Another question on Guynemer's N.17 1550/1530

davecww1 · 15 February 2009, 05:59 PM

OK I have another question, and I'm still not sure if the serial # is N 1550 or N 1530, the photos I have seen sure look like 1550.
Anyway my question is on the center section on the camouflaged wing. Originally I know they were clear cellon panels, but looking at the photos of the plane they definately look opaque to me. But the center wooden brace is also visible in the photos. Wondering if the clear panel became damaged if it would be a field replacement to just recover with unpainted linen and put a layer of dope on it. Looks unpainted to me but any other ideas? it is definately lighter than the painted camouflage but not at all glossy looking. See the attached photos - one is from Georges Guynemer Aces & Aeroplanes 2 by Dennis Hylands.
Thanks,
Dave

WarrenD · 15 February 2009, 06:17 PM

Dave, I corresponded with Dr. Glen Merrill on this a/c a good while back posing some of the same questions. Dr. Merrill said that the cellon panel on this a/c had been painted over. Something I plan to replicate on the 1/72nd Eduard Noop that is lying forlorn on the shelf waiting for me to get through with school.

Warren
PS: This is my favorite all-time WWI mount. I have called it "Frankenstien" and "George's Jalopy" because it was made from spare parts. I've got some other things planned for this one as well.

davecww1 · 15 February 2009, 07:08 PM

Hi Warren,
one of my favorites as well. Looking at the photos the cellon section is definately lighter than the surrounding area, but in the second photo I posted it looks almost like the light shining through the cellon panel or else it is just a light unpainted CDL. What do you think about that idea?
Dave

WarrenD · 15 February 2009, 07:19 PM

Personally, I think that someone, at some point in time, slapped a coat of that green or brown paint that the Noops were wearing for whatever reason. (Private! That cellon panel is all dingy, looks bad. Slap some paint on it!) I ahve seen some pics of an upturned Noop that had camo wings, and you could still see light coming through, although more dimly than you would CDL. I just think it is a thin coat of paint.
Also, note how on this Noop, and you will note this on others, but not all, has a somewhat two-tone coloration to the enduit metalliase (sp?) on the fuselage. That fabric that covers the top, and overlaps slightly to the sides is a bit lighter.

You know, I can see it now. George makes it back to the 'drome after his harrowing experience of cracking up his Noop, tells his mechanic that he is in need of a new mount. Said mechanic tells Mon Capitain "If you can wait a day or two, I'll have something you'll just love". He puts together this parts-plane for him. Why would Georges Guynemer fly a parts-plane? There's a part of me that wants to think his mechanic souped it up to scream like my mom's old GTO. Every time I see a pic of that a/c the song Little Deuce Coupe runs through my head.

Warren
PS: You know, I have often wondered, if Guynemer flew #2, who got #1?

davecww1 · 15 February 2009, 08:28 PM

Hi Warren,
Easy answer is #1 went to Brocard, he was the Squadron commander and gave out the numbers. so of course he got #1.
As far as repainting the panels with the camouflage colors, the photos don't suggest that, if they used the same colors as the camouflage then they would not look so light in the photo, even if painted on very thin. My idea that it was cdl (at least when these photos were taken) is that you can definately see two light strips in both photos with dark area where the wooden center section spars were. So either they did not paint over the wooden rib (seems highly unlikely) or else the new fabric was not painted and remained translucent. That's my idea and I think I'll stick with it!
Dave

WarrenD · 16 February 2009, 03:15 AM

It's your a/c, and quote Monty Python: "It's only a model".

I always thought that since the paint went over two different types of materials (celluloid vs. fabric) that it would result in two different types of reflectivity.

Warren

Cliff · 16 February 2009, 10:42 AM

Dave

The aircraft number IS 1530, you can see the difference between the two middle numbers in your second pic. The font for the numbers had a solid horizontal stroke at the top of the '3' and a lighter 'dot' and vertical for
the '5'.

As for the centre section, the underside looks transparent as you can see the faint shadows of the structure behind (your pic 2).
The top does look painted (your pic 1). You can't see any shadow of the structure below. It's definitly lighter than the wing camo colours , but looks about the same tone of grey as the surround of the top wing, so maybe painted over in cdl, silver or blue?? (It was decide in a recent Windsock article that the surround on the Nieuport 11 was blue, what colour was used on the N17?)

Cliff

WarrenD · 16 February 2009, 03:00 PM

Cliff,
IIRC blue was used on the wing surround on the Nie.17 as well. It could be painted blue, hadn't considered that.

Warren

davecww1 · 16 February 2009, 03:46 PM

Yes it appears that the early Nieuport 17's with camouflaged wings used the horizon blue tapes outlining the wing, maybe that would be a way to go.
Dave

Cigogne · 25 February 2009, 11:40 AM

Another reason this doesn't look so transparent is the angle of sight. The front 3/4 view would only show the wooden rib/spars through the transparency. Also, cellon would get dingy and more opaque due to the castor oil spray. Could that perhaps be what you are looking at here?