I deleted this:
- "The planes were also decorated with bombs, "scalps" in form of enemy insignia, such as swastikas or rising sun flags, to illustrate the number of kills, or bombing missions the crew had been on. Some crews also used locomotives for train attacks, camels for cargo missions, broomsticks for "sweep" operations and sitting ducks for decoy missions. Major Eino Luukkanen (Finnish Air Force), 54 kills, used beer labels as victory insignia for his Brewster."
This isn't strictly "nose art". Maybe a separate page on victory or mission markings? Trekphiler 04:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
It would appear whoever made this comment was just trying to be funny and it is a good call to delete this from the section.
Signaleer 16:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't have a source right at hand - but I believe that a German pilot actually used shark's teeth in the Great War, well pre-dating WW II use... Mark Sublette 01:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)Mark SubletteMark Sublette 01:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
What is the application of bullets/bombs or minerature silhouetted planes with x on them called? To keep track of enemy planes shot down? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 23:07, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
- Kill or mission markings have been around since men took potshots at each other in the air. The kill markings for fighter pilots, or the bombs in a row denoting missions flown for bombers, are part of the military heritage, but I don't believe they qualify as part of the nose art. And there are all sorts of other mission markings - camels for flying the Hump, armour shot up, et cetera. The Memphis Belle had red and blue stars over certain bombs denoting the position it flew in the mission.
The A-10 is specifically referenced as a good example of the shark's teeth motif in modern usage. But aren't A-10's more likely to be decorated with the 'warthog' variation, with tusks as well as teeth? Or have I just seen a lot of photos of the same aircraft and the warthog paintjob isn't that common? Coyote-37 (talk) 14:32, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
But is it art?
I don't see any ref to nose art in this sentence:
A Bf-109K-14 (10 red) of I/JG 300, managed by Officer Wolfgang Hunsdorfer, was flown by various pilots.
If it is not detailing nose art, then this factoid needs to be somewhere else...
return of the pin-up?
- The United States Air Force had unofficially sanctioned the return of the pin-up (albeit fully clothed)
Is it part of the definition of nose art that it's unofficial or semi-official? A sort of grass-roots folk-art? If that were the case, Virgin Atlantic's markings would not apply as, although clearly inspired by the nose-art tradition, it's part of that airline's official livery.
Or is it simply defined as artistic work on the front of an aircraft that's individual to that particular aircraft? In which case defining VA'a livery as nose art is fine.
We have a proposal, no marked by a redling, that we add a new subject, Tail Art. Me, I think it's hair-splitting, the article centers on nose art proper, but covers, nicely, other related vehicle markings. Anmccaff (talk) 17:21, 19 October 2016 (UTC)