"Famous" Il-2 'Avenger' nose colour & was it real?

[krofire]

Hi Folks,

I have been doing a bit of digging on the topic of a "famous" late war Il-2 airframe. It had the word "Avenger" within an arrow under the cockpit and was active in the Berlin campaign April 1945 when it was subject of at least one propaganda photo. I can only find two references to it - one is a picture in "War in the Air" 126 whilst another is a side-view artwork in Crowood's 2004 "Ilyushin Il-2 & Il-10 Shturmovik". Seems strange for such a "famous" airframe!

Anyway - the gist of my research concerned the colour of the nose. I found the aircraft featured on the Aeromaster Decal sheet "Shturmoviks" nbr 3. Their artwork features a red nose extendng as far back along the airframe to the exhausts. The Crowood artwork does not, it shows red spinner only. The caption to the "War in the Air" book's photo says that the "front of the nose was painted in the colours of the Air Army". Hmmm - helpful! The photo is indistinct. Can anyone tell me what the nose colour was and how far back it extended? The aircraft was of the 16th Air Army.

A second point - this caption goes on to state that "there's an opinion that the white arrow and word "Avenger" were..... added by a photo-retoucher." Does anyone have any further photo's of this subject (nbr "25") that could confirm or deny this? I intend to model the subject and would hate to create a fictional one!

[Dark Green Man]

http://vvs.hobbyvista.com/DigitalModeling/monthly_profile/june06/june06.html

[krofire]

Thankyou DGM! Intriguing. Just what I was looking for as the photo featured is much clearer. However Erik's artwork showing no Red on the fuselage.  Aeromaster may have read too much into the "War in the Air" caption? Howerver Erik does not have a red Spinner contradicting "War in the Air". This remains a quandary as both the other sources predate Erik's work and both agree at least the spinner was red... Who to believe? Closer inspection of this photo shows a very sharp demacation line to the camo on the lower nose under the first exhaust pipe. Erik has interpreted this as Brown camouflage but it easily could be evidence for the alleged red nose. Probably an inspection of the original negatives may supply more information - a luxury we don't have. Dark red over dark brown is going to be difficult to spot.

Erik says that there have been "many photograph captions and attributations made of this aircraft, but to date nothing specific has been confirmed" but goes on to speculate that Berlin in 1945. However his work postdates the "War in the Air" book (published 2005) so he was not working in a complete vacuum - was he unaware of their other analysis? He goes on to suggest the aircraft was too clean but does not say the photo was retouched - rather the real aircraft was retouched for the photo. This is credible as photo-retouching tends to be easy to spot from the war years. Since Erik says these are stills from a 16mm film then this must rule out photo-retouching. However if this is a still from a movie it seems remarkabley clear. The "War in the Air" book author seems unaware of this as does anyone suggesting the photo was retouched. Difficult to know who to believe.  Can anyone tell me if there is anywhere where we can see this movie online? Are there any other books/online resources featuring these stills? Any proof this was from a movie at all?

I am not sure why a 1945 'arrow' would have wooden wings - seems puzzling. Do we know how many wooden-winged arrows were still around by the time of the Berlin campaign? Metal wings had been in production for a year by this point..... Guess it is impossible to tell but this is a real aircraft and I will model it with metal wings, a red nose, and let the debate rage... I'll post the photo's when done. Cheers.

[Dark Green Man]

there is some further discussion about this in the link below.
look for image links posted by Evgeniy Velichko to see more images of aircraft that appear to be in the same flight as 'Avenger'
in none of these photos do I see an arrow,inscription or Tactical Number.(bort number)
please come to you own conclusion on that.
[/color]
http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=11708

[Massimo Tessitori]

Hi,
I have looked at these photos with attention.
The thing that astonish me is that the plane with writing is photographed much more clearly than the planes aside, in much better light and focus.
In my idea, it's the photo of a real plane, but taken separately and glued on the original image of planes over Berlin.
Massimo

[krofire]

