True color of MVR Fokker Dr1 425/17

[Langdon]

Originally Posted by Dan_San_Abbott

Langdon:
You believe that Dr.I 425/17 was at LeChelle, that is your opinion. I don't believe Dr.I 425/17 was at Lechelle, My opinion is based on the fact that in the records (Nowarra) there is no record of Dr.425/17 until 20 April 1918.
For example, "Why did MvR use Dr.I 161/17 in March and Dr.I 525/17 on 17 March 1918 to visit Jasta 5 instead of Dr.I 152 /17 which was his primary aircraft? When did he get Dr.I 425/17? When did MvR start using 425/17? Are all the photographs at LeChelle of the all red Triplane, 425/17? Where is 477/17? Was it photographed at Lechelle? If It was his regular aircraft why is it not in the flight line photos?
If you have a record or a document that establishes otherwise, produce it. I don't want to hear Imries, Ferko, I know their positions, they are both stating opinions. Produce evidence to support your position. Evidence, Langdon. Evidence.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

Dan-San,

I asked you a simple question which you have dodged, where is 425/17 if not at LeChelle, there is no known record of it previous to the 20th but we know it has gone through all the markings changes of an MvR personalised aircraft from at least early March (if not from production). If it is not with Jasta 11 where do you suppose it is? You have stated previously that there is no point in having a "hanger queen", what's the point in having a plane in MvR's colours but not having it with him? You ask for evidence for it being at LeChelle and there has been plenty provided both hard and circumstantial, where is your evidence for this aircraft being elsewhere?

Evidence Dan-San has been provided multiple times above including Imrie's observation of the works number on 477/17 as well as Taz's confirmation of the same, each of these gentlemen are reputable. I believe Ferko showed had no bias when he stated he could read the military number on the 425/17 photo, if he did then in his book he would not have made the statement concerning the 477/17 photo saying in his opinion, reading the works number is inconclusive.

[Langdon]

Originally Posted by RAGIII

.... 6. You ask for proof not based on Ferko, Imrie, etc. Isn't your "Evidence"Based on others research? Be it Nowarra, Kilduff, etc.? DO you have any Original evidence that Identify positively that the ALL RED aircraft at LeChelle is 477/17? Not "Opinion" but based on positive ID of the Werke Number, serial number etc.?
This debate as I have said previously can not end unless outside sources can verify Numbers that the rest of the mortal race seem unable to discern :-)
RAGIII

RAGIII,

Dan-San was quoting Kilduff but has since had to discredit him as Kilduff changed opinion. To quote Nowarra is desperation, he did wonderful work in his day but that research is very much outdated now.

[Dave_Watts]

Hi all,

I looked in some of my reference books such as Mein Flieger Leben, Jagd in Flanderns Himmel, Flieger am Feind, Jagdstaffel and Der Schwartze Ritter. Two were pertinent to our discussion; Mein Flieger Leben and Jagd in Flanderns Himmel.

I'm not well versed in German so this was a challenge, but I did find these pages from Udet's Mein Flieger Leben;

Page 67,



Page 68,



Could one of our more well versed German forum members translate those passages that are pertinent to Richthofen's Dr.I?

Thank you!

Best,
Dave W.

I could not find any passages citing 477/17 or "all-red" or "blood-red" or any "red" Dr.I's for Richthofen for the month of March in any passages of Bodenschatz's Jagd in Flanderns Himmel. I would be pleased if someone would prove me wrong.

Dan-San, did you find any passages from Flanderns Himmel describing "red" triplanes from the March time period? If so which pages? Thank you!

