More on F1 103/17

[Craig]

On Rosebud's site, I found a photo (http://www.geocities.com/wwiaero/images/DR1_103_17.jpg ) of Voss' triplane. Why does the forward part of the fuselage look so dark, and the rear so light, if it was painted in the usual "streaky green" we expect on such machines? A second photo (http://www.geocities.com/wwiaero/ima..._mechanics.jpg )seems to repeat this appearance.

Karl Timm, Voss' mechanic told Alex Imrie that when 103/17 was delivered it was all grey. dark, dirty grey on the forward section and light grey aft of the cockpit. By the way, 103/17 was not a Dr1 it was a V4 pre-production model.

[Rod_Filan]

You're quite right on the Dr1 comment Barry.
Although the file was named Dr1 etc..., all photos of 101, 102, 103 are captioned F1....
You may find more than a few file names that conflict with what the subject of the photo actually may be, but captions are (hopefully) correct.

If anyone spots an error, omission or misidentification... for gawds sake, please let me know!

Additionally, if anyone has a further description or historical data; don't be shy, email me the real scoop. I have been adding this info on or under the photo, and whether you like it or not I'll add a credit for the submission.

BTW many of the Fokker F1 photos are compliments Gaston Graf at www.jastaboelke.de and more detailed info on them is available there. ...an excellent site well worth the visit.

VBR
Rod

1575 images and counting...

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Craig:
The first four Fokker triplanes were V.4 designs and carried the "F.I designation in the Besselnummer, ie Fok.F.I I00/17-103/17. Beginning with serial number 104 they were new production designs in the V series and were V.5 and were redesignated DR.I, (Dreidecker I) and applied all subsequent serial numbers.
The paint was not grey according to to Karl Timm, he define it as "earth grey" which is defined in the Methuen Handbook of Colour as "Earth-coloured (or mould): 5F2, The colour of half-dry earth or mould of the kind used in gardens."
The paint was thinned for ease of application, solid or very dark areas are the result of repeated brushing with a fully loaded brush. A sample of fabric from Fok. DR.I 144/17 was in the Imperial War Museum Archives and Paul Leaman made a study of the sample and provided me with a copy of his study. It does not have an under coat of sky blue, it is an olive brown over clear doped linen fabric.
The real and bonified study conducted by Lt. Barfoot-Saunt of Fok.F.I 103/17 is in the Public Records Office, PRO file AIR1 Box 1061 defines the colour as "It is camouflage green on the upper surface and sky blue on the lower."
I hope this answers your question.
Blue skies,
Dan-San Abbott

Craig, that's easy to explain- reflected light. The doped surfaces on German fighters had low gloss but high specularity, which results in large highlights on surfaces.

Part of it is also due to how "global lighting" works- that the light on the aircraft is not just coming from the sky, but is reflected off of other surfaces. This is particularly obvious on the wing undersurfaces- notice how their value decreases as you move inward toward the fuselage, where more of the indirect light is blocked. The value of the wing undersurfaces goes from very light to almost black, and yet we can be fairly certain they were painted a consistent color.

In other words, whether a surface appears light or dark often has nothing to do with the actual color of that surface, but the amount of light reaching it, and the physical properties of that surface which dictate how much of that light is reflected diffusely (the real color of the surface) or as a specular reflection (the color of the light hitting the surface).

Hope that makes sense It's something that folks like me that spend lots of time with 3D modeling and rendering programs sweat over.

[Volker_Nemsch]

Hello Craig!

Here is a website that may help you:

http://www.fokker-team.de/

Best regards
Volker Nemsch

Craig, when I responded before I had only looked at 17_mechanics, and my response was based upon that. I stand by those comments, you're seeing alot of specular reflection on the rear fuselage that lightens it considerably.

I just looked at the other image, and now I see what you mean. First, though, much of the dark-to-light transition that you see just forward of the cockpit area is shadow from both the middle and lower wings.

However, that being said there's several things I see that are interesting:

1) The area just to the rear of the cowling is very dark, but is not in any shadow. The coverage of the darker paint is almost complete, although you can just barely see evidence of streaking.

2) The middle and rear fuselage are of a much lighter value than Dr.I's showing the "standard" Fokker finish that I've seen. It clearly shows streaking of one color over another, but it's almost as if the top coat were thinned to the point of being a wash.

3) There's one very dark streak just aft of the fuselage cross- why? It almost looks like it continues over the top.

4) Even stranger, look at the area between the legs of the mechanic on the far right- it's of a very light value, much lighter than the surrounding areas, showing no signs of streaking at all. It continues up to his right to the horizontal tail. It almost looks like an intentional light stripe of sorts.

