True color of MVR Fokker Dr1 425/17

[RAGIII]

Just curious as to how the above quotes prove any Reports false(or true) for that matter. based on a diary does give it a first hand account but the Description Blood red triplane could be relative to a bird with red upper wing, upper fuselage and tail just as easily as an ALL RED triplane. If these quotes are from any book published during the years of the Third reich would'nt it have been heavily edited? Finally, by this time wouldn't MvRs Overall Blood Red Triplane have been the expected image one would portray of Richthofens bird in any writing, and probably added by editors if not included ?
DSA,
You have said numerous times that you suspect the reports because of the way the Dates are presented. Month, Day, Year. I completely understand the Rest of the World uses Day, Month, Year.. Are you referring to the dates being wrong in the translation or the Original? If the translation, was this done by an American, for a report to American( US) officials, for the Imperial War Museum etc.? I just want to be clear! other than the colors you disagree with are there other glaring errors? In other words what kind of discrepancies do you see in the translations other than the afore mentioned date and color issues? I do not know about others but this will help me understand your position on these reports and why you feel other dedicated researches have been taken in by them.
Finally I hope I haven't missed something which answers these questions, I try to follow but sometimes things seem to run together and I miss something I should have seen
RAGIII

[Dave_Watts]

Hi all,

A couple of points.

I have to say I'm bothered by the small window of operation with 152/17 as well.

Also with the statements that is was taken from the frontline service, pulled for posterity.

As I've been immersed in the Fokker archive images, I recall discussing with Peter Grosz images I had of Fokker D.III 352/16. Photos of this D.III were out of context with the other images of the V.2 experimental aircraft in series with it. I told him the plane had been updated with LMG 08/15 guns, when in every other photo I've seen the aircraft is sporting LMG 08's. He said he hadn't noticed that, but he was certain the photos were of the restoration of Boelcke's plane for posterity. There were other changes made in the freshening up at Schwerin.

Here are the images courtesy FHT.







As I mentioned, I see no reason for pulling an MvR aircraft on March 18th or 20th, unless it was retired making room for 425/17 and that makes a little sense! The date of March 18th or 20th has MvR at his 66th victory, not his 75th or 100th, so there is no significance of importance associated with this aircraft or the date or the score. Why change the practice of waiting for the "Golden Eagle" to be grounded before pulling one of his aircraft for posterity. I think this would be negative thinking and just not done. I'm sure 99.9% of the Germans thought the Ol' Baron was going to get a 100 victories as sure as the sun comes up in the morning. My guess is the plane was selected for posterity after he was shot down. Am I way off base? Does Imrie have concrete evidence contradicting my rambling? IF 152/17 was on display in the Zeughaus before April 21st, then obviously I'm all wet. Why didn't 152/17 go back to Fokker for freshing up?

Lastly, Langdon, your point of the motor and prop being covered not because of the rain is intriguing. You're right, why not simply pull it back into the hanger! I'm going out on a limb, but your alluding that the motor cover and prop cover are reminiscent of aircraft being delivered on rail cars has me thinking, what if that's indeed what happened, but the cross changes puts the aircraft out in the field much sooner so that doesn't fly. My second idea would be the plane had been inactive, "stored in reserve", not readied for flight waiting for MvR to let go of his highest hour aircraft; 152/17.

Just throwing out ideas that may trigger others thoughts.

Best,
Dave W.

[Dave_Watts]

Hi all,

Since Langdon was wanting sources that Peter Kilduff used for his book, I thought I'd post his Bibliography, and you could get a look at his references. As mentioned before "no smoking gun" with respect to the reference on the colors of 477/17. I still need to look up Udet's observation.












to be continued....

Best,
Dave W.

[Dave_Watts]

From above...






Best,
Dave W.

[Langdon]

Dan-San,

Well well well, fact finally emerges from theory but you immediately discredit it and choose to readily accept the opposite opinion without reference to the informations source.

I knew Dan-San had to be sitting on the combat reports and they provide the information I had expected. Dan-San do you have copies of the untranslated originals? Unfortunately I only have access to two of them, they are for 152/17, for the victory on the 18/3/18 and 425/17 for the 20/4/18. 425/17s simply states Roter Anstrich which google interprets as red paints whereas 152/17s states rotes oberes tragdeck, rote haube, rote laufräder, u.roter schwanz. My understanding of the latter is (any German speakers please translate accurately as mine is most probably atrocious, please see original document below), red upper-covers, red cowling, red wheel covers and red tail , compare this with Dan-San's (It has it with thr red upper surface of the top wing, red engine hood, struts, wheel covers and empennage.). Richthofen's descriptions for 152/17 and 477/17 seem remarkably similar yet Dan-San assumes they must be incorrect as they do not fit his theory, the problem with this is the reports fit the photographic evidence.