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Langdon:
If it was not at Lechelle, where was Dr.I 425/17? How about Armee Flugpark 2. As far as I am concerned, there is no record of Dr.425/17 at Lechelle. If it was not at Lechelle, then it would be at the Armee Flugpark 2, as part of the spare aircraft for Jasta 6 and 11 held in reserve, four (4) machines for each Jasta equipped with the Fok.DR.I in the @.Armee. Also at the AFP2 for each Jasta, were 4 mechanics at the to maintain the machines held in reserve.
Langdon I am still waiting for answers to my previous questions. The reason is you don't have any supportng information/documents.
1. You are hanging your hat on photo Alex Imrie has stated it was Dr.I 477/17 and that the upper wing is painted red.
2. The rear view of this machine in the panorama photo clearly shows the upper wing is in a streaked camouflage and the cross fields are white with Iron Crosses. It is not painted red!
3. If you take the time to study the photograph of this machine you can readily determine the leading edge of the stabilizer, fuselage cross fields are not red. So much for accuracy. That is not Dr.I 477/17 period!
4. I did not get the impression that Taz was absolutely sure of the werk nummer.
5. The machine in the photograph does not fit the description of Dr.I 477/17 in the questionable MvR combat reports.
6. I was identified by Paul Leamon as DR.I 486/17.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[Dan_San_Abbott]

DaveWatts:
I have read through Mein Fliegerlebenand Jagd in Flandern Himmel and I have found no reference to a red or all red Fokker Triplane during the time Jage Nr.1 was at Lechelle Airfield.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[Dan_San_Abbott]

RAGIII:
1. I did not disparage Heinz Nowarra, I was citing Nowarra as my source.
2. I raised the the question about Dr.I 477/17. Ifthe all red triplane photos were of Dr.I 425/17 at Lechelle raises a problem. All the photographs taken at Lechelle are of the same aircraft! If all the photos was of Dr.1 425/17, the question becomes, where is Dr.477/17? In the lineup photos of Jasta 11, there are no photos of a Dr.I 477/17 painted as described in the questionable MvR combat reports.
3. I feel quite sure Heinz Nowarra had access to the MvR combat reports.
He gives the serial number of MvR's machines with the specific victory. I am not talking about the English Translations in the PRO.
4. I have the same feeling about the combat reports in Gibbons' The Red Knight of Germany.
5. I have not discredited Peter Kilduff, I related what has most likely occured that changed his viewpoint.
6. Cross changes.. When the cross change order was issued on 17 March 1918, it applied to all manufacturers, all depots and all units in the field. It also stated that the change was to be completed no later than 15 April 1918. A follow-up directive was issued 24 March and a revised Directive which provided specific dimensions for the cross and border was issued 10 April 1918. All the machines in transit and those held in reserve at the Armee Flugpark and all machine received by the AFP prior to issue.
All the machines at front line units, i.e. Jasta 11 the aircraft in their inventory, the crosses were to be modified in accordance with the Idflieg Directives. All these changes are evidence in the balken crosses on Fok.DR.I 425/17. I think the initial change of 17 March and 24 March 1918 was made at Armee Flugpark 2 and the final change of 10 April 1918 at Jasta 11 at Cappy Airfield while Dr.I 425/17 was being painted. The move to Cappy was made on 12 April 1918.
The fact that it was done, only means that wherever the aircraft was,
(425/17) the changes were made. What we do know for a fact, none were made on the Dr.I machines at the Fokker Flugzeugwerke. I would not give any significance to the fact the crosses were changed other than the Directives were complied with.
I hope I have answered All your questions.
blue skies,
Dan-San

[Langdon]

Langdon I am still waiting for answers to my previous questions. The reason is you don't have any supportng information/documents.

As I have mentioned previously, I have provided a list earlier in this thread. The only evidence against 425/17 being at LeChelle is that fact that it did not score a victory there which is hardly supportive of any conclusion.

425/17 was almost certainly prepared from the factory for MvR's use, you have mentioned that the Jasta 11 aircraft were modified to the thick armed Balken cross on the 27th of March, if MvR was not already in possession of 425/17 then it would not have been painted in outdated crosses after this date. Ferko identified 425/17 from the military number on the fuselage that he could see in the negatives he produced from the original photos. It is quite obvious that 425/17 is not just another aircraft waiting in a flugpark as it has already been highly personalised for MvR. It can be seen outside of hanger 4 at LeChelle with its engine and propeller protected as they are when in transit or storage

1. You are hanging your hat on photo Alex Imrie has stated it was Dr.I 477/17 and that the upper wing is painted red.

That is part of the evidence.

