Thanks everyone

Alan, that's what I thought too. Weathering and probably exposure to blazing sun, changes brand-spanking new red to more orange/scarlet over time.



Btw. Experimenting with Citadel's new Contrast paints recently, I found mixing 3 parts Gryph-hound Orange to 1 part Blood Angels Red gives me the shade needed for Wellington in India, or Zulu War British.

I've seen that photo, but the problem is it's useless as a historical reference as it stands. There is no provenance for the garments in the photo, and no indication of whether they belonged to a front line grenadier or a rear HQ clerk typist. More critically, the conditions they have been stored under since the 1940's: a parade or walking out tunic that has been worn briefly then stored in a trunk in Oma's attic will be radically different in color to a service uniform that has been displayed in a glass case for half a century - even though they looked the same when first issued from the QM stores - there is a very good reason why most museums ban flash photography - even of tanks and heavy equipment after all.

I'm reminded of the great mistake in Louisiana Tiger jackets from the ACW: based on surviving examples, they were brown with red trim and that was they way they appeared in Osprey books and on reenactors for a generation or more. Except that in 1978 the discovery of the graves of privates Dennis Corcoran and Michael O'Brien, who were executed in December 1861, resulted in some concrete evidence of some elements of the uniforms. A scientific investigation of the few scraps of textiles in the graves led to the conclusion that the jackets were originally blue with red trim!

Interesting point, Stuart. I hadn't thought of that. I still think you have to allow some, maybe even quite a degree of variation though maybe not as much as in the photo in question. Uniforms that a group might be wearing may come from several sources that have intrinsic differences.

Ian's post (above) seems to bear this out.

I once read a post a few years ago from a guy who had been in school just after WW2 who said that all the kids used ex British rucksacks to carry there books to school because they were so cheap at army & navy stores, & out of the twenty or so rucksacks there in the class not one matched another exactly.
which in my mind says that there is not one right colour but a range of colours that could be used for uniforms without being wrong.:slightly_smiling_face:

The Red has not changed, variation is about age and weathering, so like the guard at Buckingham palace for new uniform , and variations for service in the field.

Yes, they were all the rage (as in all the cool kids had one) when I was at school in the late 1960's. We used to paint all kinds of designs and pictures on the flap. They came in several colors: RAF blue and Army khaki, from various sources.

Some had been recycled and still had the serviceman's name or number on them, many of the ex army ones had been treated with "blanco" paste (which itself came in different shades of green, khaki and white); others were new unissued surplus stocks made in the UK and other countries. Canadian made web gear was different in color to Australian and Indian manufacture (hence the use of blanco paste to give a uniform appearance): Indian made webbing was a distinctive almost yellow shade of khaki compared to the light brown stuff made elsewhere, and often had black or gunmetal fittings instead of the usual brass.

When I am emperor of this galaxy though, I shall institute a rule that every army taking part in a war must us the same uniform all the way from start to finish, not change pattern and color half way through!

Can I get an Amen, brethren?:grin:

I still have a gas mask bag, WW2 issue, purchased for 15p about 1970 , it once held all by bits and bobs for fishing, I know have a double garage that overflows, time change :innocent: