Nakajima Interior Color Mix
Interior Color of the Zero? Wing Fold Detail?
Posted By: Jeff McGuire <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Monday, 18 January 1999, at 7:18 p.m.
I just rec'd my squadron order and they were out of Mitsubishi int. green. Can anyone tell me how to mix it? I don't know that I've seen a good color pic of this color. Also, would this color apply to Zeroes?
Posted By: François P. WEILL <email@example.com>
Date: Monday, 18 January 1999, at 7:25 p.m.
So far from the posts and what has been told in books we can reasonably think that Mitsubishi's interior green was in the same hue as USN interior green but slightly darker and grayer(from those of us who saw the relics.
Yes it applies to Mitsubishi built Zeros, but not so for the Nakajima built ones, which used the Nakajima interior green, which has been described as much lighter and yellower.
Hope it helps.
Posted By: Tony <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Monday, 18 January 1999, at 9:29 p.m.
Hi, Jeff, I agree with François. I use Model Master interior green with about 10%gloss white added. Hope this helps.
Posted By: Dave Pluth <email@example.com>
Date: Monday, 18 January 1999, at 9:33 p.m.
I'm with the other guys. I use Interior green with white added (probably 20-25%).
Posted By: Pete Chalmers <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Friday, 22 January 1999, at 6:01 a.m.
FYI, Polly Scale 505266 "British Dark Slate Grey" (or Floquil Enamel 303159 - same name) are EXACTLY identical to the Aeromaster "Mitsubishi" interior green.
Floquil FS is 34096 ~
The Aeromaster "Nakajima" interior color is not exactly matched, but the following colors are very close:
Polly Scale 505310 "RLM 68 Light Olive". 505368 "Warpac Gray-Green"(or Floquil 303369 - same name). Floquil Marine 818606 "Ocean Green 5-OG. These all vary slightly one from the other, and have Floquil FS 34258 ~
This is based on my own and Floquil-supplied color chips, and are supplied as a shortcut alternative to mixing.
Posted By: John Korellis
- Aircraft Interiors
Date: Saturday, 1 July 2000, at 3:03 a.m.
After reading most info regarding interior cockpit colors on this site would it be right to assume that Nakajima interior is close to RAF interior green (grayish green) while Mitsubishi interior is close to US interior green (yellowish green)?
By the way, I'm currently building Hasegawa's 1/48 Nakajima Rufe and used Gunze's H50 which is a lime green mixed with some gray to achieve a lighter RAF int. green. Is this acceptable?
Posted By: Grant Goodale <email@example.com>
Date: Friday, 28 July 2000, at 4:24 p.m.
Looking over my references, Monogram Close-up 15 (Japanese Cockpit Interiors Part 2), states that the interior colours are FS 34151 for various manufacturers aircraft although nothing for Nakajima. The colour photos of the Myrt show something that looks like 34151 but IMHO the colour fidelity in books is usually questionable.
I am currently building a G4M Betty and I did some comparisons of 34151 from Testors and the Aeromaster Mitsubishi Interior Green. The 34151 was lighter and more towards the lime green shade. The Aeromaster was darker and much more of a brown shade.
Considering the wartime conditions and available supplies at the factories (both aircraft and paint) and the maintenance conditions in the combat zone, I would hazard an opinion that one should not be too hung up on the exact shade but, each to their own taste.
Posted By: Dave Pluth <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Monday, 26 February 2001, at 5:14 p.m.
Well, it finally happened last night. I ran out of Aeromaster Nakajima interior color, at least enough of it that wasn't a lump that there would be no way for me to spray.
Well, here's the solution!
Get yourself a bottle of Pollyscale Concrete (from the railroad line) and a bottle of Pollyscale US interior green. It's not an exact mix, but if you mix 10-15% or so green until you start getting a bit heavier green tint to the concrete color, you're there!
Basically what I did was to take what I had left of the AM bottle and painted a swatch of plastic with it and then matched the color with the mix.
Good luck and good mixing!
