425/17

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Gentlemen:
When I wrote the article " Manfred Freiherr von Richthofen his Aeroplanes and victories" for Over the Front,Vol.3 No.3, Autumn 1988. I did not have the questionable MvR Combat Reports. At the back of the articles I listed the seventeen sources from which I developed the article. I know that Heinz Nowarra and Kimbough Brown's "Richthofen and the Flying Circus" was the basic source for the aircraft flown and the matching victory. Some of the books by Alex Imrie were valuable. What I have done in the past to to date, I have a yellow high lighter with me, and when something of interest pops up, I high light it for future reference.
In regard to the MvR Combat Reports, I would not use them because simply I don't think they are valid. I am somewhat amazed that so many have taken these reports as a valid data. They are so flawed, I could not use them.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[CWatson]

Thanks Dan San,

I knew you would clear up that fact.

CWatson

[Langdon]

Originally Posted by CWatson

How do you know? Can you see through the white paint on the fuselage? The rudder and fuselage cross field look very clean or more like freshly painted, looks like a paint can with a brush in it setting right under the cross field. This plane could have been painted like 152/17, red to the front of cross field and then repainted starting with the crosses and their fields. I understand on the cut crosses from 425/17's wreck the field were painted red without ever have been green ect, but going by the pictures with the flaking white paint I can not tell how it was layered if it was painted red and then the cross modified later to balkiin cross with just squaring off with red then white and black applied, I just can not tell from the pics. If it was in my hands I would be able to tell how the paint was layered.

Just trying a new angle hoping that maybe someone will notice something that was missed, jar their memory,or maybe get better qaulity photos in someone's private stashes that will prove or disprove something posted. Remember it was said (by you) that the wreckage of 425/17 did not have white cross fields overpainted yet after I mentioned it the pictures in your own collecting of the wreck's peices showed them clearly and you posted them.

Speaking of cross fields two of the four know pictures of the red triplane in question, the inverted V plane, are very clear and the one that is taken from the right front, a very clear shot, does not show such a thinly painted cross field, the whole fuselage looks pretty even. The pictures of this plane are so clear they show paint wearing of the trailing edges and finish damage on the right and left side of the fuselage and top of the middle wing ,if the cross field were so thinly painted as the ones from the wreck it would show as would the fuselage numbers and dantum line.

If someone had a clear early copy of the (often mislabeled as silk covered) right front shot showing the data panel on the cowling we would not have this discussion ever again. Someone must have one in their archive.

CWatson

I think there has been a mix-up here, I thought you were speaking of the aircraft identified as 477/17 in Imrie's book which was the subject of the discussion you refered to; What I was saying is this could not have been painted the same way as the aircraft in the LeChelle photos as the cross has been modified on the fuselage yet the fuselage around the cross still has streaky camo. Since 425/17 never had streaky camo in this area and the cross was modified after the cross field had been over painted red, the aircraft Imrie believes is 477/17 as identified by its werks number, could not be the aircraft in the LeChelle photos.

Langdon

[Langdon]

Originally Posted by CWatson

We are talking about two aircraft photographed at the same time the iron crossed red plane and the other plane identified as 477/17 by Langdon....
CWatson

Not by me by Alex Imrie in his triplane book. The piece of fabric you refer to was discovered by Imrie in the IWM, it is a very small piece from around the carburettor air intake.

Langdon

[Langdon]

Originally Posted by Troy Raines

CWatson, truer words have never been spoken Sir, I agree. the discovery of new evidence is what makes this place such fun! In fact, I had not heard of the "new" Voss D.III!

It seems that the idea of 425/17 having lower wing crosses that had not been fully converted to the latin style started with the trophy'ed crosses. I was suggesting they had been fully converted and that maybe wear & tear over the years had flaked off paint and made them look incomplete? I have never seen them in person myself and would welcome the imput of someone who has. I'm never too old to learn. Never paid much attention to the von R artifacts but I will from now on, this is FUN!

I believe the source was an article in Windsock magazine a couple of years ago. I will certainly let you know when I find it.

Yeah, you're right. Didn't Imrie say that one digit of the werke number was unreadable so based on the possibilities he was "almost certain" the s/n was 477/17 or XXX/17?

T-roy

I have inspected the lower wing cross and as I have stated previously in this thread the latter cross never had its white border applied, it is obvious from the photo I presented that the red and black have been applied but not the white, it is inconceivable that only all of the white would have peeled off leaving the rest intact.

I do not know of another lower wing cross.

Langdon

[RED BARON]

Wow There Has Been A Lot Of Talk About The 425/17 And 477/17 Since I Started This Thread.
Lot's Of Great Info From Many Members.
I Had No Idea That The German Markings On The Dr1's Were Such A Subject.
Thanks For The Info.
Red Baron

[RAGIII]

Originally Posted by RED BARON

Wow There Has Been A Lot Of Talk About The 425/17 And 477/17 Since I Started This Thread.
Lot's Of Great Info From Many Members.
I Had No Idea That The German Markings On The Dr1's Were Such A Subject.
Thanks For The Info.
Red Baron

One has to wonder, Do you have a "More Clear Picture" of MvRs aircraft or the reverse?
RAGIII