2. The rear view of this machine in the panorama photo clearly shows the upper wing is in a streaked camouflage and the cross fields are white with Iron Crosses. It is not painted red!

That photo is taken on a different day and is a different aircraft. Note how 425/17 is still sporting its old narrow bordered cross's, 477/17 having been the first aircraft converted, it seems all other aircraft are converted at this stage which provides extra evidence that the all-red triplane is not in use at that time, this is the second day (almost certainly some days apart) where it is not lined up with the operational aircraft.

3. If you take the time to study the photograph of this machine you can readily determine the leading edge of the stabilizer, fuselage cross fields are not red. So much for accuracy. That is not Dr.I 477/17 period!

So you are now using the translated combat reports to support your position! Very hard to tell given the reflection but it is obvious the top wing has been painted in a dark colour, certainly the cross field is not painted red but that is not mentioned in the combat report (it also proves that 425/17 was one of MvR's aircraft at an earlier date even though it recorded no victories), it mentions red upper surfaces and tail, I must say I expected it to be the same as 152/17 but until we have copies of the untranslated combat reports we cannot confirm if the description was exactly the same rather than similar.

4. I did not get the impression that Taz was absolutely sure of the werk nummer.

That's strange he gave a fairly clear impression, maybe you only see what you want to see!

I just made a 2400 dpi scan (500MB) of a first copy print of photo #95 from Alex Imrie's Triplane book. The WN I read from the scan and using my thread counting loupe on the 4.5"x6.5" print is 2103, which equates to Dr.I 477/17, as Alex stated in his book. My print says the original is in Ed Ferko's UTD collection. It would be easy to misread the WN as 2112 without careful examination. The photo Dan-San references from Alex' German Fighter Units June 1917-1918 is also contained in two parts in Greg VanWyngarden's von Richthofen's Flying Circus photos 48 and 49. Photo #95 in Triplanes shows a line-up of Jasta 11 Dr.Is in the background (Steinhauser's Dr.I is easlily identifiable on the left) with no aircraft except 477/17 having had their fuselage or rudder crosses converted to Balkenkreuz standard. The photo Dan-San refers to was obviously taken at a different time and from a different camera location. It shows a line-up of Jasta 6 Dr.Is on the right and a more random placement of Dr.Is, some from Jasta 11, on the left. All the Dr.Is in this photo have had their fuselage and rudder crosses converted to Balkenkreuz standard. This conversion takes time. In the background of the aircraft on the left (photo #49 in Greg's book) a Triplane top wing only is visible which has been overpainted (red presumably) and could be 477/17, 425/17, 127/17 or 152/17. Nothing conclusive can be determined from that photo, which I have in two parts also, but have not yet scanned.

Taz is very clear in this statement, he is also clear about the aircraft you now pin your hopes on as showing evidence that 477/17 does not have a red upper wing is not the same aircraft, you are alone in your opinions.

5. The machine in the photograph does not fit the description of Dr.I 477/17 in the questionable MvR combat reports.

It does fit the description and you are the only person questioning these reports. We know the original reports give an accurate description of the aircrafts paint work by the two copies I have posted elsewhere above. There is no reason to believe the translations are not reasonable renditions of the originals, we know that the translated documents are also accompanied by originals.

6. I was identified by Paul Leamon as DR.I 486/17.

You were!!!

[Dave_Watts]

Hi all,

Sorry about the double page posting, it was late and I was tired. I have it corrected now.

Dan-San look at the second page, it mentions, "Richthofen's roter Fokker". I thought this must translate to "Richthofen's red Fokker", implying his Dr.I. I believe this passage relates to his March 18th downing of his 66th victory over a Sopwith Camel.