Posted By: D.Ryan
Date: Friday, 2 March 2001, at 3:11 p.m.
I am new to Japanese WWII aircraft modeling. So forgive me if this question seems simple to most of you. I am doing one of Hasegawa's newer 1/72 Zero's (A6M3 Type 22). What is the correct (or close to correct) color for the cockpit? I thought it was metallic blue...so I picked up a bottle of Gunze (my paint of choice) and when I got home and looked at the plans they call for a green. What is a good match (in the Gunze line if possible). Also, did the A6M2b and A6M3 type 22 have folding wing tips? If so, where can I get a good picture of the wing fold so that I know where to cut to fold them? Thanks all, your help is greatly appreciated!
Posted By: François P. WEILL <email@example.com>
Date: Saturday, 3 March 2001, at 12:32 a.m.
I think the question of interior colors should be included in the board FAQ.
As far as the Zeros are concerned FORGET ONCE AND FOR ALL THE METALLIC PAINT AS A COCKPIT COLOR. The general color used depends on the actual manufacturer of the plane. Setting aside the two seat trainers built by Air Arsenals, the Zero was built by two manufacturers in the following pattern: Mitsubishi made at least partly all Models: and Nakajima made Model 21's and Model 52 and later operational variants in conjunction with Mitsubishi.
Mitsubishi made planes used the Mitsubishi naval aircraft interior color in the cockpit area, which was a darker variant of USN Interior Green (FS 34151). Nakajima made Zeros used a much lighter yellow green color in the same place. Notice however that each manufacturer used the cowl "antiglare" color under the windscreen and the fuselage under the canopy. This paint was glossy blue black on Mitsubishi made Zeros and glossy gray black for Nakajima ones.
As you are building a Model 22 that like Model 32 and 22 Ko was only Mitsubishi built, you have to use the Mitsubishi interior green in the cockpit area. Model 22 and 22 Ko's had folding wing tips. Basically the Model 22 and 22 Ko wing was a modified Model 21 wing with a new gasoline tank arrangement and ailerons with a complicated moving tab mechanism linked to the flaps which was inhibited when the flaps were down 30° and more to avoid overcontrol at low speed. If I were you, I wouldn't bother to cut the wingtips to fold them on a Model 22. Most of them were used from land bases and scarcely used that device.
For all Zero structural details I recommend buying the Aero Detail # 7 book. though the color information in this book are to be considered not up to date with the current research.
Hope it helps.
Posted By: Scott Hazel <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Saturday, 3 March 2001, at 12:24 a.m.
I was a volunteer at the San Diego Aerospace Museum at the time that the A6M-7 was restored. The aircraft had been exposed to the elements and in particularly sun light for some time. The cockpit interior looked to be the metallic blue-green that many older references speak of. Several of the attached components were removed to reveal unexposed painted surfaces. The color was not the same. The areas that had no exposure were all FS34096. The metallic blue-green was this same color only faded from the sun. I think that Testors makes FS34096.
Posted By: Bill Misco <email@example.com>
Date: Friday, 3 August 2001, at 10:07 p.m.
I am building the new 1/32 Tamiya A6M5. The interior instructions call for XF71, cockpit green, but I was told by my local hobby shop that this isn't available yet. The box lid shows a picture of the built and painted interior, and if that is the color they used, it seems to be a dead on match for zinc chromate green. Does anyone know if that is right? Also, the supplied photo etched belts and harness seems to be a leather type, but no painting instructions are provided. Should I assume that they are supposed to be leather and paint them accordingly? And would they have brass colored buckles? Thanks for any help anyone can provide.
Re: Zero Interior
Posted By: Ryan Toews <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Wednesday, 8 August 2001, at 10:30 a.m.
The following is a summary of what I have found on original Zero cockpit colors. Please bear in mind that this is still a work in progress and more research needs to be done. Nevertheless, FWIW, I hope it helps. Of course, any comments and/or additions to this list will always be appreciated.