DGM/MT - cheers again. This is all good. The debate over at the 12 o'clock high forum was certainly heated! I'll not repeat it here but, point taken. We should always check for ourselves. In this case I think that I can see why these photo's lead to such debate. I don't think the propagandists in the Soviet Union during the GPW had Photoshop so the idea of them being able to blend in aircraft to these shots so well seems odd. Given the enormous variability between the shots I would take another and far simpler guess - they were taken by different photographers on different days. Yes, they show the same flight of aircraft with their white tails but I don't think that all the photo's were taken on the same date. Some look like stills from a 16mm movie. Some are of really bad quality. Some are exceptionally clear. The clearest showing our old friend "Avenger".

It is utter speculation but I suspect the photographers went to the front in the closing stages of the Berlin campaign for some stirring propoganda photos and were disappointed by the result. Dull aircraft and poor photo's. So they tried again with a better quality camera (maybe even a captured German one??) and got the ground crew to freshly paint up on of the aircraft to make a better photo. This may account for some of the photo's, but....

....a study of two of the photo's reveal one simply to be a close up of the other (clearer) one. They are identical. The fuzzy version shows no Arrow. The clear photo shows the arrow. These two photo's are probably the clearest evidence for the claimed retouch. If it is retouch then it is damn good. Quite remarkable because the touched up version is so incredibley clear. I feel dazed and confused now. Should probably sleep on it. But it looks as if the Aeromaster White 25 may not have existed after all. I must say I am disappointed!

It is a fascinating debate but I am none the wiser as to the 'red-nose-or-no-red-nose' debate! Seems academic now.

[Dark Green Man]

the good news is that if you still want to do this aircraft correctly (and are using Aeromaster sheet 48-349) eliminate decals 7 & 8,this will remove the arrow,number and slogan.
you will also have to eliminate decals 13 & 14 as the four red stripes for the rudder's trim tab are not there in the unaltered image.(you will just have to paint the trim tab white)

what is in the unaltered image are the white fronts to the landing gear 'pods' , the white band around the spinner and what also looks like a white starter connection at the tip of the spinner.(?)
since none of these features are on any other aircraft in the photo it just might be the regiment's commander or deputy commander.
if that is so then a red spinner is not beyond the realm of possibility if you wish to add some color to the model that would not otherwise be there.

you may also find this inspiring-to add a red nose or not.
[/color]
http://www.hyperscale.com/galleries/2002/il2m3cw_2.htm

[krofire]

OK - slept on it:




I brightened the fuzzy image and cropped the bright image and stuck them side by side. It reveals that both photo's are doctored and the bright version also appear to be a montage. The bombed ruins under the aircraft do not match the horizon or the countryside beyond. Once this distraction is removed I focussed on the differences between the two.

The mystery for me was exactly why the "touched-up" "Avenger" was so GOOD. Then it hits me. This may have been a real aircraft and it was not touched up afterall. We assumed the touch-up ADDED the "Avenger" arrow. We never questioned the more obvious solution - that these markings were airbrushed out in other copies of the photo. The sunshine on the fields beyond the aircraft indicate a part-sunny day which is consistent with the sunshine reflecting of the upper wing, wing root and tail surfaces. The dark fuselage patches are not consistent with this photo. A very close examination of the right-hand photo shows hard demarcation lines where a darker colour was applied over the photo to obscure details on nose and fuselage.

The giveaway is the fact that none of the aircraft pictured have numbers on them suggesting that they were removed to obscure their identities. Who knows why? The position of the White 25 is consistent with the picture of White 12 from the same Unit. None of the other photo's of aircraft from this unit show an aircraft with the white tipped undercarriage sponsons.

I indicate on the marked-up copy enclose where the touch ups have happened. The Rudder balance appears to have vanished in one photo. The tip of a propellor for an out-of-shot aircraft has also been removed. Cloud was added to the right-hand photo. I believe the rudder's trim tab was white but it is not clear if it was striped. The striping may just be shadows from internal ribbing. That remains a little mystery.

