Richtofen's 102 /17 color scheme?

[vongrube]

Ok..check out the site below. There is an aircraft depicted as 152/17 with white fields behind the crosses. Mmmmmm......
What do you guys make of this. its also apparent that THIS aircraft is not streaked in the factory cammo. Red perhaps?

http://www.fokkerdr1.com/152_17.htm

[RAGIII]

Originally Posted by vongrube

Ok..check out the site below. There is an aircraft depicted as 152/17 with white fields behind the crosses. Mmmmmm......
What do you guys make of this. its also apparent that THIS aircraft is not streaked in the factory cammo. Red perhaps?

http://www.fokkerdr1.com/152_17.htm

While in use by von Richthofen the aircraft appeared as in the second photo. It is believed that at some point it was painted overall Red, probably just prior to being sent to the Berlin Museum for display. The Red dope did not adhere well to the white background and flaked off on the side shown, revealing the white rectangle. IHTH,
RAGIII

[vongrube]

Thank you for your response, but I am curious where you recieved your information?
Where does it say that the dope used peeled off the aircraft, or that it was applied shortly before the a/c was put on display?

[spacecrow]

Originally Posted by vongrube

Thank you for your response, but I am curious where you recieved your information?
Where does it say that the dope used peeled off the aircraft, or that it was applied shortly before the a/c was put on display?

Some accounts have 152/17 being painted all red along with 477 and 425, just prior to the "Michael Offensive." Others, and some on this board, dispute this. One photo shows 152 in the configuration it was in the museum.

[vongrube]

Arrrggghhh!!
This is so frustrating! So many different accounts, opinions, etc. I have several publications that have competely different captions for the same photo!!
At this point I have no definitive answer to my question. Is seems that the best answer to this question would be that we really don't know for sure if Richtofen flew a triplane with the paint scheme as described above.
Guess I'll keep searching.
Thanks anyway.

[spacecrow]

Originally Posted by vongrube

Arrrggghhh!!
This is so frustrating! So many different accounts, opinions, etc. I have several publications that have competely different captions for the same photo!!
At this point I have no definitive answer to my question. Is seems that the best answer to this question would be that we really don't know for sure if Richtofen flew a triplane with the paint scheme as described above.
Guess I'll keep searching.
Thanks anyway.

red tripe with white wheels and white or metal cowl- fuggetaboutit!
easy!

102/17 best bet green cowl-green metal upper deck, blue or natural linen (your choice) and rounded tail.

If you want an all red tripe red everything except white vertical stabilizer and check photos for correct cross. Don't need to worry if it was 477 or 425.

[RED BARON RETURNS]

Vongrube,i Have Been In Your Shoes With This Plane Too.i Have Been Making Mahogany Fokker Dr1 Triplanes And I Had The Help Of Other Modelers Sending Me There Color Pics Of What Some Of The Planes Looked Like.as Far As 102/17 Goes That Plane May Of Only Had A Top Red Wing And Tail A Lot Like The 152/17 But The Two Planes Are Different I Do Have Some Of The Old Pics That Were Sent To Me While I Was Building Them If You Need A Look Email Me.right Now I'm Getting Ready To Paint Up A Werner Voss 103/17 And The Pics To That Was Awsome As Well.good Luck In Finding What You Need.

[Dan_San_Abbott]

VonGrube;
Fok.DR.I 114/17 was in standard factory finish of olive brown streaking over CDL and sky blue under sides, and white crossfields.
Fok.DR.I 152/17, Red engine cowl, upper surface of top wing, all struts, wheel covers and empennage to include the fuselage sides from the leading edge of the fuselage cross. Turtle deck in camouflage streaked finish.
Fok.DR.I 127/17 same as DR.I 152/17.
Fok.Dr.I 477/17. Originally painted all dark red including rudder with Iron Crosses outlined in white. Later crosses were changed to the balken(beam) cross with 150 mm white borders and white rudder.
Fok.DR.I 425/17. Painted all red, with balken crosses with wide borders and white rudder.
Fok.Dr.I 161/17 and 525/17 were borrowed from Jasta 6, were not red.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[Hans]

It is really astonishing to see the difficulties to kill this Red Fokker myth. Years of research of qualified historians, just for nothing?

Vongrube, please don't mix up any available infos on red triplanes, but take a look to contemporary sources. All the myth started with this lonely picture:


( courtesy www.fokkerdr1.com)

This picture clearly shows an Fokker F-type, not a Dr.I. This picture was mislabelled with 'von Richthofen'. It could be the MvR flew this pre-series-version, but he never flew this in action. All F-types wore the standard Fokker Camouflage, none was ever painted red.

This is F 102. It shows the standard camouflage. No red at all. None on wings, none on tail.



All later DrI which Richthofen used had Eiserne Kreuze with white border. All photos which are available from these Triplane are showing this type of Cross. There are definitely no photos of a Richthofen Triplane with Iron Cross on a white square.

Hans

[RAGIII]

Originally Posted by vongrube

Thank you for your response, but I am curious where you recieved your information?
Where does it say that the dope used peeled off the aircraft, or that it was applied shortly before the a/c was put on display?

Von Grube,
There are many references on von Richthofen, and the Triplane in genetral. I suggest you invest in a few. AE Ferkos work on von Richthofen is a good start. This as available through Albatros publications. Alex Imrie has an excellent DR1 book as do others. Windsock Data Files alao by Albatros, and the Osprey Aircraft of the Aces series provide excellent coverage. The net is great but I like to be able to thumb through and peruse my info first hand. Speaking of the net, this subject has been Hotly discussed on this very forum! As far as I know, NO ONE after HJ Nowarra has really indicated the scheme that you are asking about! The simple answers are actually in this thread, DSA, and others have spelled out the markings and noted any controversies. Again IHTH,
RAGIII