Zero Cockpit Colors
It is generally accepted that Mitsubishi and Nakajima built Zeros utilized different colors of paint in their cockpits. The following is an examination of the different existing evidence for this conclusion. The best evidence, of course, are original cockpit relics that can be linked to a specific aircraft serial number and thus also to a date of manufacture. Other relics that can be assigned a more generalized date are also included. Last of all are written references to cockpit color.
1. In the collection of the Nimitz Museum is a piece of the Mitsubishi built A6M2 Zero flown by Iida that was shot down at Pearl Harbor. Greg Springer assigned the paint an FS value of 34095.
2. Blayd has in their collection parts of the cockpit of A6M3 32 s/n 3285 (November 1942) that have paint with an FS value of between 4088 and 4098.
3. The A6M3 22 in the RNZAF Museum appears from photos of the interior to have been painted in a shade of green described in MA510 page 11 as 34528.
4. The NASM replicated traces of existing paint valued at 4151 on their A6M5 s/n 4340 (December 1943).
5. The Planes of Fame A6M5 s/n 4400 (December 1943) cockpit color has been described by Katsushi Owaki as having a Munsell value of 2.5GY4/2 which compares to FS 4102. It can only be assumed that this is either the original paint or a replication of the same.
6. According to Mikesh, Japanese Aircraft Interiors, the interior of Mitsubishi Zeros from the beginning of the war to the end was a close approximation of Munsell 10Y 4/4 (close to FS 4255). This probably represents an oxidized darker paint.
1. A number of cockpit interior parts from the various A6M2 wrecks that date from October 1942 to March 1943 in the possession of Blayd all are finished in a paint with an original value of FS 4373. It should be noted that this value is one that applies to paint that has had the oxidized outer layer of paint removed.
2. An A6M5 captured on Saipan (thus manufactured between February and May 1944) and examined by Douglas Aircraft was described as having its cockpit interior painted "with a yellow-green primer similar in appearance to the zinc-chromate primer used in American airplanes." Zinc-chromate was either yellow (FS 3481) or green (FS 4227). The former could be a variation of FS4255 while the latter has similarities to FS 4373. The reference is most likely to the yellow shade of zinc-chromate, as the green shade has no yellow in it at all. Possibly what was described was an oxidized variation of FS 4255.
3. The Imperial War Museum A6M5 s/n 196 (March 1944) had its cockpit finished with two applications of paint, according to an examination by Joe Picarella. Unfortunately, he compared the paint to the Pantone color system and the FS values are not always easily matchable. His study found an undercoat of Pantone 4495U, which is somewhat more yellowish/green than FS 4255. Over this was an application of Pantone 581U, which is roughly comparable to FS 4151. This second application of paint may possibly be a field modification.
4. Arashiyama Museum's A6M7 s/n 82729 (April 1945) cockpit paint has been described by Katsushi Owaki as having a Munsell value of 2.5GY6/4 or FS 4258. Again note the similarity of this color and FS4255.
5. Mikesh's Japanese Aircraft Interiors describes the interior paint in the Air Force Museum's A6M2 s/n 51553 as having a Munsell value of 2.5GY 4/2 which is close to FS 4151.
6. Mikesh also states that the interior of the A6M7 s/n 23186 in San Diego has a Munsell value of 2.5GY 4/2. This is close to FS 4151.
It would appear that Mitsubishi consistently used dark olive green paint falling into the parameters of FS4088/4095/4098/4102/4151 in the cockpits of the Zeros it built. AeroMaster Mitsubishi Interior Green is probably the best representative of this color although it could be augmented by the addition of some brown tinting.
Early Nakajima built Zeros made use of a gray/green cockpit interior that is close to FS 4373. Gunze Sangyo 50 Lime Green is probably a good paint to use for a "scale effect" cockpit gray green but to match the original color mix 5 parts Model Master Acryl Pale Green, 4 parts Model Master Acryl RAF Sky Type S and 1 part Model Master Acryl Olive Drab.
