Mc 200 photo interpretation

Post topics relating to Colors, Camouflage Schemes and Markings of the Regia Aeronautica and ANR
Post Reply
User avatar
kippenhan
Comandante di Gruppo
Comandante di Gruppo
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 1:37 pm

Mc 200 photo interpretation

Post by kippenhan » Sun Mar 27, 2022 5:32 pm

Hello all,
I'm working on a 1/72 Flying Machines Macchi 200 with the markings of 364th Sq. 1942.
There is a port side photo of this aircraft in Osprey's Aircraft of the Aces #34, Italian Aces of World War 2, page 7
This same machines appears in a starboard side view on page 34 of MMP Books Macchi C.200 Saetta (Orange series No 8113)
Image attached.

I have two questions
1. In the starboard view, the wings are noticeably lighter than the fuselage. Can this be a result of strong sunlight or the fact that the wings came from a different plane? To support the sunlight hypothesis is the fact that the port photo shows very strong light reflections on the horizontal surfaces. To support the different wings hypothesis is the fact that the lighter color neatly ends where the wing roots are AND, the fact that upper surfaces of the fuselage, especially in front of the cockpit, do not show similar strong reflections. It seems to me that the demarcation between light and dark at the wing roots is too perfect.
2. On the starboard forward wing root is a large blotch of a different color. While there are other darker spots on the photo, these latter ones appear to be not related to the plane (ie. dirt or dust on film, etc.). The larger wing root area does not extend beyond the wing's leading edge and conforms to the shape, thus making it appear it is on the plane itself.

Does anyone have any thoughts? What is your interpretation?
Thanks
Mike
Attachments
macchi.jpg
macchi.jpg (202.91 KiB) Viewed 4559 times
macchi.jpg
macchi.jpg (202.91 KiB) Viewed 4559 times

User avatar
kippenhan
Comandante di Gruppo
Comandante di Gruppo
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Mc 200 photo interpretation

Post by kippenhan » Sun Mar 27, 2022 5:33 pm

I forgot to mention the fact that the tail looks lighter than the fuselage, thus contrary to the idea of the wings being replacements.

User avatar
Editor
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 2166
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2003 3:53 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Mc 200 photo interpretation

Post by Editor » Sun Mar 27, 2022 10:10 pm

Hi Mike,
Here's Jean's interpretation of 7-364 in 1/48:

https://www.stormomagazine.com/ModelArt ... JB_1a.html

Below is an example of a C.202 with a wing replacement, note the different camouflage of the wing (of Macchi origin) and the Breda style camo of the fuselage and the location of the demarcation line along the wing root:

Image

Here are various Macchi wings laying about:

Image

In regard to 7-364 photo, its hard to tell from such a poor quality photo, but the plane appears heavily weathered around the engine area and if the wings were replaced the demarcation line is too far out from the wing root. When you examine the photo in ADI #8 p.37 there isn't a distinct demarcation line, the wings are simply over exposed, a good example of limited dynamic range in photography, similarly the stabilizers are over exposed. Jeans build is correct, I would use his build as a reference.

User avatar
kippenhan
Comandante di Gruppo
Comandante di Gruppo
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Mc 200 photo interpretation

Post by kippenhan » Mon Mar 28, 2022 9:45 am

Vince,
Great. Thanks.
Mike

User avatar
MDriskill
Comandante di Gruppo
Comandante di Gruppo
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:35 am
Location: Tennessee

Re: Mc 200 photo interpretation

Post by MDriskill » Mon Mar 28, 2022 11:31 am

Well...for whatever my opinions are worth...!

+ In my copy of the Osprey book, the photo you mention occurs on p.42. A better-quality shot which makes it look like the aircraft is fairly new (or newly re-painted?), and the finish in good condition.
Image

+ Per Vince's and Mr. Barby notes in the linked build, WW2 film can be very "contrasty," e.g. exaggerate light or dark exposure (note other anomalies in the MMP pic, such as how much darker the green mottles look on the lower fuselage). When also factoring in Vince's note on the change demarcation, and the Osprey pic, I would say the wings have the same camo as the fuselage.

