The Ship Model Forum

For me, colour "C" is not a different colour, but weathering (of colour "A") and light effects.

_________________

Whilst keeping an open mind, it is possible but unproven that different batches of paint have been applied to Tromp, will stick on her for now.
There are only 2 images of poor quality to examine, with the variables included and also weathering, there may have been different batches applied which could contain a different enamel content or poorer mix. There is a lot of bleaching on the midship swatch. The darker stern area has a lot of wear along the lower demarcation and the strbd qtr image shows the same perceived darker area below the funnel cravat. The same image would imply the lower funnel swatch may match the dark hull areas. Could Tromp at that time have resembled a ship of several weathered tones more by accident than purpose ?

One also needs to take into consideration what Rick Davis, somewhat of an expert on USN camo to say the least, has to say regards being next to impossible to discern true colour from b/w photos, as there are just too many variables. Of course it's still worth a try but...................without more than just the photo to go on the answer will never be definitive. Just saying is all.

_________________
“We are off to look for trouble. I expect we shall find it.” Capt. Tennant, HMS Repulse. 8 December 1941
“A review of the situation at about 1100 was not encouraging.” Capt. Gordon, HMS Exeter. 1 March 1942

I think that the photos clearly show (at least) two colours, the standard light grey of the Dutch Navy and a darker grey.

The colours are heavily weathered, which can give the impression of a third colour, e.g. at the stern. But there are some clear visible demarcation lines between the light and dark grey, which cannot be caused by weathering or different paint batches, e.g. at the end of the forecastle or the panel next to the rear superstructure.

_________________

A slightly 'clearer' and larger photo of DR's camo than the same posted previously.

_________________
“We are off to look for trouble. I expect we shall find it.” Capt. Tennant, HMS Repulse. 8 December 1941
“A review of the situation at about 1100 was not encouraging.” Capt. Gordon, HMS Exeter. 1 March 1942

It seems pretty definitively clear to me that the Dutch ships of the ABDA time period were wearing camouflage. Every picture of a Dutch cruiser or destroyer (De Ruyter, Java, Sumatra, Tromp, Evertsen, Van Ghent, ect.) from the Dec 1941-February 1942 period has a very particular angular pattern that cannot be explained other than being an intentional camouflage.

As for whether it is a two or three tone camouflage, I think it is something which will never be 100% certain. When Soerabaja went up in flames in March 1942, all the records of what precisely was going on were likely lost for good. I completely understand the argument for a two tone camouflage, and its totally fair to me if that's what you think they were painted in. (Frankly you can paint your ships anyway you want as long as you're having fun with your hobby). Personally though, I think the weight of the evidence points towards a three tone for Tromp.

I think the attached picture demonstrates where I'm coming from well enough. I cropped out the two areas of clear demarcation of paint on the Tromp (paint does not wear at perfect angles like these have, that's just not have paint wears, nature abhors perfectly strait angled lines like that), those areas fortunately are at the same angle form the camera, with the same sunlight exposure making for a good comparison of the two areas. It looks to me like those are three different colors, with that middle color matching up pretty much perfectly in the two crops. That middle color to my interpretation necessitates three colors. I get where the argument for two comes from, especially given the pictures of Java and Evertsen we have, but I'm seeing three distinct colors here. In the end though paint your model the way you see it, and enjoy doing it, as I don't think we will never be 100% on this question.

The two areas do not have the same angle to the sun and camera. It would be more similar if you choose the rear end of the same panel on the hull.

You see that also with the other colour, the light grey 'A', which looks very different in the selected field. In this case, 'A' on the hull looks similar to the dark grey 'B' on the funnel. These are common effects, visible on many photos.

/edit: in case of De Ruyter, there could be third colour at the range finder on the top of the foremast.

_________________

Given the shape of her hull in that area and the curved shape of the funnel, I think the comparison I made is fair. The shadow on the bow indicates at the sun about directly overhead, so the lighting should be about the same for both. Personally, I don't recall ever seeing a ship have a hull and upper works with the same two colors that vary that drastically from each other in the same photo, but I'm not going to say it's impossible. Given what I see in the photo I think it's a three tone pattern similar to what Sumatra had in the same time period. That being said I completely understand why you could look at it and say its a two tone pattern, and I don't think we will ever have a definitive answer because the official records of the camouflage were likely lost when Soerabaja was destroyed. Again it's entirely possible that this is a two tone scheme which is heavily worn, and I'm okay if that ends up being the case if someone finds photos in the future which clarify this, but currently as it stands, I see a three tone scheme.