At some point, possibly with the change to the manufacture the A6M5 in early 1944, it appears that Nakajima switched to a cockpit interior color approximating FS 4255. This may have been an attempt to standardize the color of paint used in the cockpits of Nakajima aircraft as traces of a similar color can be found in the interior of the Nakajima Ki-43 in the collection of the EAA Museum. The AeroMaster Nakajima Interior Gray/Green is very close to this color.
Posted By: Grant Goodale <email@example.com>
Date: Saturday, 4 August 2001, at 5:48 a.m.
"Standard" Mitsubishi Interior Green is matched by Modelmaster Medium Field Green enamel. Since it is an A6M5, you could easily play around a bit with combinations of different cockpit colours. It could also have been Nakajima built. Some colour photos (from JAI) have some greens that look like RAF Interior Green to me but this may be due to the printing process.
Seat belts were leather with brass fittings. Some photos seem to show a cream colour lining of something that looks like sheepskin to me. I do believe that there are seat belt photos in the ‘walk arounds"and museums section of this site. I am positive that the seat belts are in the shrine/museum at Yasukuni.
Posted By: Charles Metz <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 1:29 p.m.
I received my copy directly from Monogram about two weeks ago. In case you were wondering what the book covers, here's a listing from my database:
Mikesh: 'Japanese Aircraft Interiors 1940-1945' (Monogram Aviation Publications [USA], 2001; 328 pages; US$69.95)
AIRCRAFT TYPES INCLUDED:
IJAAF: Ki-9, Ki-21-I, Ki-43-I, Ki-43-II, Ki-44-II, Ki-45 kai, Ki-46-II, Ki-46-III, Ki-48-II, Ki-49, Ki-51, Ki-55, Ki-57, Ki-61-I, Ki-67, Ki-74, Ki-77, Ki-84, Ki-100-Ib, Ki-115
IJNAF: A6M2, A6M3, A6M5, A6M7, B5N2, B6N2, B7A2, C6N1, D3A2, D4Y1, D4Y3, E13A1, E16A1, F1M2, G3M2, G4M3, G5N1, G5N2-L, G8N1, H8K1, J1N1, J2M3, J7W1, J8M1, K5Y, Kikka, L2D3, M6A1, MXY7 Ohka 11, MXY7 Ohka 21, N1K1, N1K2-Ja, P1Y1
IJAAF: Ki-9 (p. 109, 110), Ki-21-I (p. 65-67), Ki-43-I (p. 19-23), Ki-43-II (p. 21, 24, 25), Ki-44-II (p. 29, 31), Ki-45 kai (p. 33-39), Ki-46-II (p. 69-72), Ki-46-III (p. 69, 73-79), Ki-48-II (p. 81-85), Ki-49 (p. 87-89), Ki-51 (p. 90, 91), Ki-55 (p. 113-115), Ki-57 (p. 117), Ki-61-I (p. 41-46), Ki-67 (p. 93-97), Ki-74 (p. 99), Ki-77 (p. 119), Ki-84 (p. 49, 50), Ki-100-Ib (p. 53-61), Ki-115 (p. 103-105)
IJNAF: A6M2 (p. 125-129), A6M3 (p. 131-133), A6M5 (p. 135-141), A6M7 (p. 143-145), B5N2 (p. 195-199), B6N2 (p. 201-207), B7A2 (p. 209-215), C6N1 (p. 289-295), D3A2 (p. 217-221), D4Y1 (p. 223-227), D4Y3 (p. 227), E13A1 (p. 299-301), E16A1 (p. 303), F1M2 (p. 305-307), G3M2 (p. 229-231), G4M3 (p. 233-241), G5N1 (p. 243-245), G5N2-L (p. 245), G8N1 (p. 247-249), H8K1 (p. 309-315), J1N1 (p. 147-161), J2M3 (p. 163-167), J7W1 (p. 175-179), J8M1 (p. 189-191), K5Y (p. 321), Kikka (p. 271-275), L2D3 (p. 319), M6A1 (p. 261-269), MXY7 Ohka 11 (p. 277-280, 282, 283), MXY7 Ohka 21 (p. 285-287), N1K1 (p. 169-173), N1K2-JA (p. 181-187), P1Y1 (p. 251-259)
WHEELWELL DETAIL: Ki-46-III (p. 79), N1K2-J (p. 187)
MISCELLANEOUS DETAIL: J1N1-S oblique armament installation (p. 159); Ki-100-Ib flap, flap bay interior & landing gear (p. 59)
CUTAWAY DRAWINGS: G3M2 (p. 230), Ki-100-Ib (p. 58, 59)
COMMENT: Includes close-up photos of individual cameras (p. 17, 63), cockpit instruments (p. 26, 27, 31, 39, 47, 51, 65, 66, 83, 88, 89, 91, 94, 97, 110, 127, 128, 137, 150, 165, 169, 171, 186, 196, 205, 218, 230, 231, 237, 240, 249, 256, 263, 269, 273, 279, 301, 306, 307, 314, 323-325) and gunsights (p. 326)
Posted By: Greg Springer <email@example.com>
Date: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 5:38 p.m.