What we can see from these reports is that 152/17, 161/17 were painted in the same style and 477/17 was very similar if not the same. It is quite possible that later in the life of 477/17 it was painted all-red (Dan-San is adamant that there was only one all-red Dr.Is at LeChelle, although evidence shows one with stacking pads on its wings and another without) but if this was the case it was certainly after the directive to change the national markings to the Balken cross and therefore cannot be the all-red aircraft at LeChelle with the old crosses.

Now Dan-San has fully endorsed Peter Kilduff's work and dismisses the translated copies of MvR's combat reports with "It was these reports that suddenly appeared at the Public Records Office that everyone hung their hat on as being true translations without provendence", Dan-San can you clarify this statement with facts please? If these are not the true translations then please provide them!

I have no idea why but it seems Peter Kilduff decided to use aircraft descriptions that come from the theory Dan-San is promoting over the translated combat reports, I would like to ask Dan-San if this is his theory that 425/17 was painted all-dark-red and 477/17 all blood red because if it is he should be upset that he doesn't gain a mention in the sources for Kilduff's book. In the quotes above provided by Dave Watts we see "looking like the apparition of red death in his first combat in the all-red Fokker Dr.I 477/17, ..." and after that I think there was the description "blood red". Now for the description of 425/17 on page 201 of his book we see "Richthofen in his all-dark-red Fokker Dr.I, 425/17" now where did he get this from? Contemporary reports on 425/17 state the aircraft was painted "blood red" (as are the samples I have seen) yet here we have it changed to Dan-San's "dark-red" and 477/17s description has been changed from the combat reports to Dan-San's all-red, blood red.

My feeling is that this wonderful book has been tainted by this theory. Kilduff mentions the Richthofen combat reports in his list of scourers, never once proclaiming them as unreliable yet has chosen this unsubstantiated theory over Richthofen's own - albeit translated - description. I submit the two combat reports for the readers consideration, as you can see these are copies of the originals, the translated copies would have been made from this type of document and so a reasonably competent translator should easily have been able to provide an accurate English rendition. Dan-San once again, do you have copies of the original documents to compare with the translated documents and if not how can you pronounce them as unreliable?




At this point I think it's timely that we discuss the aircraft, and why red on one should look different to that on another. For this I consult Allan Toelle's analytical study of the large piece of fabric that includes the port side fuselage cross from 425/17. One of his findings is the poor hiding quality of this vermilion paint. He mentions that this is evident when one considers the bright red colour where paint has been applied over the white cross field in comparison to the darker shade where the paint covers the bleached linen and the very dark shade where the paint has been applied over the under-surface blue.

Another of his findings is that the black particulate found in the paint was soot and Castor oil contamination. He states that the paint has never really dried and even now has a relative softness that at the time probably allowed this contamination to enter the surface. As you know from elsewhere above my theory is that the aircraft had a complete over-coat of paint when its markings were changed to the narrow bordered Iron Cross (which covered the various stencils that are still evident under a thin layer) and it is probable that at this stage the contaminants were mixed into the paint during application. Allan Toelle found this contamination to be progressively heavier, the closer you go to the bottom of the fuselage.

I find the idea that MvR had the red paint on 425/17 deliberately darkened to the point that Dan-San has described it as maroon as being unbelievable. This is a man who deliberately painted his aircraft to stand out. He named his book "the red air fighter" and I'm sure he would not have wanted a dark dirty red or to be known as the maroon air fighter. What we know from contemporary descriptions is that 425/17 was blood red (Toelle believes it is quite possible that the dark has become darker with time).

As noted by Allan Toelle the vermilion paint has poor hiding qualities, we know that 425/17 had its paint applied directly over bleached linen. His other triplanes had their paint applied over normal streaky camouflage, therefore we would expect them to look much darker than 425/17, probably at least as dark as the over-painted under-surfaces of 425/17.

Dan-San I do not think we need to go over the dates of the various aircraft use again, nobody is disputing the fact that 152/17 was MvR's main mount between 12-18th March and 477/17 took over this role until around the 20th April. These facts are undisputed and are known only because they can be found in the combat reports.

