Airplane Unpainted article

[Randy1]

http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/the-u-s-army-air-forces-strips-its-planes-of-paint/

Here is some good information on USAF position on unpainted aircraft during WW2

My WAG.  The P38L skinned shinny metal should have a top speed increase over the J of about 7 MPH and a weight reduction of say 200 pounds.

[GScholz]

Yeah, right... 

[BnZs]

The 7mph figure is plausible. The weight decrease of 200 pounds is possibly plausible for a B-17, not the P-38. Read the article again.

[ReVo]

We would never see another painted aircraft skin in use if that aircraft had a bare metal skin available. -1

[Saxman]

We would never see another painted aircraft skin in use if that aircraft had a bare metal skin available. -1

While it would be an interesting touch, I got to agree with ReVo. -1

[GScholz]

As long as the planes are properly waxed and polished it doesn't matter if they're painted or not. On a fighter the weight difference would be around 10-20 lbs.

[Randy1]

The 7mph figure is plausible. The weight decrease of 200 pounds is possibly plausible for a B-17, not the P-38. Read the article again.

Note I said WAG.  Trying to get the most kind of like asking price.

[Randy1]

We would never see another painted aircraft skin in use if that aircraft had a bare metal skin available. -1

The properties I am guessing are tied to the default skin.  This is a factual article.  The Air Force updated their paint specs too.  There was also a anecdote of a ground crew being assigned to remove the paint with gasoline to get the higher top speed.

[FLS]

There is no statement in the article that unpainted aircraft are faster. The article clearly states that polished aircraft are faster than unpolished aircraft regardless of paint. The "unpainted" aircraft were either waxed or painted with clear coat.

There is also no reason to assume that our aircraft top speeds are based on tests of unpolished aircraft.

[Randy1]

. . . The article clearly states that polished aircraft are faster than unpolished aircraft regardless of paint. . .

I found a B17 test that compared three cases.   Painted, unpainted and painted, sanded and polished.  They did not test unpainted polished.

[Greebo]

IIRC the Mosquito's top speed was reduced by about 20 mph when using the RAF's night black finish. Night black was a very matt paint with a rough surface texture.

As far as AH is concerned the choice of default skin has nothing to do with the flight model, they are two separate things as far as HTC are concerned.

[BnZs]

It should make no difference with the paint job in good condition and waxed. However, I'm guessing the bare metal is easier to keep slick when flying sorties day after day.

[Karnak]

IIRC the Mosquito's top speed was reduced by about 20 mph when using the RAF's night black finish. Night black was a very matt paint with a rough surface texture.

As far as AH is concerned the choice of default skin has nothing to do with the flight model, they are two separate things as far as HTC are concerned.

Mossie's top speed was about 8mph faster when waxed.  The Mossies in AH are not waxed (it was deemed not worth the effort during WWII), but also not night black.

I have read that it was standard to wax La-7s.  I am not sure if that carries over to other Russian fighters.

[FLS]

I found a B17 test that compared three cases.   Painted, unpainted and painted, sanded and polished.  They did not test unpainted polished.

If you mean that article you linked it was too general to really compare anything. What was clear was that polishing makes aircraft faster and polished and painted is as fast as polished and "unpainted" with wax or clear coat.

[DaveBB]

Something as thin as a piece of masking tape can disrupt laminar flow.  So it is a huge increase in drag to have any rough surface on the airfoil.  As far as a few hundred pounds go, that's really nothing for a B-17.  20 pounds for a fighter is also miniscule.