Talk:Nose art

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Military history: Aviation Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Zodiac#Western zodiac|zodiac]] The anchor (#Western zodiac) has been deleted by other users before.
[[List of surviving Consolidated B-24 Liberators#United States|''Witchcraft'']] The anchor (#United States) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Art critic[edit]

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)[reply]

Good call[edit]

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)[reply]

Shark's Teeth[edit]

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)[reply]

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 76.103.48.146 (talk) 23:07, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Mark Sublette 08:37, 28 October 2007 (UTC)Mark SubletteMark Sublette 08:37, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A-10 Sharkteeth[edit]

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)[reply]

But is it art?[edit]

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...

Mark Sublette 08:30, 28 October 2007 (UTC)Mark SubletteMark Sublette 08:30, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

return of the pin-up?[edit]

The United States Air Force had unofficially sanctioned the return of the pin-up (albeit fully clothed)

Either I am missing something or the article is missing the text about the disappearance of pin-up. Please clarify. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:27, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Virgin Atlantic[edit]

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.

Personally, I've no idea one way or the other. I just though I'd though this out there to see if there's a consensus.Catsmeat (talk) 08:27, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tail Art[edit]

We have a proposal, now marked by a redlink, 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)[reply]

Gallery[edit]

Considering the number of images in the article prose, is a gallery at all necessary? Unless someone voices opposition here, I'll likely remove it in a week or so. Loafiewa (talk) 20:18, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]