Sopwith triplane vs Fokker triplane - Humble Pie

[MikeW]

In the past I have emphatically stated that the Sopwith Triplane never met the Fokker triplane in combat. I fear that a small slice of humble pie might have to be eaten here:-

On the 24th September 1917, the day after Voss was downed, Naval 1 flew a 10 triplane offensive patrol from Bailleul at 4.45pm. They encountered 8 enemy scouts which included amongst their number 1 triplane. The encounter seems to have been completely uneventful but it does look as though both triplane types were briefly in the same vicinity at the same time.

Would this have been MvR? If not, who was it on an early evening patrol?

Mike

[Barrett]

According to JWC, Kurt Wusthoff of J.4 claimed a Camel near Moorslede at 4:50 German time. No other JG.I claims, and of course we don't know if Wusthoff had "triplane privileges" but I sorta doubt it.

[Gregvan]

Hi Mike,

Very interesting report . Kurt Wolff had been shot down in F.I 102/17 on Sept. 15th. Voss fell in F.I 103/17 on Sept. 23rd. According to all the conventional wisdom, as related in Alex Imrie's "The Fokker Triplane" and elsewhere, these were the only two operational Fokker triplanes at the Front until October 11, when the first of the productions Dr.I's (Dr.I 115/17) arrived at Jasta 15 at La Neuville, in the German VII Armee sector; it would be flown by Heinrich Gontermann, who crashed fatally in it. Seventeen more Dr.I's were shipped to Jagdgeschwader I at Marckebeeke on October 10 and 13, arriving around October 20th. So where did the Triplane in your report come from ?

Alex Revell has also mentioned the fact that some British combat reports mention encountering triplanes in the "gap" between Sept. 23 and Oct. 11, and he has strongly suggested that there were triplanes at the front considerably earlier than the official records indicate.On October 2nd, Muspratt and Rhys Davids ,56 Squadron,tangled with a formation of enemy scouts which included two "triplanes", according to Rhys Davids: "saw two Fokker Triplanes with no dihedral, large extensions, Nieuport tail, Fokker rudder and Martinsyde shaped wings, engine probably rotary. Climb appeared good ('High in the Empty Blue', page 179)." This certainly sounds like a fairly good description of a Fokker triplane, and makes it less likely that the triplanes being encountered at this time were captured and repainted Sopwith types (which is certainly also possible; a number of German pilots flew captured Allied fighters in combat, and they had captured more than one Sopwith Triplane.)

So, were these mystery triplanes previously unknown Fokkers, or were these Allied pilots mistaken in their identification ? Who knows ? It's a question for members of this forum...

Greg VanWyngarden

[AchimEngels]

If they would have had an encounter on 23rd, than it might have been mentioned in the war diary of Jagdgeschwader I.

But all it mentiones is that victory of Lt. Wüsthoff (Jasta 4) at 4.50 pm. On that day there took place some 43 (Kriegsflüge) combat flights. Maybe they met on one of these? But however, I doubt it was a Fokker Triplane. * :

Rittmeister von Richthofen flew one of the new (quotation from JG I war diary) Fokker triplanes on September 1st and downed his 60th, an British artillery spotter who took him obviously for one of the Sopwith triplanes since he made no attempt to defence himself. Obviously there was a lot of confusion. And do not forgett about all the other triplanes around in those days. I do not know when the first front line trials of the Pfalz Dr.I took place, but they might have been around these days, too.

Achim

P.S. Dan-San (below) is right about the Pfalz Dr.I since Idflieg orderd some 10 of tese by October first time for evaluation.(just checked )

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Michael W:
There were no Pfalz DR.I aircraft operatiomal or in front trials in 1917, a;so there were no Fok. F.I or Fok.DR.I aircraft in service or or in trials after 23 September 1917. Fok. DR.I did not return to front sevice until mid October 1917.
Blauer Himmel,

[Droops]

Is it possible that these might be some other triplane type that was being evaluated for operational duty? I know that's not likely, but I'm trying to find some reasonable solution to what appears to be an impossible set of circumstances.

John

[MikeW]

All,

the triplane sighting comes from Naval 1's Daily Ops Reports for the 24th September. The Sopwith triplane patrol included a number of experienced "old hands" including Minifie, Ridley and Rowley, all of whom should have known the difference between an Albatros DV and a Triplane.

I don't think the encounter involved anything more than a bit of positional sparring, there was certainly no combat report for the meeting.

Maybe it was a captured Sopwith as suggested, Naval 1 lost several that were forced to land in German territory.

Or maybe it was a case of seeing what they wanted to see, I suppose the news of the death of Voss must have circulated pretty rapidly, and Fokker triplanes would be on pilot's minds.

Just another one of those mysteries!

[Barrett]

It's often fun to play recognition games w/combat films, especially gun camera footage. There have been at least a couple of instances of Luftwaffe views of RAF fighters in which I defy anybody to tell me (first time thru) whether the victim is a Spit or Hurribox. Similar problemos with 109s and 190s, seen from 4-6 o'clock.
ID errors are common in combat, which is the Big Reason for "friendly fire" (which, by definition, isn't!)

[wings]

On page 160, Volume 8, Number 2, Summer 1967, Cross & Cockade Journal, there is a photo of Wusthoff, Jasta 4, standing next to a captured Sopwith Triplane. On the same page, another photo is said to show the same triplane in German markings, in apparent flying condition.

[MikeW]

Wings,

that one was N5429 belonginging to Naval 1, brought down by Wusthoff on 13th September, the pilot Wilford becoming a POW.

There are several photographs of this one in German markings. Probably on an operational aerodrome as well.

I wonder?

Mike