Langdon

[Dan_San_Abbott]

CWatson:
I can't say there was a "holy grail" in the two sets of photos. I suspect Greg Van Wyngarden has copies of these photos. The photos were taken on two separate days, the 26th and 27th or 27th and 28th of March 1918. The photos on the first day is in bright sunlight with strong shadow and on the second day overcast sky and weak shadows.
From Alex Imrie's book, "The Fokker Triplane" photos 92, 94 and 95 were taken on the first day. With DR.I 477/17 in front of the fourth Besseneau Hangar, Jasta 6 in line-up in front of hangars 1 and 2 and Jasta 11 in front of hangars 3 and 4. There were more than these six photos. There were photographs of Jasta 6 and 11 from behind the line-up and in front of the line-up of both Jasta 6 and 11. On the second day DR.I 477/17 was in the line-up next to Ltn. Richard Wenzel's DR.I 588/17 with the checkered leading edge, photos 98, 99 and 100. Photos 98,99 and 100 were taken on the second day.
In regard to Dr.I 477/17, being in front of the hangar and the engine and propeller covered with protective covers, only indicates to me, it was through for the day. The other machines in the line-up were still operational.
The move from Awoingt to Lechelle was made with ground personnel going by truck and arriving about 6:00 p.m. The aircraft were flown in on the afternoon of 26 March 1918. flight operations began early on the 27th. Ref."Jagd in Flandern Himmel".
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[Dan_San_Abbott]

CWatson:
I can't say there was a "holy grail" in the two sets of photos. I suspect Greg Van Wyngarden has copies of these photos. The photos were taken on two separate days, the 26th and 27th or 27th and 28th of March 1918. The photos on the first day is in bright sunlight with strong shadow and on the second day overcast sky and weak shadows.
From Alex Imrie's book, "The Fokker Triplane" photos 92, 94 and 95 were taken on the first day. With DR.I 477/17 in front of the fourth Besseneau Hangar, Jasta 6 in line-up in front of hangars 1 and 2 and Jasta 11 in front of hangars 3 and 4. There were more than these six photos. There were photographs of Jasta 6 and 11 from behind the line-up and in front of the line-up of both Jasta 6 and 11. On the second day DR.I 477/17 was in the line-up next to Ltn. Richard Wenzel's DR.I 588/17 with the checkered leading edge, photos 98, 99 and 100. Photos 98, 99 and 100 were taken on the second day.
In regard to Dr.I 477/17, being in front of the hangar and the engine and propeller covered with protective covers, only indicates to me, it was through for the day. There were several aircraft from both Jasta with triplanes parked in front of the hangars awaiting maintance or whatever. The other machines in the line-up were still operational.
The move from Awoingt to Lechelle was approximately 30 km by road, was made with ground personnel going by truck and arriving and set-up by about 6:00 p.m. The aircraft were flown in on the afternoon of 26 March 1918. Flight operations began early on the 27th. Ref."Jagd in Flandern Himmel".
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[Dan_San_Abbott]

CWatson:
LazerLloyd is mistaken, Fok.DR.I did not go to Jasta 5 in May 1918. Ltn.Josef Mai received Fok.DR.I 139/17. There are photos of this machine at Jasta 5.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[Langdon]

In regard to Dr.I 477/17, being in front of the hangar and the engine and propeller covered with protective covers, only indicates to me, it was through for the day. There were several aircraft from both Jasta with triplanes parked in front of the hangars awaiting maintance or whatever. The other machines in the line-up were still operational.

The covering of engines and propellers at the end of the day was not standard practice as is evident in the large number of WWI German photos of aircraft of all types in hangers. You are clutching at straws.

You say the aircraft is through for the day, the day being the 26th March. That's strange as the photo looks to have been taken around mid-day and we know that 477/17 was busy that afternoon as it shot down two aircraft, the last of these at 1700.

[Langdon]

Originally Posted by Dan_San_Abbott

CWatson:
LazerLloyd is mistaken, Fok.DR.I did not go to Jasta 5 in May 1918. Ltn.Josef Mai received Fok.DR.I 139/17. There are photos of this machine at Jasta 5.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

See Ferko's "Richthofen" page 60. "... May 15 1918 - though the same day he did fly two other Dr.Is - Nos 139/17 and 567/17" this is in addition to 152/17 and in relation to the victory of Josef Mai on that day in one of these aircraft.