Also, to be precise this is the way I did the camouflage on the Tromp I made a few years back. Is it definitely correct? Maybe, maybe not, but it's the best I was able to pull out of the photograph, and I don't mind if it ends up being incorrect, but that's what I see in the photo.

a comment of author Jaap Anten about camouflage of Dutch ships in the NEI made in 2018. It is in the Dutch language.
Source:
https://marsethistoria.nl/forum/krijgsg ... en?start=6

over die camo-patronen is er veel prietpraat en zeker die vergelijkingen met de Britse patronen is een studeerkamer onderwerp die vaak ver van de dagelijkse werkelijkheid staat. Zo werd ik eens geconfronteerd met de bewering dat de Nederlandse Marine naar Singapore is gevaren om daar Brits verf te gaan halen om dat camo-patroon voor de slag in de Javazee aan te brengen. Dat dan terwijl er in Soerabaja in grote verffabriek staat die defensie contracten vervult....

Vandaar dat ik deze vraag aan Jaap Anten heb voorgelegd. Hij de auteur van "Hr.ms. kruisers Java en Sumatra' en ook van "Navalisme nekt de onderzeeboot". Hij is zeer goed ingevoerd in het onderwerp en heeft altijd een goed oog voor de dagelijkse praktijk. Die stelt hij liever op de voorgrond dan een studeerkamertheorie.
Ik hoop dat je met zijn onderstaande antwoord uit de voeten kan;

Wat betreft de Nederlandse camouflagekleuren ten tijde van de Slag in de Javazee.
1/ Camouflageschema's werden vooral door de Engelsen en vervolgens de Amerikanen gebruikt in de tweede helft van de Eerste Wereldoorlog.
2/ Alles wat daarna gebeurde, bestaat uit variaties en vereenvoudigingen van deze schema's uit de Eerste Wereldoorlog. Het is verkeerd een schema te reduceren tot een patroon, het bestaat uit een patroon in combinatie met bepaalde kleurstellingen.
3/ In Nederlands-Indië was het zo dat, al ver voor de Tweede Wereldoorlog, sommige oefeningen kruisers een experimenteel camouflageschema kregen. Daar hadden we de Britten niet voor nodig. Niet lang voor de de Slag in De Javazee werden de kruisers in een soort Nederlands standaard camouflageschema in twee tinten beschilderd. In het boek Nederlandse Oorlogsschepen 1940-1945 van Henk Van Willigenburg staat dit schema op de kruisers. Het bestond het in Indië gebruikelijke groenig-grijs, waardoorheen, mogelijk donkere verf werd gemengd (neem ik aan) en in ieder geval stookolie om een donkerder tint te maken. Dat van die stookolie mengen heeft bemanningslid van een van de kruisers mij verteld, dat hij dat deed. Dit waren Nederlands-Indische kleurstellingen.
4/ Een vereenvoudigde versie van dit kruiserschema werd op sommige torpedobootjagers gebruikt, met name de Evertsen. Gek genoeg ontbreekt dit schema in het overigens uitstekende boek van Van Willingenburg. Ik ga er vanuit dat dit algemene schema - en zeker de kleuren - een Nederlands-Indische ontwikkeling was.
5/ Er is geen enkele reden om aan te nemen dat het in Nederlands-Indië om een Brits schema ging, behalve natuurlijk dat in zekere zin alles geïnspireerd was op Britse schema's uit de Eerste Wereldoorlog. In tegenstelling natuurlijk tot Nederlandse schepen die vanuit Britse bases in Europa opereerden, zoals de flottieljeleider (niet te verwarren met het pantserschip uit 1908} Jacob van Heemskerck, daarvan werd het uiterlijk aan Britse schepen aangepast. Dat was dus in het Atlantisch gebied. Na de val van Nederlands-Indië in maart 1942 opereerde de Koninklijke Marine ook in Azië vanuit bases van de Royal Navy - dan wel de Australiërs. Voor eigen camouflage was weinig ruimte meer. De Heemskerck arriveerde pas toen de strijd om Indië al gestreden was vanuit Europa. Het ongetwijfeld een Brits schema.
6/ De Duitsers gebruikten ook allerlei wisselende schema's en het Nederlandse schema doet, eerlijk gezegd, meer denken aan een een vereenvoudigde versie waarmee sommige Duitse torpedobootjagers voeren, dan aan een Brits. De Koninklijke Marine had voor de inval van mei 1940 meer dan uitstekende contacten met de Kriegsmarine. De Amerikanen en Italianen en de Japanners hadden ook hun eigen schema's en van al die landen lijken sommige schema's op elkaar. Veel waren 'disruptive', die term zegt daarom weinig. Maar ik denk dat het Nederlandse gewoon een Nederlands-Indische ontwikkeling was.

FWIW,

Berend

A translation of the most important part (automatic translation by DeepL):


@ GregoryC: the hull is bent in two direction at the forward end of the dark panel midships, whereas the funnel is bent only in one.

_________________

Gentlemen,

I'm getting confused: when we're talking abot two or three tone schemes, do we count the original peacetime grey in the number?

In other words: is the camo pattern created by adding one or two other paint colours? In the latter case you end up with a three colour scheme.

By adding just one other colour the result will be a two-colour scheme, right?