[John Thompson]

I had started to think the same thing - the image without the arrow is the retouched photo. I even tried the same experiment with changing the brightness and contrast of the photo after saving it, but I didn't get the same mottled effect when I tried it - possibly due to different software? The stumbling block is trying to guess why they would have removed the markings, though!

John

[krofire]

I actually have a bit more evidence on this matter. See below. I looked again at the "War in the Air" photo and - lo-and-behold - it is acually a different photo taken within a few moments of the other.



Unless we are to believe that the photo-retoucher bothered to retouch two photo's in identical fashion then we are left to assume that this is a genuine aircraft. Look at the "Avenger" arrow on both photo's. Absolutely identical. Even if the propogandists had wanted to retouch two photo's the chances of them doing such a perfect and identical job on two photo's is extremely remote. The only difference betwen the photo's is a mysterious white blob under the arrow on the right-hand photo. This photo also sheds more light on the striped rudder tab - it definitely looks as if it was really striped. I guess Aeromaster may have that one right.

By the way, the photo suggests that the aircraft immediately behind our subject also had its tactical code airbrushed out. Also the right-hand photo suggests that there is a black blob (courtesy of our retoucher?) obscuring the side of the nose. My thinking now is that these photo's were staged at the end of the war for propoganda purposes the photo's have subsequently been hacked around for various purposes. I found the full montage photo again in an old Time Life booked "The Epic of Flight - The Soviet Airforce at War". The caption was even more specific as it dates the photo to April 30th - the day Soviet Troops hoisted the red banner over the Reichstag.

I was interested in a comment by Chris Wauchop when he modelled this subject at http://www.hyperscale.com/galleries/2002/il2m3cw_2.htm (thanks DGM). He said the photo he had was not clear enough about the accuracy of the red nose. That debate should continue!

[Massimo Tessitori]

Hi Krofire,
thank you for finding two different images of the plane. 
So, it looks that the arrow and slogan are real.
Again, the first plane looks much clearer than the other ones on the background, possibly it had freshly repainted white markings. Who knows if it bore some lighter camo, at least on the nose, that puts in better evidence the details of the cowling side?
Massimo

[Dark Green Man]

I quote from :
Soviet Air Force Fighter Colours
by Erik Pilawskii
page 69 (in reference to a La-5FN with tactical number 36)[/color]

Above: a still taken from 16 mm movie film of the 159 IAP at Lavensaari in 1944.
the colouration of the La-5FN in the foreground is dramatically different from the machine just behind it,
causing some doubt as to the precise appearance of this shot-the numeral , star borders and rudder are all probably white.
such curiosities in appearance,changing with the field of focus,are not entirely uncommon on Soviet 16 mm film of the era.

so it seems to me that much of the questions about foreground vs. background aircraft are explained by it being 16 mm movie film vs. 35 mm print film.
[/color]

[Massimo Tessitori]

Hi,

so it seems to me that much of the questions about foreground vs. background aircraft are explained by it being 16 mm movie film vs. 35 mm print film.

It looks unconvincing to me. The film is not so clever to know how the lenses are focused, it just reacts to the quantity of light incoming on it.
The fading with distance due to the athmosphere is strong only when ranges of kilometers are involved.
Exceptionally, a cloud could project his shadow on a plane and leave another one fully lightened.
Probably the differences , in general, are due to the fading of paint.
Massimo

[Dark Green Man]

Exceptionally, a cloud could project his shadow on a plane and leave another one fully lightened.

that is one possibility that I had not considered and could be quite probable
[/color]

[Dark Green Man]

this first profile is from Ehksprint (#88) on the IL-2.
"Bronirovannyi Shturmovik Il-2"
by Sergey Kuznetsov
ISBN # 5-94038-042-5

this next one is from Aviatsiya i Kosmonavtika 5-6 2001
by Vladimir Perov (now deceased) and Oleg Rastrenin
I could not seem to find an ISSN number for it.

and finally a photo that shows it with a tactical number but no arrow or scripting.
very odd.....the mystery deepens.[/color]