+ The photo also appears in "Ali d'Italia no. 8" on the C.200. Looks no better unfortunately, but is accompanied by a useful shot of other 150 Gruppo machines, the one in the foreground likely from the same production batch.
Image

+ Again leaning on the nice Osprey pic, my feeling is that the dark blotches are issues with the negative or print, and not paint over a repair, etc. (and even if I thought they were paint, I might "back-date" the machine before the fix...call it artistic license, LOL).

+ Two interesting details: 1) no coat-of-arms on the tail cross; 2) the face and rear roots of the Piaggio prop blades are finished in the blue-gray "Celeste" color (good discussion of this in the Valiant "Airframe" title on the C.202. It was a unique prop finish - not silver, or underside gray, as often assumed in older profiles).
Image

+ In the Ali d'Italia monograph, this aircraft is the subject a 5-view color profile! I note the vertical arm of the tail cross should go all the way to the bottom of the rudder though (characteristic of SAI-built C.200's and 202's), and he missed the Celeste prop.
Image

+ For what it's worth, here's a beautiful Angelo Brioschi profile of a similar SAI finish. I like this a bit better than the 5-view, though again the prop should be Celeste.
Image
Last edited by MDriskill on Mon Mar 28, 2022 1:06 pm, edited 5 times in total.

User avatar
Editor
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 2166
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2003 3:53 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Mc 200 photo interpretation

Post by Editor » Mon Mar 28, 2022 12:37 pm

Mike I tend to agree with your post especially since the starboard side photo is poor quality, you really need to discount it in favor of the port side photo. Aside from the starboard side photo, there aren't photos of heavily weathered C.200s although we're used to seeing oil and smoke stained side fuselages of Bf.109s, this wasn't really an occurrence with C.200s.

Here's a photo of C.200 (in the background), note the exposure of the top wing and shading around the engine area:
Image

Exposure is determined where the camera is focused and what settings were applied.

And a line up of C.200 wrecks:
Image

User avatar
MDriskill
Comandante di Gruppo
Comandante di Gruppo
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:35 am
Location: Tennessee

Re: Mc 200 photo interpretation

Post by MDriskill » Mon Mar 28, 2022 12:59 pm

Vince, that first photo is a perfect example! The pale appearance of the wing is no doubt helped along by some fading of the colors and weathering of the paint surface.

Also note how bright the wing fillet looks, it must be facing the sun more directly than either the fuselage or top of the wing.

User avatar
kippenhan
Comandante di Gruppo
Comandante di Gruppo
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Mc 200 photo interpretation

Post by kippenhan » Tue Mar 29, 2022 7:13 pm

Thanks for all the information and photos. You guys are a great resource.

two other aspects of this aircraft that make it interesting is how far aft the white fuselage band is, this is not the norm. Also how the unit insignia's placement on the white band differs between port and starboard sides. I think I see an over painted aircraft number below the 7 on the starboard.

What a beautiful airplane the Mc 200 is.

User avatar
MDriskill
Comandante di Gruppo
Comandante di Gruppo
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:35 am
Location: Tennessee

Re: Mc 200 photo interpretation

Post by MDriskill » Wed Mar 30, 2022 11:37 am

Wow, I hadn't even noticed the band position - the most interesting anomaly of all! I wonder if it's possible this aircraft is a field repaint job? Perhaps tan sprayed over earlier all dark green uppers, as was seen on some C.202's.

I certainly agree on the C.200, so many describe it as homely, but I find the subtle curves really lovely. To my eye the early ones with full sliding glass canopies show its lines off the best.

I will be interested to hear how it goes with the Flying Machine kit. I have Special Hobby's full-canopy version of the same basic mold in the stash, but not the FM one.

Post Reply