_________________
"I've heard there's a wicked war a-blazing, and the taste of war I know so very well
Even now I see the foreign flag a-raising, their guns on fire as we sail into hell"
Roger Whittaker +9/13/2023

In my view: a two tone schema consists of the original peacetime grey plus an additional darker grey.

_________________

I would agree with Maxim, also should his previous post/translation be accurate that would go a long way in explaining what can be seen in various images, of particular Tromp. Such rudimentary mixing would result in a mottled appearance, probably of several varying hues with poor adhesion and inconsistent wear. As per my previous post `a result more by accident than purpose`

In my view it's the pre-war light grey plus two additional colors in Tromps case. Even with wear, there are some parts of the photos I cannot make sense of unless it was three colors total. Again though I understand the argument for two, and I get where that's coming from, and paint your ships in that manner if that's what you see, but three makes more sense to me.

It is interesting to note that this seems to confirm that the Dutch did use green in their camouflage, that was something which I was never sure about, and I've heard conflicting opinions about. Also, I'd like to add that I find it absolutely wild that they mixed fuel oil in with their paint to camouflage these guys. Even if they are using oil based paints, that's not something you hear every day.

Well this contemporary (1942) Australian artist saw the darker colour on Tromp in 1942 as a tropical sort of green. The caption: "Flotilla leader "Tromp" of the Royal Netherlands Navy, in dry dock at Cockatoo Island, for repairs after being damaged in action in the Java Sea." (Also interesting to see another navy had grey-bottomed ships!)

I'm impressed! And I'm getting more and more inclined to accept the story that Tromp actually was camouflaged, sometime between December 7th 1941 and mid February 1942. Even the evidence or at least indication that some particular tricks have been made to enhance this camo for the local requirements does make sense to me. So I wouldn't rule out the use of greens in one form or another. As most islands in the archipelago provide a jungle backdrop, a green camouflage makes even more sense than one consisting of greys, which would better be suited to the North Sea and North Atlantic.

I haven been aware for many years a similar discussion had been going on regarding the camouflage of warplanes in the East Indies, happening in roughly the same timeframe. This wasn't well understood either, for many years until around 2000 the common belief was that most warplanes received a makeshift camo consisting of earth brown and dark green, argued being a sort of copy from the Royal Air Force home colours, that were well known from the cooperation in Singapore. One thought was that the new Brewster Buffalo fighters were delivered from the factory in British colours.

However, it has been proven that this was entirely wrong: the camouflage was well adapted to the local situation, to hide aircraft from view above over the predominantly green jungle forests. So a two colour green camo was devised, the colours even got names: 'old leaf' and 'young leaf' (Oud Blad en Jong Blad), the former being the darker shade of course. No camouflage was applied to the undersurfaces, these were left in the original colours, being blank aluminium or light grey in most cases. In fact those Brewster Buffalos were already applied with this camo from the factory in the USA! The same for some Curtiss fighters. There is proof showing that.

As the situation anticipating a Japanese attack worsened, also the civil aircraft fleet was camouflaged in a hurry, but there were not sufficient stocks nor the time available to apply a two-tone camo, so these mostly received a single tone green or olive drab camouflage, just from what was available at the time. This happened in early February.

Of course this adds only another line of thought without any evidence, but the artistic painting of Tromp in the Cockatoo Island drydock makes me really wonder that it could have some realistic truth to it.

_________________
"I've heard there's a wicked war a-blazing, and the taste of war I know so very well
Even now I see the foreign flag a-raising, their guns on fire as we sail into hell"
Roger Whittaker +9/13/2023

And it would appear that Tromp still had a green within her repainted scheme in late 43, as per another dated painting by Dennis Adams.

But according to the text in Dutch (as far as I understand it), the standard peace-time light grey as a greenish grey.

How the dark grey looked is an interesting question: according to the text it was mixed using the peace-time grey and darker paint (which one?) and oil to make it darker. If that can result in a more green appearance, no idea.


The Royal Navy used green colours, right? Could be that the painting does depict her with her new, British colours after the repair? The painting appears not detailed enough to distinguish if it was before or after the repairs (e.g. if the kingpost is still present, if 20 mm and 3" guns were added, the MGs removed etc.)

_________________

Maxim, Dennis Adams was a contemporary well known Australian artist of high regard, the painting is dated 42. Your query does hold some credence as the exact month is not noted. When Dick noted green I believe he was referring to the darker colour. Other than WA green and Flotta green there were no other official greens in the RN colour range in 42, nor 43, these colours were not used in Australia, and it is unknown if they had the formulas. There were khaki green/greys within the RAN MS range in 42. The hues are unknown and according to ROP`s did vary, an RAN MS3B could have had a green hue. Looking at her knocked up appearance in the painting it is possible it is late second qtr/mid 42 and also likely she still wears her original scheme.

The pattern does not fit to the photos of the pre-repair state - at least far it can be seen (e.g. on the forward turret).

_________________