The Aerodrome Forum - View Single Post

Langdon · 12 June 2006, 07:21 PM

CWatson,

You are misreading what I have stated. This has nothing to do with the rudder cross,it has to do with the color of the rudder itself. The pictures taken of 425/17's wreck taken from the rear has rudder covering still stuck to the frame of said rudder. The material is white inside and out. The torn edges of this material is white also, it was never painted red. If it was never painted red it could not be the "V" plane unless the rudder was swapped out and I do not believe that would be done simply for a color change. If 425/17 never had a red rudder it could have never looked exactly like the "V" plane with Iron Crosses.

You have not considered my previous answer to your question. The rudder in the photo you mention must have been either re-covered or change due to some damage, it certainly would not have had this done to it purely to change its colour. 425/17 for a time had its national markings changed to the narrow bordered type, it would be highly unusual for this to be done to all other crosses with the exception of the rudder. At that time other Dr.Is, including the one in the LeChelle photos as well as 152/17 had narrow bordered rudder crosses so it is highly unlikely in my opinion that 425/17 would have been different.

No contradiction, again you are misreading what I wrote or I did not make it clear enough, I did miss a comma. I meant to say there would not be red of the same mixture and shade. That is why I asked if the fuselage's paint was the same as the crossfield's. If the plane was painted at the factory red and delivered with white cross field I do not believe Fokker would have sent a batch of the same red color and shade paint with the plane to overpaint the crossfields and blue under surfaces.I am try to see if the different shades of red on the remains are from different shades of red used or simply the undercoat of paint, blue undersurface or white crossfields bleeding through over time.I have painted many cars and the chances of getting a exact match of paint from different batches is rare and with the primative conditions at the airfield of the period even less likely. You mention you feel it was red then overpainted red again when the crossfield were covered, was there evidence of a second coat of the same or different shade of red?

The paint on any of these aircraft would have looked different depending on where it was applied, if over the cross field you would expect it to be lighter than over the under-surface blue, if original streaky camouflage was present then it would have looked darker still, it doesn't matter which aircraft we are speaking of they would all display (to a greater or lesser extent, 425/17 would be less as its red was over CDL on its upper surfaces). I do not think you can assume the red in the photo was as perfect all over just because it looks this way in the photo. The V blemish for instance is probably a brush mark.
Who's to say that Fokker supplied the paint? It is quite possible that Jasta 11 supplied the paint to Fokker, these are questions that cannot be answered. The chemical composition is most likely the same for each application, with the possible exception of soot contamination.

You also mention most of the planes in the Jasta were painted the same shade of red, that is very unlikely in those conditions. If the paint was thinned or mixed in bucket for each plane and painted them at different times chances anything was exact is slim.

I believe it is highly likely they were the same. The paint was made by mixing mercuric sulfide and an extender to clear varnish, if they had a recipe they were following, which is likely, then it would look the same.

12 June 2006, 07:21 PM	#57 (permalink)
Langdon Forum Ace Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 753	CWatson, You are misreading what I have stated. This has nothing to do with the rudder cross,it has to do with the color of the rudder itself. The pictures taken of 425/17's wreck taken from the rear has rudder covering still stuck to the frame of said rudder. The material is white inside and out. The torn edges of this material is white also, it was never painted red. If it was never painted red it could not be the "V" plane unless the rudder was swapped out and I do not believe that would be done simply for a color change. If 425/17 never had a red rudder it could have never looked exactly like the "V" plane with Iron Crosses. You have not considered my previous answer to your question. The rudder in the photo you mention must have been either re-covered or change due to some damage, it certainly would not have had this done to it purely to change its colour. 425/17 for a time had its national markings changed to the narrow bordered type, it would be highly unusual for this to be done to all other crosses with the exception of the rudder. At that time other Dr.Is, including the one in the LeChelle photos as well as 152/17 had narrow bordered rudder crosses so it is highly unlikely in my opinion that 425/17 would have been different. No contradiction, again you are misreading what I wrote or I did not make it clear enough, I did miss a comma. I meant to say there would not be red of the same mixture and shade. That is why I asked if the fuselage's paint was the same as the crossfield's. If the plane was painted at the factory red and delivered with white cross field I do not believe Fokker would have sent a batch of the same red color and shade paint with the plane to overpaint the crossfields and blue under surfaces.I am try to see if the different shades of red on the remains are from different shades of red used or simply the undercoat of paint, blue undersurface or white crossfields bleeding through over time.I have painted many cars and the chances of getting a exact match of paint from different batches is rare and with the primative conditions at the airfield of the period even less likely. You mention you feel it was red then overpainted red again when the crossfield were covered, was there evidence of a second coat of the same or different shade of red? The paint on any of these aircraft would have looked different depending on where it was applied, if over the cross field you would expect it to be lighter than over the under-surface blue, if original streaky camouflage was present then it would have looked darker still, it doesn't matter which aircraft we are speaking of they would all display (to a greater or lesser extent, 425/17 would be less as its red was over CDL on its upper surfaces). I do not think you can assume the red in the photo was as perfect all over just because it looks this way in the photo. The V blemish for instance is probably a brush mark. Who's to say that Fokker supplied the paint? It is quite possible that Jasta 11 supplied the paint to Fokker, these are questions that cannot be answered. The chemical composition is most likely the same for each application, with the possible exception of soot contamination. You also mention most of the planes in the Jasta were painted the same shade of red, that is very unlikely in those conditions. If the paint was thinned or mixed in bucket for each plane and painted them at different times chances anything was exact is slim. I believe it is highly likely they were the same. The paint was made by mixing mercuric sulfide and an extender to clear varnish, if they had a recipe they were following, which is likely, then it would look the same.