True color of MVR Fokker Dr1 425/17

[Langdon]

Dave,

In answer to your:

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

Kilduff's reference for the 425/17 report is: "Public Record Office, Richthofen Combat Reports; Sopwith F.I Camel D.6439 of No. 3 Squadron, Maj Richard Raymond-Barker, MC, aged 23 (KIA)." He does not give a reference for the 152/17 report, only a notation of the details contained in the report.

No doubt Dave you have noticed a pattern with DSA, he deems any evidence that supports his case as a "cogent observation" and does so without the slightest hesitation even when these are found to be erroneous almost immediately after they are posted - Hemer aircraft mistaken for the 477/17 shot because the positioning was similar, your quote from the first Kilduff book concerning the sensational "looking like the apparition of red death". Any evidence contrary to his belief is immediately dismissed as being unreliable or simply ignored. I think that says it all.

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?

Unfortunately I only have a copy of the first American edition, which was released in 1969. It provides a combat list in the appendix with the correct (presumably) information for the 66th claim. I find it interesting that the translation of this book was done by Peter Kilduff - an American - in 1969, Dan-San disputes the translated copies of the combat reports because the date format is done in the American style, it would be interesting to know if Peter Kilduff was also the author of the translated copies.

[Dan_San_Abbott]

DaveWatts:
The English translations from the PRO ARE NOTthe the same as the Gibbons translations. The Gibbons' translations follow the same format as the two bonified MvR combat reports (66th and 80th victories) in the Bodenschatz Jagd in Flandern Himmel.
I believe that Floyd Gibbons had access to the German MvR combat reports.
David what was the post number of the panorama shots at Lechelle?
Blue skies,
Dan

[Dan_San_Abbott]

DaveWatts:
When MvR achieved his 75 victory he was flying Dr.I 477/17.
Like you I have been scanning Bodenschatz's book. The reference to the "roten" translates to: "From April 6 on, the red triplanes fly to Harbonnieres in the mornings, they set off on their flights against the enemy, and fly back to Lechelle Airfield in the evenings."
It does not help.
Blue skies,
Dan

[Langdon]

Dan-San it seems you haven’t found your way back to my list in an earlier post so I have revised it for you. Also I have noted during this compilation that I may well be wrong concerning the panoramic photograph and the time it was taken, but that does not alter the fact that the 477/17 aircraft has a red upper wing, upper surface (see below).

Evidence for 425/17 being present at LeChelle and therefore being the subject of the photos:

Firstly there is no contemporary factual evidence that there was another all-red Triplane other than 425/17 prior to April 1918. We know 425/17 was all-red at this stage as it carried the national markings that were current up to the 17th of March and it is inconceivable that it would have been painted in the wrong markings outside of a reasonable time after this date (for instance if the aircraft was being painted at the time of the directive or before notification arrived. Aircraft often carried outdated markings for a period but painting an aircraft around a month after the changes directive, as Dan-San is suggesting, is absurd. Source: upper and lower wing crosses held by the AWM, port side fuselage cross held by the RCMI, starboard side fuselage cross, private collection. Cross change directive, DSA above).

425/17 was painted in the same manner as the aircraft in the LeChelle photos. I have stated previously that there is a small amount of doubt concerning the rudder but I now believe that it was red, beyond a reasonable doubt. My reasoning for this is that if you look at the LeChelle line-up you can see that all Jasta 11 aircraft with narrow bordered Iron Crosses have the same marking on the rudder. Once again there is no known documented proof from the time of any other aircraft with these all-red markings, Dan-San cannot have it both ways, he has stated somewhere above about “facts” and anything else being “wishful thinking”, the fact is that 425/17 is the only confirmed all-red bird with thin bordered Iron crosses. 152/17 is basically all-red at some time in the future but it carries the Balken cross with white rudder at that stage.

Another fact is that a lack of confirmed combat activity does not preclude 425/17 from being held in reserve – awaiting service – at LeChelle. Also the fact that 477/17 was at LeChelle as the main MvR aircraft does not make it all-red.

Ed Ferko positively identified the all-red aircraft with the inverted V blemish as 425/17 after reading its military number on a negative he made from the original photograph. (Ferko letters Ferko collection UTD)

We have strong evidence that 425/17 was built specifically for MvR's use in that it as never received upper-surface camouflage. Dan-San was in agreeance that it is highly unlikely the aircraft would have gone through the acceptance process with only CDL on its upper surfaces, if he's correct then that only leaves red painted upper surfaces as an option as the red has been applied directly over the CDL and aluminium (Allan Toelle's paper "Fabric-M.v.R RCMI"), with this in mind the aircraft was obviously attached to Jasta 11 since it was delivered from the factory no matter when it was first mentioned in victory reports.

The aircraft identified as 425/17 in the LeChelle photos has its engine and propeller covered, it is the only aircraft in these photos that has these coverings and is therefore almost certainly not in service. Its axle wing has no Castor oil pools on it. You would not cover an in-service rotary engine as they drool large amounts of oil and what would be the point, they will not rust when covered in oil and if this was 477/17 it was used frequently at this time, and if Dan-San is correct, even on this particular day when the photo was taken. It is not standard practise to cover engines and propellers at the end of the day (total lack of photographic evidence to show they did, not just in Jasta 11).

There were only two aircraft specifically photographed on there own at LeChelle, both have been identified as Richthofen aircraft (there is no dispute concerning the all-red aircraft being MvR’s and the other aircraft photograph identified as 477/17 (Imrie & Taz) came from a contemporary German photo album with the caption “ Manfred von Richthofen’s Triplane” (“Von Richthofen’s Flying Circus” by Greg Van Wyngarden).

