425/17

Langdon · 17 January 2006, 02:05 PM

Dan-San,

It is impossible to tell why MvR chose certain aircraft over others, I imagine there are a variety of reasons to do with maintenance and damage. Also the records we have are not records of each flight - as far as I know - they are records of success in combat and it is highly likely that there were many more unsuccessful flight than successful ones even for an ace of his standing.

I asked the question about the date the LeChelle photo was taken because, due to the markings it is almost certainly prior to the end of March. There is one plane we know with certainty that was painter all red with narrow white borders around its national markings and that was 425/17, we know this as the evidence survives today, we can speculate that 477/17 was also painted this way but I was under the impression that the combat reports you refer to describe the paint scheme differently to that of 425/17 which was described by MvR as being all red, his description of 477/17 being somewhat different.

You're view "I believe that during the period of 12 to 19 April 1918, Fok.DR.425/18 was acquired and was painted for MVR" seems an unlikely scenario. We know that this aircraft underwent two changes in Richthofen's personal colours (both all red) and it seems unlikely that the first of these would be carried out after the mandated change and yet be painted in the earlier markings, and then again be painted - and you believe, without him ever flying this aircraft - to the correct markings possibly even the day before his first recorded flight in it.

For whatever reason 425/17 was not his preferred mount - or at least he was unsuccessful on it - until the end of his career. Could it be the aircraft in the photos? Yes. Are there reasons why 477/17 was more likely to be photographed? Sure, but unless we can prove with certainly that 477/17 was painted all red then this debate can only be speculation and not "ALL THE PHOTOS ARE OF 477/17 and none of 425/17!!"

Langdon

Dan_San_Abbott · 18 January 2006, 12:34 PM

Langdon;
All of this is personal opinion and specification on ALL our parts. what I have stated is just that. In regard to the MvR combat reports, it is my opinion the are fakes. They do not follow the German Combat report form and style. The dates are in American style, month day year, instead of the European style, day month year. There is no provenence to their origin or who made the translation and from what records were these translations made. As far as I am concerned they are not true copies of MvR's combat reports. Also I respect your opinion on this matter.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

Langdon · 18 January 2006, 05:11 PM

Dan-San,

I have not seen these combat reports and it is outside of my normal area of study so I accept your observation on the possibility of their authenticity. what a pity there are people who would stoop to producing fake historic documents.

We have had the discussion before (a couple of times I think) concerning the approximate date that 425/17 was personalised for MvR's use. Do you now accept that given the aircraft was painted (at an earlier stage) all red (with the possible exception of the rudder) with the thin white borders around the old style cross, that it was likely to have been one of his personal aircraft prior to mid March and for whatever reason it was not flown or he was not successful on this aircraft?

Langdon

Dan_San_Abbott · 19 January 2006, 04:35 PM

Langdon:
My opinion has not changed. The time frame I gave in a previous post is what I believe. The all red machine at Lechelle Airfield on 26 March 1918, is Fok.DR.I 477/17. All the photos that show the blemish on the right side below the cockpit are of Dr.I 477/17. MvR acquired Dr.I sometime before 20 Aopril 1918. possibly during the period between 12 April to 19 April and had it painted all red. The fact that the crosses were change two or three times was because Idflieg direct ALL crosses the be changed. The fact that the red is over the white paint, states the crosses were changed before it was painted red. Suppostion about when he first flew ,is just that, it is supposition. With what record are available, indicates he never flew it before 20 April 1918. In all probability he did, we don't know when, or if ever! In the outline in answer to you, what I have stated are facts from the record. The only suppositions are when these two aircraft (477 & 425) were prepared.
All the dates are when he scored his victories, or moved from one airfield to another, and what plane he was flying when scored thos victories. Those are not suppositions, those are established facts.
I am only stating my opinion in this question.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

Langdon · 19 January 2006, 07:46 PM

Dan-San,

425/17 arrived from the factory with standard, large white cross fields. I do not know if the aircraft was entirely standard as far as camouflage goes - I know Allan Toelle has inspected many samples and has noted a complete absence of upper surface camo, and I believe his findings are that the aircraft arrived from the factory painted mainly in red.

