Streaky Wings.

[Ginger.]

Was the sideways brush lines on the DR1 wings for the following purposes?
I recall reading somewhere that if you are shooting at a target moving one way that has angled stripes on it,an optical effect is created that confuses cordination.I have read one or two accounts of Tripes appearing to jerk "crablike" through the air.
If this optical effect was known about in WW1 would not more aircraft have carried such camoflage?

Ginger, I don't think that the Fokker streaking had anything to do with that. The pilots who wanted to apply the "Optical Illusion" (Die Optische Taeuschung) took more drastic steps with higher contrast. Hans Kirschstein, Ernst Udet, Ulrich Neckel, Fritz Rumey, Josef Mai, and numerous other German pilots applied diagonal stripes to their aircraft upper wings and or fuselages in either black and white, or another high contrast color scheme. The hope was to throw the aiming off. Kirschstein claimed that it had the desired effect. He was however killed in a crash unrelated to combat.

The Germans weren't alone in this. There are documented photographs of a Sopwith Pups, Camels, SE5s (and 5as), etc. on home defence or training duties painted in these "dazzle" schemes. Also, many flight instructors had their pet machines painted up for the fun of it in England. Australian Ace Harry Cobby had a white Sopwith Camel with a black checkered finish, including the cowling, wheel covers, and the vertical tailplane in front of the rudder were all black and white checkerboard design. A long horizontal (longitudinal?) checked stripe connected the cowling to the tail midways along the fuselage.

The Fokker Triplane was very adept at making rapid turns without banking, but only by applying rudder. This ability to change direction without much tilt of the wings would be disconcerting to pursuing aircraft, used to predicting the movement of their target by watching the bank of the wings rather than the relatively tiny movement of a rudder. I think it probably accounts for the "crabbing" of the Triplane that you read.

Voss in his last fight with the flight from 56 squadron led by Captain McCudden issustrated the excellence of the Dr.1 abiltity for yawing at a amazing rate without the need for aditional pitch or bank controll. Voss, after his fellow pilots had fallen in the fight was at a position of fighting off the faster Se5a, he had to move fast as the Dr.1 was always a 'fat little target' when in a dogfight, so this 'Crabbing' was a good way to switch attacks from one enemy A/C to another
However Voss was shot down by A. Rhys-David, a great loss for Germany and Aviation History.

[PeterL]

Ginge, no doubt someone has the right answer but I can't help feeling that it would be for some boring practical reason rather than the "optical illusion" you suggest. If the wings were doped in the horizontal possition laid on tressles it strikes me it would just be easier that way. At this point the equaliser steps out of the shaows and levels his Gnu.....BNAG!!

cheers

Peter L

Regardless of whether it was a distortion technique or not, Ginger's question is a valid one, because of the wide range of experimental techniques in camouflage developed in WW1. While the dazzle painting of ships is probably the best-known, there were a lot of other attempts, some quite bizarre. Have you seen the photo of the Camel painted with three-dimensional diamonds along the fuselage, intended to throw off the aim of enemy gunners by distorting perspective? In fact, it was the development of aerial observation and photo interpretation that made the use of effective camouflage imperative to both sides in the war. By war's end techniques were highly sophisticated.

[Terry_Crisp]

Ginger,
I have to agree with P.L. that the real reason is probably dissapointingly mundane ( my personal guess is that the thrifty Fokker fiqured it was cheaper to do something arbitrary and unrepeatable).
On the other hand jerking crablike is very easy to do, just ask any student pilot.My personal view is that in some cases it was a calculated manouver and in others it was merely a startle response,a sort of phisiological O S--T.
Theres my two cents worth.
Very Best Regards,
Terry

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Hi Ginger:
In my opinion I think theFokker streaked pattern applied to the Fok.D.III, D.IV, D.V, DR.I and the AEG C.IV(Fok) was an attempt to disrupt the perceived lines of these aircraft. as a means of camouflage with one color paint. It did use less paint than a fully painted two color or three color scheme. Most manufacturers were spraying the paint rather than hand brushing the paint ion the aircraft. Spraying the paint would be cheaper and quicker than the hand painted scheme used by Fokker. All used one color coat of paint. I don't think he was trying to save money, this was HIS scheme, I think it was more ego than money!
From dead astern in the shooter's position, the application of the strokes in the scheme would not be descernible, only in the top view, and on the ground it's purpose would be to break up the lines, in the air at close range any scheme is useless.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[stevedrew]

Ginger,
The simple effect of kicking your rudder from side to side causes your aircraft to yaw through the sky, giving the impression that the aircraft is travelling in one direction (where it's nose is pointing) when it fact it's travelling in a slightly different direction. This is usually sufficient to throw a pilot's aim out a little bit. That's all you need to survive in some instances.
As for the deceptive paint jobs putting gunners off their aim, consider the Bf109 flown by the Blond Knight of Germany, Erich Hartmann (352 victories - NOT a misprint! - that's right, I said 352 victories). His aircraft had an anti-clockwise spiral painted on the spinner of his Messershmitt so as to cause an optical illusion from the front of his aircraft. Some purport this to have given the impression the propellor was stopped (I'm afraid this would only work at one particular engine revolution speed), and hence convincing the opposing (ground) gunner that the aircraft was going to crash with no engine power. Others say it was useful in head on passes of other fighters (shudder!) to convince the opponents that the aircraft was a few feet left (or is it right) of where it actually was. Again, a few feet is all that is required, meaning the difference between an engine and cockpit attack to a spot a few feet along the wing. Hope that didn't confuse anyone.
Steve Drew

Just a note to say that 352 victories is not that surprising for a German pilot if you take some points into consideration. i) there were so many allied A/C in the sky by 1944/45. ii) German pilots were not rotated between training and operations, they kept going untill they were wounded or Killed!! some German pilots did excess of 1000 missions.