of one of PCRs of Franciszek
Surma of 308 Sqn). Very often an airman after the
combat was barely able to say any logical words!
Sometimes
pilot's recollections do not agree with PCR
statements but this not neccessarilly means the
pilot is wrong. This was the case of Michal Cwynar
and his victory on 30.07.1944. The PCR was short
and described events in quite a different way
rather than the pilot 50 years later. Luckily the
cine-camera film survived and prooved the PCR to
be wrong.
Most
important for any such document is the personality
of the man writing it. I've seen the ones covering
both sides of paper as well as the ones quiting
after few sentences. Samples are eg. PCRs of F/L
Johny Kent and on the opposite of the Sgt
Szaposznikow both of 303 Sqn.
Very
important was also experience of an airman who
took part in the combat. As recalled by Don Lopez,
Witold Urbanowicz impressed him very much with his
ability to describe the events of combat. Please
note that the latter had at the moment over 10
years of flying and 16 downed a/c on his account.
To compare, Francis Gabreski on his very first ETO
sortie was unable to note Fw 190 though he was
already quite experienced pilot!
Intelligence
Combat Reports known also as Intelligence Patrol
Reports are the general reports based on PCRs as
well as oservations of other pilots. They're fully
comparable with PCRs concerning their reliability.
Captured
Enemy Aircraft Reports are the reports filled
after the capture of enemy aircraft or significant
bits of it. Sometimes very detailed, sometimes
give just only basic comments. The CEAR for two
Croat Me 109s was rather not very detailed,
nevertheless it gave wrong colour of codes (white
instead of black) and caused general confusion re.
version of the enemy a/c stating G-6 instead of
G-14. Another for Fw 190 captured at Melsbroek
gave wrong colour of codes outline again confusing
black for white. Regarding the colours, they're
usually described in rather vague way thus
allowing no specific conclusions. Comment that
'upper surfaces were green' doesn't help a lot
having in mind most of Lw camo colours may be
percepted this way. CEAR of the German glider (Go
242 IIRC) stated however the ship was in blue-grey
scheme contradicting RLM rules. Luckily a bit of
fabric survived (this was mentioned in my previous
posts) and confirmed the colour to be absolutelly
correct Black Green.
This
can be followed longer but I hope it's enough. I
think it will be covered in good detail in the
forthcoming book on Lw colours.
Concerning
the particular CEAR of JAAF aircraft, this
indicates only that the a/c were in different
colours. But you can't be sure if there weren't
any errors commited during the retyping the report
(originally handwritten) or ability of the man to
differentiate specific shades. He doesn't use
knowledgeable terms in kind of light ochre,
brunswick green or paris blue nor use any kind of
paint chips for comparison. Indeed he describes
the colours in rather general way!
Going
back to the blues, Jim Lansdale was unable to
present any proof of EXTERNAL use of blue colour.
As noted previously Thorpe's book is now 30 years
old. If it was as accurate as Lw books then it
can't be used as a reference any more.
Of
course if there's any material evidence of dark
blue A22 then the whole matter could look in very
different way. However where is that evidence?
Aren't the Akimoto interviews the only source for
the colour? For God's sake, if there was a bit of
a/c with blue used by Thorpe it must be somewhere
around!
Regarding
the photos I've referred to the Lw a/c which are
quite well photographed both in colour and
B&W. There're also plenty of relics and
related documents.
Perhaps
the situation with IJAAF is not that good but I
don't think it's that bad. In this particular case
we've two Ki-43 painted in unusual way and plenty
of US soldiers who either had Ektachromes or
enough time to get some souvenirs. Something
certainly must have survived. I suppose units
present at the airfield are known and presumably
there're some associations for them.
Finally
regarding "blueish" caste and stress,
those are two different things. Due to lighting,
blue sky, kind of haze being in the air everything
tends to be percepted in blue. For example one of
the An-2s that we've here in Warsaw is painted in
US Navy scheme of blue and yellow. Up to 500m it's
clearly recognisable, up to 1000m is well visible
however wings' colour is not so clearly yellow,
over that height you can't notice the a/c at all
as it blends against the sky!
I
may additionally quote here Tom Cleaver as to his
observations of colour in the air.
'As
an air-to-air photographer I am constantly
aware
of what I am looking at, and I have the time to
actually "see it" as more than a shape,
which I don't think a pilot in combat really does.
I have seen a light blue airplane become
"gold" with the sun on it at a low angle
(early morning or late afternoon). I've seen
airplanes become red when they were actually
silver. It all depends.'
Shock
and adrenalin is another matter, one of my friends
was a pilot in the Sonderkommando Elbe and
actually rammed a B-17. He doesn't remember
anything and laughs of those who claim they
remember! Few months before the ram he was downed
by Allied fighters and actually it was myself who
gave him description of the action and his
downing. Again he practically remembered only mass
of flames that blew in front of him! Of course at
certain moment the man gets used to it but I don't
think there were too many who lived so long.