I received mine one week ago. It is an absolutely superb book with any number of photos I have never seen before and I have been collecting references on Japanese aircraft for 26 years. Get it while you can.
Posted By: Seth Lorinczi <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Friday, 8 June 2001, at 10:31 a.m.
I have a feeling I may get a lot of flak for this, but...
I've spent the last few days carefully studying the new "Japanese Interiors" book. I'm astonished by its scope and coverage, and impressed by the attention to detail and careful research. But as a writer and editor (my "day job") I can't help but be disappointed by the innumerable grammatical errors and general lack of copy editing. I just feel that it detracts from the otherwise high quality of the work. Am I alone in this view?
Posted By: Dave Pluth <email@example.com>
Date: Friday, 8 June 2001, at 12:10 p.m.
You mean there are words in that book? Shoot, I haven't finished looking at the pictures yet! .
I have heard this comment from several folks. The text is somewhat disappointing, but does convey what needs to be conveyed. Monogram isn't known for its great literary works, but more for the photos. It's still well worth having, even at twice the price.
Posted By: Jukka Juutinen
Date: Friday, 3 August 2001, at 4:45 a.m.
I got the book yesterday making my observations strictly limited but so far following observations come to mind.
First, those who expect a book similar to Merrick´s "German Aircraft Interiors" may be disappointed as I was. Whereas Merrick covers engine and armament installations quite well, Mikesh has practically nothing on this. All cutaways show fuselage layouts or crew positions but no armament, systems, engine or wing structure details are found. I think a more appropriate title would have been "Japanese Aircraft Cockpits". It seems that this book has been strongly designed for modelers (which I am not), not for technical enthusiasts (gear heads). On the positive side, the book is very well printed and the photos, especially modern museum photos are excellent (compare to what w find in Squadron´s Walkarounds). However, there are many photos that should have been left out as they show aircraft in next-to-junk condition. These should have been replaced by drawings (like in Maru Mechanics).
All in all, this is a relatively good book. However, it could have been much better by covering wing layouts, engines etc as well. Considering what the Japanese themselves have achieved with Maru Mechanics etc. this indeed pales into insignificance. (Note: Original thread slightly amended by Collector. GB)
Posted By: Mike Driskill <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Friday, 3 August 2001, at 5:42 a.m.
I fully agree with you. Don't misunderstand me, I think this book is utterly indispensable, but it could have been much better.
I guess my biggest disappointment was the fact that Japanese documentary sources (i.e. factory and other documents in private hands such as was used to build the Maru Mechanic series) are completely ignored. The many excellent photographs are appreciated, but the authors' attitude that "if I can't photograph it, then it doesn't exist" is hard to understand. The book illustrates many interiors not shown in the MM series; then again other machines are much better served by Maru Mechanic or Model Art publications.
And the shortcomings wouldn't be nearly so annoying without the rather arrogant statement in the introduction to the effect that the book contains virtually all that is known about Japanese interiors!