You are wrong when you say that the crosses were changed prior to the aircraft being painted red. The first change in National markings was to overpaint the large cross fields so that the Eisernes Kreuz was surrounded by a narrow border - the crosses remained the same - this would not have been carried out after the 17th of March 1918. Surely you are not suggesting that MvR would instruct his men to paint his aircraft in superseded National markings at some stage in April or even late March and then have them repaint it again shortly after.

This is not a question as to whether the LeChelle photos are of 425/17 or 477/17 it is simply a matter of logical deduction on the history of 425/17.

Langdon

RAGIII · 19 January 2006, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Langdon

Dan-San,

425/17 arrived from the factory with standard, large white cross fields. I do not know if the aircraft was entirely standard as far as camouflage goes - I know Allan Toelle has inspected many samples and has noted a complete absence of upper surface camo, and I believe his findings are that the aircraft arrived from the factory painted mainly in red.

You are wrong when you say that the crosses were changed prior to the aircraft being painted red. The first change in National markings was to overpaint the large cross fields so that the Eisernes Kreuz was surrounded by a narrow border - the crosses remained the same - this would not have been carried out after the 17th of March 1918. Surely you are not suggesting that MvR would instruct his men to paint his aircraft in superseded National markings at some stage in April or even late March and then have them repaint it again shortly after.

This is not a question as to whether the LeChelle photos are of 425/17 or 477/17 it is simply a matter of logical deduction on the history of 425/17.

Langdon

Langdon,
It is nice to see that someone with more credentials than myself is presenting this question. I have asked this in at least one other thread before. If the large white fields were painted out leaving narrow white borders before MvR took ownership then Olive Brown would have been used as on other Triplanes in Jasta 11/JG1. 425/17 had large white fields painted out with Red, then changed twice per Idflieg orders, with red. This is evident in the crosses still held in various museums. It stands to reason that 425/17 was assigned to MvR earlier as you say. I agree that it isn't a question of which aircraft is pictured. JMHO, even though I know I am not in the same league with Alex, Dan, GvW or yourself.
RAGIII

Langdon · 3 February 2006, 01:02 PM

RagIII,

This one never gets answered!

Tim West · 4 February 2006, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Langdon

RagIII,

This one never gets answered!

Frustrating isn't it

Guess thats part of the allure of this period in aviation history. It kind of gives everyone a chance to dig around and draw their own take on history. That makes this era unique in that even amateurs can take part and contribute.

Langdon · 4 February 2006, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim West

Frustrating isn't it

Guess thats part of the allure of this period in aviation history. It kind of gives everyone a chance to dig around and draw their own take on history. That makes this era unique in that even amateurs can take part and contribute.

No, I mean the fact that the Eisernes Kreuz was modified by giving it a narrow border proves that the first repainting was done previous to the official markings change to the Balken kreuz. One researcher was stating some time ago that there was no proof (actually he put up a challenge for any proof) of MvR's involvement with this aircraft prior to the 20/4/18. The fact that it was painted in his colours prior to early March proves this but has never been acknowledged.

Dan_San_Abbott · 19 February 2006, 04:25 PM

Langdon:
I am not being a smart ass when I ask you this question, first I don't want an opinion, I want straight skinny, What color were the cross fields painted on Fok.DR.I 425/17 that are held in the Australia War Museum?
This I am most curious about. What I understand you to say is, "The first modfication to the crossfields to comply with the Idflieg order to paint out the crossfields leaving only a 5cm white border surrounding the Iron Cross. (Before the 17 March 1918 order to change the cross form to the Balken cross.)" Can you substantiate your answer?
Blue skies,
Dan-San