True color of MVR Fokker Dr1 425/17

Dave_Watts · 3 July 2006, 01:32 AM

Hi all,

Dan-San,

Good work on the translations. You are correct, it appears to be two independent translations of the same source document. The "original" account document in German would be one step closer to the truth, but the important thing is both translations were based upon the same document. I believe there was a question of whether the translations were a forgery, not the original German source, which it looks like Karl Bodenschatz cited. His book was not published until 1942, so there is room for antics in the archives. I thought much of what Karl quoted was from a war diary he kept as well as a squadron log.

Descriptions from the translations of how MvR's plane was finished may be more difficult to translate and offered more trouble. Was there a description of his aircraft flown that day in both translations, and if so how do they compare?

I'm guessing they may have changed the indexing system in the archives and therefore there could be a change in suffix number extensions. A query to the PRO may explain the differing index numbers.

Very best,
Dave W.

Langdon · 3 July 2006, 03:58 PM

I believe I may have the answer, there are two translated copies held by the PRO, one from Floyd Gibbons (American) and the other from H.A Jones (British).

I sincerely hope all of us can now view these important documents without scepticism. They tell us in Richthofen's own - translated - words how his aircraft were painted. Please see the the reply to my request of the PRO below.

Dear Mr Badger

Thanks for your enquiry. First of all, I can tell you that we hold only a translation of the Baron's combat reports. In fact we have two copies - the one you have spotted under our catalogue reference AIR 1/686/21/13/2250, and another under reference AIR 1/2397/262/1.

Both copies came to us therefore from the Air Historical Branch of the Royal Air Force and I have asked if they can tell us the origins.

AIR 1/2397/262/1 - the reports relating to combats 17-80 were borrowed for copying by the branch from Mr Lloyd (or Floyd) Gibbons of the Chicago Tribune on 12 November 1926, and those relating to combats 1-16 on 18 January 1927.

AIR 1/686/21/13/2250 - the branch's record of this copy link it to all the other material gathered by the branch to support the authors of the official history The War in the Air. References to von Richthofen appear in three of the six volumes of this work - Volumes II (published in 1928), III (published in 1931) and IV (published in 1934). In his introduction to each of these volumes, H A Jones acknowledges the assistance that he received from the German Reichsarchiv, Potsdam, and it is clear that in addition to asking the latter 'numerous questions' Jones also visited Potsdam on at least one occasion to conduct research. It is therefore possible that the branch received the translated versions of Richthofens reports from the Reichsarchiv. But of course Jones could have translated them himself during a visit to Potsdam. I'm afraid we just do not know the answer to that one!

I hope this information is helpful nevertheless.

Yours sincerely

Joe Kelly
Records Management & Cataloguing Department
The National Archives
www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
tel. 0208 392 5330 ext. 2359

Dave_Watts · 3 July 2006, 07:31 PM

Congratulations Langdon...good work!

With regards to Hayes having gone to Potsdam to the original source documents and Gibbon's translations being copied and fed back into the PRO system, this answer makes a lot of sense and confirms both what you were saying and what Dan-San was saying about the PRO victory claims.

The next step would be to get copies of the original German source documents and check the quality of translation especially regarding the color of the aircraft.

As to the accuracy of the translations, it appears to me both of the PRO "authors" have tried to do a honest and accurate job. Absolute confirmation can't be made until comparison with the original source documents, but things are looking up.

Best,
Dave W.

Langdon · 3 July 2006, 07:36 PM

Thanks Dave, let's hope the originals weren't destroyed during WWII.

RED BARON RETURNS · 3 July 2006, 08:11 PM

You know Mates with all this info that you put together on this thread you can make a whole new book about that tripe.
JP

Langdon · 4 July 2006, 01:17 AM

JP,

It has been interesting, I've learned a lot and I like your model. It would be nice to see how the aircraft would look if it was indeed painted how I expect it was at the factory, with standard paint work except for red upper surfaces. I think it would look really nice.

Langdon

CWatson · 4 July 2006, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Langdon

JP,

It has been interesting, I've learned a lot and I like your model. It would be nice to see how the aircraft would look if it was indeed painted how I expect it was at the factory, with standard paint work except for red upper surfaces. I think it would look really nice.

Langdon

Langdon,

Do you know if linseed oil had been applied over the blue before the red was added? People have mentioned that the blue under the red was "blue" but my understanding that at the factory linseed oil was applied and it caused the color to shift towards tourqize(sp?).

CWatson

Dan_San_Abbott · 4 July 2006, 12:38 PM

Dave Watts:
I am most pleased that Langdon got the information from the PRO about the MvR's Combat Reports, The response I received, was "they had no information about the origins of these documents." or something to that effect.
1. The reference Peter Kilduff has listed is the same PRO Ref: AIR 1 /686 /
21 /13 /2250 That I have, however he has XC 15183 added to the reference number, and I have #212634 added to my reference number. I have no Idea what these numbers represent.
2. The narrative for victory #75 are different, and I made very carefull transcripts of both naratives. Peter Kilduff appears to be a British translation, while my copy appears to be an American Translation.
3. When I compared these tranlations I found differences in narratives in Floyd Gibbons "The Red Knight of Germany",page 331, 68th Victory, 25 March 1918. Second victory on Fok.DR.I 477/17. He does not give any information relative to the machine or its color.
The narratives are slightly different, last sentence of the narrative:
Gibbons: Bombs that had apparently been in the plane exploded several minutes later.
My copy: Bombs which had apparently been in the plane exploded several minutes later.
I don't believe my copies of the these MvR Combat reports have Floyd Gibbons as the translation source. We have three different sets of the MvR combat reports that are all slightly different.
It would be interesting what is contained in the Gibbons PRO file: AIR 1 /2397 /262 /1?
I am with you Dave, I wonder if the original Reports are still in Potsdam Archiv?
Blue skies,
Dan-San

Dan_San_Abbott · 4 July 2006, 12:50 PM

later. Sorry, a mistake i wish to delete all.

Langdon · 4 July 2006, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CWatson

Langdon,

Do you know if linseed oil had been applied over the blue before the red was added? People have mentioned that the blue under the red was "blue" but my understanding that at the factory linseed oil was applied and it caused the color to shift towards tourqize(sp?).

CWatson

CWatson,

Allan Toelle does not mention a clear varnish coat.

"However, careful examination under the microscope failed to reveal any coating material other than the clear dope and red, white, black, and blue paint mentioned above. There is no streaked camouflage present anywhere on the RCMI specimen!"

His reference for the blue is "Methuen 22 B 3.5".