"vehicle and aircraft insignia - What's the point?" Topic

Slow day at work – the mind wanders….

Been working on some WWII minnies and started to wonder, how much good could insignia on planes and tanks really do?
it seems to me by the time you got close enough to see the insignia on an airplane, your target has likely already spotted and opened fire on you.
Same thing with tanks – did they do any good other than provide an aiming point?

Maybe that is why they don't use them anymore.

Hi, i am deeply shocked about this Question.
This is the main differance between a combatant and a terrorist! This concept should be know by now as it is a key part of the convention of geneva.

To who are you refering as "they"?

greetings and have fun
:)

link

Summery from wki:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combatant
Privileged combatants

The following categories of combatants qualify for prisoner-of-war status on capture:
Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict
Members of militias not under the command of the armed forces, with the following traits:
that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
that of carrying arms openly;
that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.
Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.

After a dog fight or mission with multiple squadrons, it helped hasten the reorganization for the continuation of their respective missions or the return home to possibly different bases/ships.

An, methinks the bug has struck again.

Friendly fire was a big problem in WWII. The C-47 transports were always being mistaken for German Bombers, it was so much worse when you fielded captured equipment (which surprisingly enough, the Germans did quite regularly on the Eastern Front). You did anything you could to try to identify yourself to own side. The Germans even liked to put fake side armor over the treads for the Russian tanks they captured so that they would look 'more German'.

Besides, even if they couldn't see the markings when they started shooting, they would STOP when they DID see them.

Wave,

Please post only one pic with captured russian tanks converted to look more german, please?

I am very interrested in your source.

Greetings

As Rudi said, only those wearing or displaying an internationally recognized national symbol are protected by the Geneva Convention – otherwise you are just some guy on the battlefield and no one knows what you're doing there.

A quick google search of M1A1 doesn't show any tanks with white starts or US flags prominantly displayed like they were in WWII.

No, but most M1A1s do have the NATO chevron on the sides, which serves the same purpose.

I expect it helped traffic direction behind the lines too I the days before everyone had GPS, good radios etc.

Basically to aid in ID'ing the enemy from friendly forces. Sometimes the enemy used that to advantage. Robert

Anything that lessens the chance of being shot at by friendlies is a good idea, especially since enemy identification wasn't what it should have been between aircraft, ships, troops, etc.

Lots of examples of misidentification, and "friendly" attacks (an oxymoron if you ask me, since "friendly fire" isn't).

The AAC and USN went though a few variations from the beginning of the war till the end. The same as the US Army. Different types, sizes,colors,Location. Robert

USN removed the red dot from the US logo – too much like the Japanese "red sun"…

And the British removed the red from their roundels for the same reason (hence, the SEAC blue and white roundel).

I expect it helped traffic direction behind the lines too I the days before everyone had GPS, good radios etc.

All that radios and GPS do is mean that all Formations now arrive at the same embarkation point at the same time, all with their 4 mile tailback, and of course they are all 'Priority Units'!

The job of the unthanked, unloved Royal Military Police to bring forth order from chaos is as important as ever…

Opps my mistake. I meant the AAF not the AAC. The AAF and USN removed the dot by May 42. Robert

Shortly after D-Day many Sherman crews overpainted their white stars, in part because they tended to mark vulnerable parts of the tank. Later in the campaign you probably see as many Shermans without stars as with. As for people being protected by the Geneva Convention, since vehicle crews would have been wearing their national uniforms that isn't really in question. Mako11 is correct when he says that in large part it is a matter of IFF. Many of those Shermans that didn't have stars on the hull sides or turret sides had stars on top of the hull or turret to let the RAF and AAF know they were friendlies.

The British didn't as a rule use prominent national markings on their AFVs in WWII, with a few exceptions:

Small white square on some BEF vehicles.
White-red-white Operation Crusader flash for a few weeks in late 1941.
Red-white-red RAC flash in 1st Army 1943.
The 'Allied star' on the upper surface of vehicles in NW Europe 1944-45, for aerial identification purposes by the USAAF & RAF. Although some vehicles did have stars elsewhere on the body, this one was nearly universal & it was purely for IFF.

Anyone have any other examples?

They are national insignia. Why do regiments wear cap badges? Same thing.

Formation and tactical signs are of more practical use for sorting out traffic.

I think the chevron is one of the most subtle and misinterpreted of IFF symbols. Usually in a paint or material that has a different thermal loading than its background, done properly the direction of the chevron is visible for miles (pointing left, right, up or down). As the enemy does not know which direction they stymie themselves. Problem is that we now have vehicles from contingents that fought with KFOR, IFOR, Iraq and ISAF with different V shapes, most of which were wrong in the first place!

The Luftwaffe went from one style of national insignia to quite a few others during the war. This decal sheet shows some examples,

link
Robert

Wow – Truscott Trotter has a much better picture than I have.

