What's the point in such camo schemes...

[Bonehammer]

....as those applied to the Backfire and Fencer? I know of
anti-radiation white applied to the underside of nuclear bombers, but
the reason of white leading edges on the Su-24 escaps me - seems
'anti'camouflage. Perhaps it helps in disguising the shape of the
'incoming' from visible/IR sensors on the ground? Thanks in advance
for any explanation.

TIA
Bonehammer

[Evan Williams]

This is a total shot in the dark, but I remember puting tape on the leading
edges of F/A-18 wings in order to protect the paint. When the A/C flew a
lot of low level sortes in dusty or sandy environments the tape would wear
down fairly quickly. It was easier to replace tape than it was to repaint
the A/C. Of course I'm probably wrong. I have a tendancy to look for
simple solutions to complex problems.

Evan Williams

"Bonehammer" > wrote in message
om...
> ...as those applied to the Backfire and Fencer? I know of
> anti-radiation white applied to the underside of nuclear bombers, but
> the reason of white leading edges on the Su-24 escaps me - seems
> 'anti'camouflage. Perhaps it helps in disguising the shape of the
> 'incoming' from visible/IR sensors on the ground? Thanks in advance
> for any explanation.
>
> TIA
> Bonehammer

[John Newell]

Disruptiove camo works in odd ways sometimes. In World War 2 they did try
covering the leading edges of Catalina wings with spotlights, which were lit
(By photo cell) to the same intensity as the background sky. Worked a trreat
as well...Voila! 60 year oold stealth!

regards,

John


"Bonehammer" > wrote in message
om...
> ...as those applied to the Backfire and Fencer? I know of
> anti-radiation white applied to the underside of nuclear bombers, but
> the reason of white leading edges on the Su-24 escaps me - seems
> 'anti'camouflage. Perhaps it helps in disguising the shape of the
> 'incoming' from visible/IR sensors on the ground? Thanks in advance
> for any explanation.
>
> TIA
> Bonehammer