"US Navy Aviation retro paint schemes" Topic

This is one of the retro paint schemes being used by select aircraft for the 100th anniversary of US Navy Aviation.

Here's is an A-6E Prowler from VAQ-129, trapping aboard USS Ronald Reagan over Veteran's Day weekend.

is there any point in camouflaging an aircraft anymore?

Aside from it looks really cool?

I bet the ACM crowd still sees small benefits from various camo schemes applied to aircraft. But if you expect most or the action to be the result of radar detected missile shots, then probably not.

Are weapons used against aircraft within visual range any more?

All the best,

John.

Camo still has a purpose, especially for those aircraft that play close to ground troops. Probably half or more of all AA guns are still effectively visual range weapons, and a camo pattern may give you a split-second advantage in a dogfight.

And the powers that be thought that the end of the dogfight was 50 years ago, until *their* powers that be said 'you must make a positive ID of aircraft as hostile'

Back further guys. Lets have the gray body and yellow wings with the stripes and the properly colored tail and nose. Imagine a Hornet with a bright red nose, gray body, yellow upper wings with the red squad leaders stripe and the blue tail of the USS Enterprise (1937) Oh, and the red fuselage band numbered 4-F-1. Totally cool. If I could still build aircraft and paint I'd be sorely tempted. For those who might, here's a really good site on markings for the period.

link

At this tie CAW1 is assigned to the Enterprise and VF-11 The Red Rippers are on board. Perfect for the old color scheme since they served in it at one time.

They could sell sponsorships and advertising, so the planes look like NASCAR racecars. Could offset budget cuts.

Here's a few more photos of various retro schemes for the Centenary of Naval Aviation.

link

Today it is much easier to determine friend from foe. The Rusian method of controling the aircraft by radar has resultem in AWACS (In darkest day in blackest night no evil shall escape my sight. Wonder why AWACS hasn't adopted Green Lantern as their nickname?) watches aircraft from takeoff to landing and probably knows what the pilot said just before he climbed in the cockpit. There is always the possibility you would close to gun range, but the likelihood is much less than it was. Next up I expect there to be stealthed AAM's if we even bother with manned a/c. More likely we will see unmanned a/c, perhaps uprated F-22's and F-35's and then a smaller unmanned fighter/bomber. There really is no longer any need for a man in the cockpit, particularly since you can build cheaper and not risk a multimillion dollar asset (the pilot) in a dogfight. Imagine having pilots who can fly for literally 30 or 40 year with all the experience that entails along with the fact that there is going to be a lot less stress, physical and mental on the pilot. In a long war (not likely) or multiple wars, the same "old man" could continue to fly. Cost of training pilots goes down. Imagine a 65 year old pilot with 150 kills to his credit and all he has learned in the last forty years at his command. Or a 15 year old with 50 kills. Kids playing video games and doing well at it would make excellent pilots with a reaction time that it is hard to beat, and sitting inside a rock of a fortress without the danger of dieing in the war.

We may not want to take the human equation out of war though. This is a bad thing to say, but without human deaths there is no reason to quit fighting a war.

That new Navy Working Uniform scheme would be a nightmare to paint on a model.

The new Navy Working Uniform is dumb, period. "Aquaflage" is ridiculous. In one of the last issues of Proceedings, a senior Chief wrote a column that took some guts, basically calling B.S. on the new uniform as a ridiculous "me-too" that was a grotesque waste of dollars in today's environment. It looks as bad, and purposeless, on the Bug as it does on the sailors. The column was calling for a return to the more practical previous uniform.

And that camo scheme on a jet is headache-inducing.

I think it's neat…

No, Navy Working Uniform is designed to closely match the typical paints used onboard ship. Because there's always wet paint somewhere, you always have paint and/or grease-spots on the uniform. So you replaced you dungarees or utility uniform about every two weeks in port. You couldn't even wear coveralls *on the piers* at most of the bases I visited, and those were supposed to be the Shipboard Working Uniform.

I wanna see some F18s in the classic 3-tone blue scheme.

Hey Lion, don't wait on the Navy, just up and do one.

That F-18F would really mess with someone's head in flight. It is hard to focus on even in the pictures.