Regardless, I now see why 56 squadron said it was blue or blue green. After looking at that photograph, I'd be very surprised if that plane did not look more blue than green at a distance.

[Craig]

Though your replies hardly comprise a consensus, I thank one and all for your answers. I'm still not sure what to think.

Unsurprisingly, Craig concludes his foray into the appearance of Voss’ F.I 103/17 somewhat less assured than he may have hoped at the outset, if not downright despairing. It remains a continuing source of irony that the most photographed single airframe of the war continues to elude a consensus about what it actually looked like.

Despite my own sense of futility in dealing with this Hydra-headed devil-plane from Hades, I’ll put my own oar into the stygian darkness of this particular branch of the river of oblivion—the stream of History.

It is commonly agreed by researchers in this area that the fabric surfaces of preproduction F.I’s—101, 102, and 103/17—were doped (or painted?) overall a light blue gray/turquoise (Rimell)/aqua (my own characterization—see the patches of greenish blue on the Dr. I fabric at Charles Gosse’s site (http://charlesgosse.home.mindspring.com), tentatively identified as from Richthofen’s 425/17. Unfortunately, I do not know what evidence has been brought forward to support this use of “turquoise.” But, as will be seen, since it supports the eyewitness reports of RFC Squadron 56 pilots, let this stand.

Photographs of all three aircraft show that a camouflage pattern of “olive”—read (dark) “green” as reported by Barfoot-Saunt in the PRO Salvage Report referred to by Dan-San Abbott—applied in varying densities over the base color that is consistent with general Fokker practice for many ‘streaky’-finished aircraft, including Dr. I’s and D.VII’s. One of the clearest photographs of this ‘pattern’ is that of 160/17 appearing on page 1 of the Albatros Publications Fokker Dr. I Datafile Special. Metal cowling and upper forward decking solid olive. Immediately behind and below these areas a very heavy application, albeit showing brush strokes, continuing rearward to the cockpit area. An appreciably lighter application is seen from there to the national insignia field. Another dark, nearly solid application is seen to the rear of the insignia band, the appearance of this latter area being, perhaps, somewhat affected by the shadow of the tailplane.
Another, less detailed, photograph of Dr. I 212/17 mounted—sans wings—on a railway flatcar for delivery essentially replicates this pattern (photo 63, DF Special).

How do the F.I’s compare?

(to be continued)

How do the F.I’s compare?
101/17: Photo 1 (DF Special): A Fokker factory photo, front left ¾ view. The wings are not mounted, so the confusing effects of shadow from them are not present. The cowl and upper fore decking are unpainted. A narrow band of moderately heavy olive between the cowl and breather pipe; a heavy, nearly solid band from the breather pipe to aft of the middle wing fairing; a moderately dense band from there to the insignia field, lightening somewhat from fore to aft; and finally, a dark band from the insignia to the tail, some of which is perhaps in the shadow of the tailplane. All olive bands have distinct, clear demarcations.

102/17: Photo 2 (DF Special; also reproduced in von Richthofen’s Flying Circus [vRFC]): Rear left ¾ view. Detail forward of the cockpit is minimal due to angle, focus, and, most importantly, the shadowing effect of the middle wing. Nonetheless, it seems clear enough that the cowl and decking are dark colored, as is the fabric area from the cowl to aft of the cockpit. The well-seen area between the cockpit and the insignia band is consistent with the appearance of this area in the photo of 101. The visible area behind the insignia band is dark, presumably nearly solid, and is not affected by the tailplane in this view.
Photo page 48, bottom (vRFC; also at http://www.geocities.com/aerodromeaces/ima.../Dr1_102-17.jpg where the tonal values are too dark, but more of the rear fuselage is visible): Close-up side view of cockpit, from wing trailing edge to just aft of the insignia band. Although valuable because of its superior detail compared with the previous, tonal values are marred by lens flare, over-exposure/over-development, and possibly halation, the overall effect being too light. Nonetheless, there is a clear, if somewhat ‘soft’ transition from an area of moderate application forward to very light, almost nonexistent olive at about the “k” in “Fok.” of the airframe serial. This transition point of dark to light application is almost precisely replicated in the several photographs of Alois Heldmann’s Fokker D.VII 244/18. The small area aft of the insignia band that is visible is very dark and featureless, supporting the appearance in the rear view that it is a solid, unstreaked olive.

Now to the mystery ship, 103/17:
(to be continued!)