The reason I searched this book is because Kilduff cites it as a reference several times in his book. I was hoping to find a passage to "red", "all-red" or "blood-red" triplane. Looks like I found "red", but it applies to 152/17. So in this case "red" does not mean "all-red". My point was to analyze the wording and meaning of that wording when Bodenschatz or Udet for that matter, when they would say "red" or "all-red" what they meant. In this case I believe Bodenschatz is calling 152/17 "red", but we know he must mean "partially-red" at best. Akin to my posting where I stated;

"I have to say, if someone says "all-red" it may not really mean red all-over. As Kilduff points out, most planes were mostly in standard finish, if Manfred's 477/17 was all-red on the top surfaces then one would be inclined to state it was all-red, instead of stating it was mostly red."

This is where you have to interpret a bit and not take statements at face value, or at least temper them.

Following all from Bodenschatz's, Jagd in Flanderns Himmel.

Here is a passage for April 6th where I believe a red triplane is mentioned. Assistance in translation please...



Here we have the official victory claim by MvR where we can see how he refers to his paint scheme of 152/17, which reads to be very specific and not so general as "red" or "all-red".



Lastly, we have the victory claim by MvR with 425/17 where he states the color scheme as "red painted" or for us English folks, "painted red". Kind of a general statement as it could mean "painted red all over"? Everyone believes this plane to be "red all over", (and I don't mean a newspaper - "read all over") so "painted red" means "red all over".



Langdon, you posted the same two victory claims but yours were missing the reference from where they came. Note Bodenschatz credits the Kriegstagebuch des Jagdgeschwaders, anyone know of this book?

Dan-San,

Any other passages you can refer me to where Bodenschatz or Udet refer to a "red", "all-red", or "blood-red" triplane would be appreciated. I know this is not a "smoking-gun" as far as evidence goes, but it may shed light on the subject at hand.

Best,
Dave W.

[Langdon]

Dave,

... you posted the same two victory claims but yours were missing the reference from where they came. Note Bodenschatz credits the Kriegstagebuch des Jagdgeschwaders, anyone know of this book?

Mine came from Kilduff's "The Illustrated Red Baron" he gives the source as the PRO, Richthofen Combat Reports. It would be interesting to know if they originally come from your book and have the reference cropped.

[Dave_Watts]

Hi all,

Langdon,

Your point of where did Kilduff get his copies made me go back and look at your posted versions and compare them to mine. Kilduff's are certainly different. He did not simply copy Bodenschatz's printed versions. First of all, Kilduff's are in general much darker with some of the letters being so heavy they close up. No doubt both Kilduff's and Bodenschatz's facsimiles are made from the same originals. Look at Kilduff's 425/17 report, you will find the words, "Sopwith - Camel" at the left, if you go downward from the word "Camel" on Kilduff's there is a lone solitary "s" above the paragraph. An error no doubt, but it has almost been removed/lost from Bodenshatz's copy...only the very bottom of the "s" remains.

Correct me if I'm wrong...the PRO holds copies of the two above posted German victory claims with English translations...or not?

If not,...

Kilduff got his copies from some other possibly independent source. I wonder where?

If so,...

This proves that the PRO copies of these two victory claims were made either directly from the originals or excellent copies of the originals, not from Bodenschatz's book. I can't imagine these documents are fake. Look again at my above posted copies of the 425/17 report and the attached "confirmation".

Dan-San, you stated that Gibbon's work has these "bogus" documents cited as well. How far back does that go, 1927? Are you stating the documents printed in Bodenschatz's book are these same fakes? If so, then I'm guessing there are no originals or copies in existence.

It makes it tough when you discredit all known documented victory claims...they even fooled Bodenschatz!

Did Bodenschatz get his bogus copies from the PRO? Since he was a German, I'd figure he'd get them from the Berlin Archive.

Does anyone have a copy of Der Rote Kampfflieger, as that was written in the hand of the master in 1917. Was there any additional information included after his death that may collaborate the 66th victory claim?

I think we should be able to nail down these German claim documents as originals or fakes.

Dan-San, what's your guess as to when the fakes first were planted in the archives...1926 or 27', coinciding with the release of Gibbon's fabrication/forgery The Red Knight of Germany flimflam?

If so...

It's too bad the forgeries are so close in date to the original time period, it would be impossible to scientifically time date them accurately enough to distinguish them from each other, (say 1926 from 1918).

Best,
Dave W.