I learn a lot about life drawing airplanes.
NERD ALERT: This post is really just musing on the futility of trying to get artwork 'perfect.' A better history lesson will follow, prolly on my Substack...
* break break *
Most of the time, what I learn is poured into the mental-box reserved for abstractions, points-to-ponder...
Hang with me.
Look at my art below - it's a McDonnell Douglas F-4E Phantom II that was flown by Lt Colonel D.C. Vest in 1972 while assigned to the 336th Tactical Fighter Squadron (TFS), nicknamed, "The Rocketeers."
At the time, the 336th was based out of Ubon, Thailand, flying combat missions into North and South Vietnam.
It's old art - I did this in 2016!!
Anyway, notice some elements...
Tail Code: The two large letters on the tail. These became prevalent markings on most USAF aircraft around 1967. The Navy/Marines had been doing this since after WWII. Why the disparity? Ask a Marine aviator (you might find the response amusing). Nevertheless, Tail Codes are an important detail.
Serial Code: These are mostly an abbreviation of the serial number assigned to the aircraft at the factory. This number tells a story of when the particular lot/batch of aircraft were ordered/upgraded. Serial Numbers very-very-very rarely change on aircraft, civilian or military.
The *'s show details that may/may not be consistent within a squadron or unit. In this case, the 336th wanted to have these markings on their aircraft. Realize that they could be added/modified/removed in a couple of hours. In the case of 221 (the F-4 shown above) the yellow tail-top and divisional/command shields were generally applied to 336th F-4s but not mandated.
The ? marks details that are generally mandated but often changed such as stencils added to call out certain features of the aircraft; most of the time, these stencils are reminders to maintenance crew to do/think a certain thing. "HAND HOLD" "JET A FUEL ONLY" are examples. These may/not be done at the factory and may/not be maintained during regular maintenance.
But 99.999% of the time, USAF aircraft have the American "Star and Bar" insignia in a definite place and a definite size.
For people like me who have opportunity to draw a particular airplane at a particular moment in time, we learn to balance the resources of TIME - ENERGY - MONEY (TEM) to create what we hope to be an accurate representation of what the particular aircraft 'looked like.'
But, what happens when new information comes up that changes the art?
I used to weep. But, I grew up. Now, I just swear once or twice and go back to 'life.' Practically, one the deal is done, the pilot has signed, the work is displayed, there's nothing to do other than shrug and give a loose apology.
However.
Recently, I (almost) fulfilled the commission to draw "264," a Republic F-105F Thunderchief that John Wambough flew on a particularly important day in October, 1968.
I assumed the Tail Code would follow a certain convention that had replicated itself in the past. And I even pestered the man about photos. Did he have any? "Not that I can recall, but I'll check..."
TEM demanded I move forward so I rendered what I assumed to be 'the way it was done.' Circumstances being what they are for me, I was able to visit John at his home and show him what I THOUGHT was the final artwork.
John me: Well... here's 264! What do you think?
John W: Wow. Great! I like it! Thank you!
(Wife points to kitchen counter piled with photos, plaques, documents...
Wife: You need to see this photo album...
And low, behold, a treasure trove of photos of 264. To my dismay... there, in living black and white, was a perfect tail-shot of John's "Thud" (nickname for the F-105) revealing that I'd totally gotten the markings WRONG.
 |
Col Wambough and I going through his pile of 'history.' I love this part of my work! |
Wrong lettering, positioning, convention...
John me: Oh sh*t. I have to redo your tail.
John W: Why??
I then waxed poetic, pointing to lettering spacing, style, stenciling; John squinted, then stated, "Yes. You're right. You noticed the detail."
Three airports, seven hours travel-time, and 36 hours later, I obsessively updated the artwork to reflect the style/change revealed by the photo (and not the assumptions made over years of work and reinforcement of detail).
There's a lesson here: assumptions are not facts, one can only do so much, every once in a while and Gawd throws you a bone.
Oh. And always endeavor to go to 'the source.'