Coming
to F/L "Jimmy" James' account there're
following questions.
How
many combats he had before this one?
What
was the weather and time?
What
was the height and position towards the sun as
well as range to e/a?
What
was the landscape?
The
one however must have in mind that James'
observations are only the things he saw and that
there's just too large marigin of error. As long
as there's no other evidence referring to this
particular Hayabusa it's just only statement of
Allied pilot.
Re:
Evidence
Posted
By: Nick Millman
Date:
Friday, 16 August 2002, at 12:49 a.m.
In
Response To: Re: Evidence (Franek Grabowski)
The
first part of your reply, (apart from appearing to
assume I don't know the difference between the
various types of reports) merely underpins my own
position that they reflect the characteristics of
the individual completing them. Some may be more
reliable - others less so.
Regarding
the intelligence report I cannot be sure there
were not errors - you cannot be sure there were -
but assessing the report and its information as a
whole I do not believe it contains errors. You
have not seen it - I have - so I am in a better
position than you to assess its accuracy. You are
dismissing its evidence on a generality and on the
basis of other documents of questionable relevance
- I am referring to that evidence as a
corroborative component of a broader hypothesis.
Going
on to Jim Lansdale; we are back to evidence and
proof again. Jim has weighed in with further
credible evidence for blue aircraft. Regarding
Thorpe - you have articulated a perfunctory
dismissal of the whole book on the basis of its
age and a questionable reference to "Lw"
books. I do not believe there is the slightest
point in comparing the history of the study of
JAAF colour schemes to that of the Luftwaffe.
Historians tend not to dismiss a source out of
hand but to use it to sift and weigh evidence. The
evidence for A22 is provided by Thorpe and
corroborated by the later works of others - the
existence of combat and intelligence reports
referring to blue Oscars adds more weight. You
cannot seriously expect me to believe, sir, that
the only historic evidence you accept is a
tangible piece of metal in your hand or a colour
photograph (and I'm not even going to explore the
question of provenance or the vagaries of colour
reproduction)?
On
the photographic front you again compare JAAF
aircraft to Luftwaffe aircraft. There is no
comparison. Learned researchers have argued long
and hard over Luftwaffe colours for many years,
despite well documented standards, colour chips
and a wealth of colour photographs. JAAF data is
sparse in comparison and definitive conclusions
not so easily drawn.
Whilst
I appreciate the anecdotal references to the AN-2,
Tom Cleavers opinion and the recollection (or
non-recollection) of one member of Sonderkommando
Elbe, none of it provides evidence against the use
of dark blue paint by the JAAF or a reliable
refutation of "Jimmy" James observation.
I
have a list of Japanese aircraft paints, very
kindly provided to me by Joern Leckscheid and I
believe sourced from Owaki-san. This includes the
following:-
No.3
Hairanshoku "Dark Blue Grey"
No.
32 Kokuranshoku "Dark Blue"
No.13
Ao-iro "Sea Blue"
No.17
Tanseishoku "Medium Blue-Grey"
Weighing
all the evidence I think it very likely that some
JAAF aircraft were painted blue (or a colour that
became blue) and I am confident that further
evidence of this, and the reason(s) for it, will
come to light.
Re:
Evidence
Posted
By: Franek Grabowski <frantag@friko4.onet.pl>
Date:
Friday, 16 August 2002, at 7:53 a.m.
In
Response To: Re: Evidence (Nick Millman)
All
the time I've tried to show you, your evidence is
too vague. While I can't proove your reports are
wrong, you can't find any evidence they're
correct. And as yet the only first hand (or almost
first hand) evidence are those few Allied reports.
The
fact of use the blue colour on internal systems by
Japanese aviation is no good evidence either as
every AF had own colours to designate piping etc.
and that not means there were quantities of those
paint and will to use them on external surfaces.
Regarding
Thorpe's book, the fact that wealthy archive
material was declassified, released and allowed
for copying in 1970s and later on, says all on the
subject.
You
wrote:
"You
cannot seriously expect me to believe, sir, that
the only historic evidence you accept is a
tangible piece of metal in your hand or a colour
photograph (and I'm not even going to explore the
question of provenance or the vagaries of colour
reproduction)?"
Why
not? I can add few more Japanese documents and/or
accounts that would be acceptable but I
definetelly don't accept intel reports or post war
memories on such a subtle subject as an colour!
You
tend not to accept my comparisons to Lw research
as well as any of my comparisons. OK. But please
have in mind that the comparison analysis is known
method of research also in historical one. Having
in mind my experience with research of ETO, I've
presented my humble opinion on Japanese Blues.
It's absolutely up to you what conclusions you
draw.
PS
I've found an detailed description of black Tojo
in China 1943, I'll post it separatelly.
Re:
I've got the JAAF Blues: Increasing Knowledge!
Posted
By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date:
Wednesday, 14 August 2002, at 1:03 p.m.
