The other day I was talking to a friend who has a 1/9 scale RC B-17. He said that the silver paint on it weighs about 10 pounds. He said that on a B-17 aircraft, the total weight of the OD/Neutral Gray could be as much as 5000 pounds!!! I was amazed; had no idea that paint could weigh so much. 5000 pounds is close to a bomb load. No wonder the USAAF went to NMF as soon as they could.
Is this figure close to accurate? Thanks.
Wes W.
QuoteThe weight of paint could reach 500 lbs or more on a Flying Fortress
http://www.taphilo.com/history/wwii/USAAF/Boeing/index.shtml
(And that link also says that modern paint weighs about half as much as WWII paint).
I think the guy has got slightly confused - I'm also highly sceptical about 10 lbs of paint on a 1/9 scale aircraft.
I did read something about one of the recent RAF anniversary schemes (might have been the RAF 95th, or the 3Sqn 100th, but I can't remember) where they had to be careful to mask off each area and only apply one coat when painting (so no overspraying of colour on colour etc) because the weight of the paint would upset the centre of gravity of the aircraft.
Thinking about it, if you paint a room in your house you might go through a couple of 5-litre tins of paint, which weigh a couple of kilos each. I know some of it evaporates off (whatever the solvent is), but it's not insignificant...
Agree that the 5000 lbs is high, think Mr. Creek has a good source. A 747 paint job may be around 700 pounds, but varies, and the wings are often unpainted. Type of primer and color shade makes a difference.
I did some research into this subject years ago.....I was thinking of a C-130 that had multiple layers of paint and wondered what it weighted. I can't recall exactly, but thought it was higher than I had at first thought.
Now I was just thinking of the weight of a can of spray, and how many it would take to cover an aeroplane !
:cheers:
Quote from: sandiego89 on February 12, 2014, 05:59:49 PMA 747 paint job may be around 700 pounds, but varies, and the wings are often unpainted. Type of primer and color shade makes a difference.
According to this: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_05/textonly/fo01txt.html 555 lbs without the wings painted.
What's interesting is that the operating cost is ~$130,000/ year HIGHER if the aircraft is unpainted!
(Although I don't know if that extra accounts for fuel saved by not lifting the extra weight of paint).
Dependent on the user,
RAF Transport a/c such as VC10's had upto 11 layers of paint on the fuselage.
It added up on the in service weight to around a ton(2400lb), mainly as it's not ''standard paint'', it can be polyurethane finish, glossy weighs more than matt and it has to stay on at a wide temp variation and weather conditions, unlike your lounge/house paint.
BA engineers on site at BZZ back in the 80's, when we took over the Tristar fleet, said paint weight was a major factor on long haul aircraft and as such was a major consideration as it could commercially make or break a routes profitability. Not sure how accurate he was, but if your airframe weighs more that leaves less for payload.
Thanks to everyone for their answers. One of the answers brings up another question on how paint is applied to real aircraft. If I am building a model of, say an F-105 in SEA cammo, I will paint the entire top and sides tan (lightest color), and then add medium green and dark green in the appropriate places on top of the tan. This means there are some areas with at least three layers of paint. On the real thing, is a similar procedure done, or are the various colors just applied where they are needed?
Thanks.
Wes W.
I've a picture of USAF techies painting an aircraft in theatre in 'Nam
They had masking tape and brown wrapping paper over areas they didn't want to paint. I'd surmise that they 'mask' the same as we modellers do, just to a much larger scale.
I know RAF VC10's were masked and spray painted on the fuselage, and roller brushes and trays were used for applying coroguard/wing finish on the undersides of the wings
Thanks for the answer. This does lead into another area of aircraft painting, particularly for cammo. How exactly is a cammo scheme decided upon, and does the military service use models to test out various schemes. I would very much like to know how the USAF SEA schemes came to be for all of the aircraft; I can just picture several dozen F-105 models with many different patterns, shades, sizes of insignia, etc in an office at TAC or the Pentagon. Sounds like it would have been a great job for modelers to assist with!!
Wes W.
Quote from: Mr.Creak on February 12, 2014, 07:34:31 PM
Quote from: sandiego89 on February 12, 2014, 05:59:49 PMA 747 paint job may be around 700 pounds, but varies, and the wings are often unpainted. Type of primer and color shade makes a difference.
According to this: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_05/textonly/fo01txt.html 555 lbs without the wings painted.
What's interesting is that the operating cost is ~$130,000/ year HIGHER if the aircraft is unpainted!
(Although I don't know if that extra accounts for fuel saved by not lifting the extra weight of paint).
Corrosion prevention adds to the cost of a NMF aircraft, I'd surmise, more time out of the sky and under inspection
Quote from: tigercat2 on February 13, 2014, 10:26:06 AM
Thanks for the answer. This does lead into another area of aircraft painting, particularly for cammo. How exactly is a cammo scheme decided upon, and does the military service use models to test out various schemes. I would very much like to know how the USAF SEA schemes came to be for all of the aircraft; I can just picture several dozen F-105 models with many different patterns, shades, sizes of insignia, etc in an office at TAC or the Pentagon. Sounds like it would have been a great job for modelers to assist with!!
Wes W.
I know the RAF tested various schemes in WWII on aircraft. Including some splinter schemes which look surprisingly "Luftwafer'ish". USN tested the Barclay schemes and the USAF tested various schemes before settling on the "Euro" schemes but not sure about SEA scheme. These were all done on actual aircraft rather then models but I assume they were drafted as the first part of the selection process.
Slightly off topic, I wonder how the weight of volcanic ash on the aircraft pictured here:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world/asia/ (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world/asia/)
affects their airworthyness??
Quote from: Rheged on February 15, 2014, 05:44:48 AM
Slightly off topic, I wonder how the weight of volcanic ash on the aircraft pictured here:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world/asia/ (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world/asia/)
affects their airworthyness??
I can't imagine the respective authorities letting them fly without having it swept off, and probably washed down too.
Quote from: Mr.Creak on February 12, 2014, 07:34:31 PMAccording to this: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_05/textonly/fo01txt.html 555 lbs without the wings painted.
What's interesting is that the operating cost is ~$130,000/ year HIGHER if the aircraft is unpainted!
Less drag...