Posted By: Dan Salamone <email@example.com>
Date: Friday, 3 August 2001, at 8:30 p.m.
I agree with you 100% on your comments. The book is "pretty" with the color photos but the numerous typos are not acceptable as well as the (almost) total lack of readily available info on aircraft such as the Hayate. Why they did not include data from the Japanese sources is confounding...
I don't have all the Maru series so the Monogram book serves me well for the Grace and Jill- but $70 for reference on a handful of aircraft is not a bargain (for me at least).
As a disclaimer- I'm not trying to belittle the effort on this book, just trying to communicate my disappointment with the final product. If someone has a library full of Maru Mechanics/Aero Detail/FAOW they can skip the Monogram book IMHO.
Posted By: Mike Driskill <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Sunday, 5 August 2001, at 3:04 p.m.
Dan, thanks for your thoughts. I guess the thing that bugs me about this book is that it IS indispensable if you're a real Japanese aircraft freak, in spite of its problems! For example, I know of NO other published source of information on the Ki-55 Ida, other than a simple drawing of the instrument panel that appeared in Asahi Journal. Several other aircraft fall into this boat.
Oh well, such is life for the enthusiast.
Posted By: Amos Terrell <ATerrell@KScable.com>
Date: Sunday, 5 August 2001, at 8:14 p.m.
The value of this book MAY depend on where you're coming from. To wit, the long time enthusiast may already have much of this information gleaned from other sources; newcomers like myself welcome and relish it as a concise reference source for many Japanese a/c in one spot. To that extent, I regard it as quite a treasure.
Posted By: Mark Smith <MarkA6M2@aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, 7 August 2001, at 9:05 a.m.
As someone who has all the sources you mentioned (Maru Mechanic titles on Japanese a/c, as well as 95% of FAOWs going back to the early '70s and the AeroDetail books), I would disagree. I think the book is important as one that attempts to be both comprehensive in covering many aircraft and detailed regarding particulars. When I think of all the time, money, and space (!) these earlier sources have required, I remember that only the lucky person who has them would consider the book superfluous.
I was disappointed with the typos, too. That is the editor's responsibility, and probably out of Bob Mikesh's hands. Bob had sent me scans of some photos for a couple of model projects, with their corresponding captions from the book. I don't recall any typos within. Yet when the book finally arrives, it was peppered with typos. After tying up Mr. Mikesh's references for several years past the time originally promised, the book shows signs that it was hurried to press and shabbily edited. This is a shame, as after a lifetime as a meticulous researcher, his magnum opus deserved better.
The Frank was mentioned as a type that deserved detailed coverage it was not given. Yet this is readily available in so many other sources, I would rather have seen some of the more obscure types covered, as they were.
I notice, at least for myself, that hardly any book or kit release these days is quite what I had hoped for, much less *all* I could have hoped for. That seems to be getting more and more difficult as we amass more and more material and say, "but show me something I haven't seen!"
Just some ramblings, respectfully offered.
Posted By: Dan Salamone <email@example.com>
Date: Tuesday, 7 August 2001, at 8:22 p.m.
In Response To: Re: All encompasing it is not..... (Mark Smith)
You have valid points..... the book does seem very rushed and I think that is what caused the typos. Personally, I could have waited a few more weeks/months to make sure that was correct.
As for the Frank, or lack of, a book this comprehensive should cover the "basic" types in entirety and the more obscure types as much as possible. The Ida is covered very well along with a few others and that is great- but the omission of so much material available in Japan (while claiming to be the end all book on the subject) is, well, not acceptable for the price I paid for this book.
I do appreciate the book for what it is, don't get me wrong. I was just hoping for a book that I could turn to without having to access other books and notes from J-aircraft. I hope that this is the point that gets across to those whom are thinking of paying the $65+ for the book. While being a good book to form a "backbone" of a Japanese aviation library it is sadly lacking when it comes to editing and coverage of some important Japanese aircraft. Take it easy Mark,