The aircraft identified as 477/17 is the first Jasta 11 aircraft to undergo the markings change to the Balken cross, it has been suggested above that this would seem reasonable given it was MvR's current main aircraft and that he would take precedence over others (RAGIII elsewhere in this thread).

Both Alex Imrie and Taz have identified the other LeChelle photo as being of 477/17, Taz’s quote can be seen above and his statement leaves no room for doubt on his convictions after he scanned the photo at 2400dpi. Imrie did qualify his caption (“The Fokker Triplane” by Alex Imrie, photo #95) with “almost certainly” when he read the under wing stencilling.

The aircraft identified as 477/17 has a red cowling, struts and wheel covers, its top wing is certainly red which is evident from the dark colour that has extended in a wavy line below the normal upper surface paint work extent along the leading edge. In this photo the rudder has been over-painted white which is evident by the narrow Balken cross.

Finally the MvR Combat reports held by the PRO have been used as a reliable source and until now have not been discredited. So far Dan-San has not been able to dispute their contents; rather he says they are unreliable due to their American style date format! The information they contain in relation to actual combat details is not in dispute, the dates themselves are accurate. My understanding is the aircraft descriptions for 425/17 and 152/17 are accurate and there is no reason to believe those for 477/17 are not accurate as well. These have been held by the PRO for a long time, at least prior to 1969 when Kilduff quotes from them (“The Red Baron” Manfred von Richthofen, translated by Peter Kilduff). If they are fakes then they must have been made by quoting information from the originals, what would be gained by only adding fake descriptions for 477/17, and if you were really going to produce a fake then why not fake the original document? They can be found at:

Air Ministry: Air Historical Branch: Papers (Series I) AIR 1/686/21/13/2250
Combat reports of Capt. Baron Von Richthofen. . Combat reports of Capt. Baron Von Richthofen. Air Historical Branch Air Ministry: Air Historical Branch: Papers (Series I) The National Archives, Kew
Date range: 1916 - 1918.
Source: The Catalogue of The National Archives

Evidence for 477/17 being the all-red aircraft in the photos.

Dan-San's belief that only the aircraft MvR was flying for those couple of weeks would be all-red at that time and only aircraft that gained victories were present. Supporting evidence; discrediting the combat reports.

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Langdon:
I find it amazing that I am absurd, and you are absolutely correct. You win, end of discussion. I am tired of this crap.
Not so blue skies,
Dan-San

[Dan_San_Abbott]

DaveWatts:
I wish to continue this study and find out where it leads.
Blue skies,
Dan

[Dave_Watts]

Hi all,

Dan-San,

The posts you are looking for are #118, #119, and #120.

I want to thank you for your perseverance in hanging in here as I've learned a great deal and see I have much more to learn.

Best wishes,
Dave W.

[Langdon]

Originally Posted by Dan_San_Abbott

Langdon:
I find it amazing that I am absurd, and you are absolutely correct. You win, end of discussion. I am tired of this crap.
Not so blue skies,
Dan-San

Dan-San,

It is a pity you have viewed it that way as it was not my intention. The suggestion that Jasta 11 (or for that matter the Flugpark) would paint and re-paint MvR's aircraft in national markings that are a month out of date is what I find absurd but I didn't mean you are by association.

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

I do not claim to be absolutely correct, in fact I started that last posting with a retraction. You asked me a couple of times to provide facts and to reference them (having already done so).

Langdon

[Dan_San_Abbott]

DaveWatts:
I have run across differences in the MvR's 75th combat report narration from those by Peter Kilduff's tranlated narrative Further the PRO reference numbers are different.
Peter's PRO Ref.5. AIR 1/686/21/13/2250 XC15183.
My copy PRO Ref. AIR 1/686/21/13/2250 #212534.
"Richthofen",[COLOR="red"][COLOR="red"][COLOR="red"[COLOR="Black"]Peter Kilduff, page 193.
75 victory narrative,
About 12:30pm I attacked a British R.E. [ aircraft ] at an altitude of
800 meters above the woods at Moreuil just below the clouds. As the adversary did not see me until very late, I managed to approach
within 50 metres of him. I fired from ten metres' distance until it began
to burn. When the flames shot out, I was only five metres away from
him. I could see the pilot and observer twisting out of their aeroplane
[seats] to escape the flames.The machine did not burn in the air, but
gradually burn [on the way] down. It fell out of control to the ground,
where it exploded and burned to ashes. (Ref 5.).

My copy.
Around 12:30 p.m. I attacked above the wood of
Moreuil an English R.E. in an altitude of 800 meters directly
under the clouds. As the adversary only saw me very late I
managed to approach him within 50 meters. When the flames
shot out I was only 5 meters away from him. I could see how
the observer and pilot were bending out of their plane to
escape the flames. The machine did not explode in the air,
but gradually burnt down. It fell unsteered to the ground
where it exploded and burnt to ashes.

I suspect what Peter Kilduff has in his book, a British translation. The word aeroplane is European.
I also suspect the copy I have an American translation, the use of plane is an American expression.
These narratives are different.
I have to contact Peter Kilduff to see what the aircraft description is of Fok.Dr.I 477/17. This may be the key.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[Langdon]

Aren't these both essentially the same? The information doesn't conflict just the translation style, Dan-San's is missing the part where MvR opens fire at 10 metres, possibly there are translated and untranslated copies?

The different reference numbers are interesting, using Peter Kilduff's I could not find the information on the PRO website, I could only find it by quoting AIR 1/686/21/13/2250.

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/c...lDetails=False