In
Response To: Re: I've got the JAAF Blues (Franek
Grabowski)
One
of the problems we have with the documentation of
the IJA use of a "blue" color scheme is
that, IIRC, there are no relics from these birds.
The second best proof of color is color
photography. However, no color photography, that I
know of, exists illustrating the use of blue paint
on Oscars only artistic interpretations.
However,
Nick MILMANN is able to quote some CEARs (more
than one, I believe) from the CBI and I am able to
corroborate the Larry HICKEY research. According
to documents in intelligence files researched by
Larry, two or three Oscars captured at Cape
Gloucester, New Britain I., were painted
"blue."
Of
course, we are a long way from the precise shade
of "blue," and it is very probable that
these schemes were unit specific. What we need to
do is more research (and, it is on-going!)
regarding the unit/s which served in both the CBI
and on New Britain which may have used this scheme
and/or the discovery of further documentry
evidence.
On-going
research and the accumulation of documentation
leads to our increased knowledge. We are
undergoing an evolution in the discovery of
information regarding the Japanese use and
application of camouflage and unit markings since
the pioneer work of Don THORPE in 1968.
There
was such an evolution in knowledge regarding the
Luftwaffe schemes and unit markings which occurred
following the work of Karl RIES Jr. (which was
first published in 1963).
Work
in the area of Japanese camouflage and markings is
progressing more slowly because the Germans kept
more precise and extensive records than Japan.
AND, more of the German records survived the
ravages of war than those of Japan.
Re:
I've got the JAAF Blues: Increasing Knowledge!
Posted
By: Franek Grabowski <frantag@friko4.onet.pl>
Date:
Wednesday, 14 August 2002, at 2:06 p.m.
In
Response To: Re: I've got the JAAF Blues:
Increasing Knowledge! (James F. Lansdale)
I'd
answer in points to make it clearer.
1.
Relics are always useful but the one should've
always in mind that the paintwork is very prone
for discoloration. Sun, air, soil, etc. all are
causing changes in paint formula. Without detailed
research of the latter eg. by art academy, we
can't be sure of anything.
2.
I wouldn't overestimate colour photography.
Reproduction of colours is still far from perfect
with modern films not to mention those old
Ektachromes. Additionally there're many factors
like lighting, exposition, development, etc. that
causes discoloration. Also very often the
differencies in colours are very subtle. See the
famous example of 357(?)FG Mustangs being painted
on the top with dark green paint and sometimes
represented as blue ones. I had played some time
with the scan of original wartime slide (so first
generation) and was unable to shift colours as
they should look.
3.
I'm able to quote some CEARs as well as PCRs from
ETO/MTO giving wrong or misleading information.
Most obvious are yellow Fw 190s, silver Me 109s or
German a/c in British camouflage during BoB (they
aren't friendly fire). Those are only second-hand
documents of someone's perception. If my friend
had trouble recognising the specific and standard
colour and he's more than well known researcher
with his work still being considered as a major
achievement in the Lw colours research, so what
could have been experienced by an IO with usually
limited interest with the subject.
4.
It's obvious the research goes further on and the
knowledge of 1960s-1970s seems funny now. I'm
pretty sure we'd have a lot of laugh seeing our
comments beyond next 20 years. The research is
still going on. I think however the major limiting
factor is the Japanese language as well as some
cultural differences limiting the access to
privately-held documents and testimonies of
veterans.
5.
I'm not denying existence of blue camouflages in
IJAAF, nevertheless I don't see any proof of their
existence rather than wishful thinking. Sorry, but
something more serious must be found to support
such thesis. As yet I don't think there's even any
logical thesis supporting such scheme.
Re:
I've got the JAAF Blues: Increasing Knowledge!
Posted
By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date:
Wednesday, 14 August 2002, at 8:27 p.m.
In
Response To: Re: I've got the JAAF Blues:
Increasing Knowledge! (Franek Grabowski)
I
agree with you!
All
we have are a few contemporary intelligence
reports, which have often contained errors,
stating that there were blue Oscars found in the
field. And some modern folks stating that this
constitutes insufficient proof that blue Oscars
did in fact exist.
To
me the balance is, at the moment, tilting toward
the view which maintains the existance of such a
scheme.
The
future may bring us more evidence and time will
tell!
Re:
I've got the JAAF Blues
Posted
By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date:
Tuesday, 13 August 2002, at 5:30 p.m.
In
Response To: I've got the JAAF Blues (Nick Millman)
Larry
HICKEY has some intelligence reports and/or CEARs
which detail and document Oscars with a top
surface of blue paint found in New Guinea. I may
have a copy of that report somewhere.
However,
I will first check with Larry before going into
this further. I believe Larry had some proprietary
interest in this information which, IIRC, he was
planning to use in an up-coming publication.
The
bottom line is, there is very credible evidence of
the use of a "blue" finish on Oscars.
Photos in b/w do not reveal this nor have any
relics from such Oscars surfaced, only material in
contemporary intelligence reports!