It always seemed strange to me when I'd see a carefully camouflaged aircraft with a big (often brightly colored) national insignia prominently displayed in multiple locations, and, often, a brightly painted tail or cowling (presumably to distinguish one unit from another). It seemed rather self-defeating. Either you want to remain hidden, or you want to be easily identified, but trying to do both at once is ridiculous.

Please post only one pic with captured russian tanks converted to look more german, please?

THere are quite a few about, if you Google something like captured Russian/Soviet tank.

In fact, here is a whole thread dedicated to images of them: link

Not just Russian tanks either:

Geoff, I think Rudi is referring to

The Germans even liked to put fake side armor over the treads for the Russian tanks they captured so that they would look 'more German'.

not just painting markings on the side.

'Germanising' with side skirts is mentioned in several sources, but the vast majority of photos (ok, all but one so far) of converted T-34s show them without side skirts.

Most of the photos available showing side skirts are of models, and on the balance of probability I suspect would ultimately derive from that one source.

It's the cumultive disproportionate effect of the internet :-)

Geoff – I recall seeing pics of German tanks mocked up to look more like M10s in the Ardennes, or was that the internet?

"I recall seeing pics of German tanks mocked up to look more like M10s"

A handful of Panthers of Skorzenys Panzer Brigade 150 were so converted. Photos etc in the Concord special on the Panther. They also did a complete cut and shut job on some Stugs to make them into some sort of bizarre creation.

wrt the infamous side skirted Das Reich T34, there does only appear to have been one in the entire battalion as other photos of 2nd SSPR show plain T34s liberally plastered with cross.

Plonking a German cupola on the turret seems to have been more popular on T34s as well as other captured Sov tanks (such as the KV-2s slated for Malta).

I still wait for the pictures…. To my knowlage was the jagdverbqnd 150 the only unit ever to customize tanks and these were on the westfront. No russian tank was ever touched. Markings do not count.

And for the aircraft markings…. They only differ not in evolution but in location. On camo surface top side are the big spacing used and under the belly the small spacing.

Greetings and have fun

T-34 with added sheet metal around the turret and what looks like a Pz-III cupola. I don't know if this clearly makes it look "more German," but it sure looks like they tried to make the turret look less like that of a T-34 and break up the distinctive silhouette.

Wing insignia can be quickly covered by a tarp on the ground – the real reason for camo paint. USAAF aircraft with natural metal finishes were quickly ordered to be repainted when operating from forward bases in Normandy – this explains the P.47's you see with US markings but RAF camouflage.

The Soviet air forces deleted red stars from the upper wing surfaces of Russian built aircraft in 1940, and use of large red stars (not the small Guards insignia) on vehicles (other than lend lease) was very rare.

There would have been a practical purpose to adding a cupola to an early T-34 which otherwise would only have had a large and cumbersome turret hatch. There were a small number of Churchills 'field converted' in much the same manner by the British in Italy.

Number4,

Similarly, the Invasion Stripes were ordered to be removed from upper surfaces for the same reason from July 1944.

Yes, I forgot to mention that. Also the use of RAF paint was because it was done in a hurry and RAF paint was all that was immediately available in theater.

BTW pilots complained that a star looked too much like a cross in high speed dogfighting, so that is why USAAF aircraft carried the star on only one wing while USN and USMC aircraft in the Pacific carried them on both wings.

BTW pilots complained that a star looked too much like a cross in high speed dogfighting, so that is why USAAF aircraft carried the star on only one wing while USN and USMC aircraft in the Pacific carried them on both wings.

I thought it was an economy measure; is there an internet source?

Wing insignia can be quickly covered by a tarp on the ground …

Good point!

ScottS, your photos are very interesting. I think that this is an attempt to make the T-34 "look German". On the right hand (far) side of the hull you can see the front of the rail upon which schurzen could be hung. On the left side you can see three supports to which the aforementioned rail could be attached.

The structure around the turret could have been intended to make the T-34 look more like a Pz IV when seen in profile (from a distance), as would the dummy muzzle brake that's fitted.

As for 2nd SS T-34s with side skirts, there could have been at least three of them.

link

The second photo down has standard turret hatches, no apparent turret stowage bin, and camouflage painted side skirts

The fourth photo down, unfortunately pictured head-on, could have a turret stowage bin underneath the tarp on the reversed turret. It does appear to have side skirts.

The fifth photo down could be the same tank as in the fourth photo. The amount and placing of foliage is very similar, plus its turret appears to be reversed and has a tarp over it. It appears to have standard turret hatches, but if there is any camouflage painting on its side skirts it's not the same as the tank in photo 2.

Finally, the fifth photo down has very similar camouflage painting to its side skirts as photo 2, but it appears to have a turret stowage bin and probably a "German" cupola too.

So I submit that there could have been at least three of these vehicles with side skirts. But, of course, the vast majority appear not to have had them.