Date: 16 Sep 97 02:35:28 From: Bill Chivers <Bill@chivcons.demon.co.uk> Organization: Chivers Consultants References: 1 2 3 4
View raw article or MIME structure
In article <airliners.1997.2109@ohare.Chicago.COM>, Marc Schaeffer <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes >Bill Chivers wrote: >> Recent research suggests that darker paint schemes are easier to see. >> Since the human eye spots things by shape and contrast, trying to >> contrast with a (usually) bright background (the sky) by having a bright >> paint scheme is pretty much a waste of time. >> >> Black, on the other hand, usually cause a good contrast with the >> background. >> >> A result of this is the the RAF has now adopted black paint scemes for >> its training aircraft (UK posters may have noticed black Hawks and ~~~~~~~~ >> Tucanos over the last couple of years). > >Sorry, but the RAF surely doesn't want it's a/c to be seen. The >interests for civil and military a/c painting jobs are certainly totally >different. I remember that in WW2 the 'Luftwaffe' had one of it's >Heinkel (?) a/c painted blue under the wings and grey/brown on the other >parts. They just didn't want to be seen. Of course this is especially >valid if you are in a conflict ... Please read my post carefully. The Hawks and Tucanos are the same ones that used to be painted in the white and red paint schemes, and are used for pilot training. Several fatal mid air collisions have occured over the last decade or so. Obviously the frontline aircraft need camoflage, but training aircraft need to be seen, just like civil aircraft. Bill Chivers 'my other signature file has something funny at the bottom of it'