True color of MVR Fokker Dr1 425/17

RAGIII · 7 July 2006, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CWatson

What am I getting at? Since this is a thread of MvR's triplanes and you matched the werke number on to 477/17 and Dan San thinks the plane in the backround of the panoramic shot is the same plane even though he does not agree on the werke number. If these pictures were taken only a day it would not be to invalide to compair the positions of the aircraft ,the plane mentioned in the panoramic by Dan San does appears to have it's prop and ailerons in the exact same angles as the the plane you IDed as 477/17 and if it was it would be interesting to note the other details,such as the plane has white upper cross fields.

CWatson

CW,
I have looked at these photos in my reference books and at the enlargements posted on page 12 of this thread until my eyes are crossed.

The Facts are that the aircraft do not line up as neatly as DSA would like to indicate.
1.Lets look first at the panoramic view of Jasta 6 and 11? ( Originally Identified as Jasta 6 and 10 by Nowarra and Imrie in their earlier works)This we know is not true as jasta 10 dis not receive the triplane. COUNT from right to left. I am not going to post the number I come up with but we will compare later. All of these aircraft that are clearly visible are lined up closely, one next to the other. There are no breaks in the line. Almost all show Jasta 6 markings until the point markings are indistinguishable. To the left are triplanes in front of the hangars, a 2 seater with a number 3 on the fuselage, then the all RED triplane. Note the absence of the triplane in front of the all red bird. To the right and in front of the red Dr1 is a triplane facing the hangers. In the middle is the aircraft positioned similarly to the disputed 477/17. Behind this aircraft are Barricades?. Also note the tree line in the background.
2. Now look at the photos showing the All red Dr1 and the disputed 477/17. The all red bird has another DR1 parked immediately in front of its location. There are 2 or 3 DR1s parked together, then a break, then the Jasta 11 lineup. Count the aircraft readily identifiable without any cross changes which are certainly Jasta 11 birds. Look in the background of the pics and the tree line is not where it should be compared to the panoramic view. There is a triplane to the right and in front of the all red DR1 but it is facing the wrong way to match to the Panoramic view. Look at the Landing gear visible under the wing in the foreground! I could be wrong but I believe the picture of the all red bird taken from the front would show the 2 seater if all aircraft were in the same position? What I am getting at is that the Numbers of Triplanes in the 2 pictures of the Lineups do not add up. We would need 6 to 8 more to equal the total of both! ( Maybe More) There is NO SEPARATION in the Panoramic view to the end of the line. THE ONLY AIRCRAFT NOT MOVED IS 425/17, A GOOD INDICATION THAT IT IS NOT IN CURRENT USE! So although there is a triplane in the same relative position as the disputed 477/17, I do not think ANYONE can say for sure it is the same Triplane, way too many differences in location and numbers for my comfort level! JMHO,
RAGIII

Dave_Watts · 8 July 2006, 01:47 AM

Hi all,

I'm probably reiterating Taz or Langdon, but it is worth repeating.

We have the photo of what some are calling 477/17 (werk number under the wing) where the fuselage and rudder cross has been changed/updated. The paint cans are still sitting on the ground alongside of the fuselage. See posting #233 immediately following this posting.

The "all red" plane in front of the hanger has the old style crosses, so it can not be the same aircraft as the one I just mentioned above "477/17" as it already has its crosses on the fuselage and rudder modified/undated, but the aircraft is far from being "all red".

Point is, if the aircraft with the werk number visible under the wing is 477/17, then the "all red" aircraft almost has to be 425/17 or 152/17 in its pre-final form.

I'm going to check Imrie's book on the timeline on 152/17. Didn't Dan-San say it wasn't painted red until after it was removed from the frontline?

By the way how did we explain the aircraft in the photos I posted in post #95 where you can see what appears and was identified by Imrie as "all red" with white rudder 152/17? Note all other aircraft in the photo have their crosses changed/updated...including the under wing and above wing crosses! I thought this was way too late for 152/17, wouldn't this make these photos be of 425/17?

Inquiring minds want to know!

Best,
Dave W.

Dave_Watts · 8 July 2006, 02:40 AM

Hi all,

I was asked to post the zoom-in of the werk number from underneath the aircraft in question with the paint cans on the ground beside it.

First a photo of the aircraft in question;

My close-up of the werk number, you're looking for "D.R.I. 2103;

Aaron/Taz's close-up of the werk number;

What do you guys think?

You have to remember you're looking at low quality images here, where as Taz and Aaron are looking at gigantic sized files with high resolution, but still you get an idea of what they are seeing. Not crystal clear!

Taz,

This may be out there but are you or Aaron able to "simulate" the "D.R.I 2103" in the same font and then through your or Aaron's software program put the new recreated font in the same plane or angle as that seen on the aircraft wing and see if they are similar or we could try different werk numbers?

If you guys could do this, I think it would go far to answer this question.

Best,
Dave W.

ManfredT · 8 July 2006, 06:57 AM

Dave-

you are looking at Fok.DrI 521/17, Werknummer 2189, destroyed 07-16-1918.

acer

RAGIII · 8 July 2006, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by acer

Dave-

you are looking at Fok.DrI 521/17, Werknummer 2189, destroyed 07-16-1918.

acer

Interesting! As far as I can tell you did not get this from the above posting? What is your reference as this one has not come up before to my knowledge? TIA,
RAGIII

CWatson · 8 July 2006, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RAGIII

CW,
I have looked at these photos in my reference books and at the enlargements posted on page 12 of this thread until my eyes are crossed.

The Facts are that the aircraft do not line up as neatly as DSA would like to indicate.

In my earlier post I was trying to point out that this photos were not taken as far apart as we were thinking. As the leader of JG1 MVR's plane should have been one of the first painted with new crosses as you said yourself and I agree. Look at the pic of the line up with the swastika plane in front(Ferko's Richthofen has a slightly less cropped version of this photo) there are two planes, the farthest from the camera that have had their crosses changed, maybe one is 127/17 because MVR did score in it about this time? As far as the aircraft not lining up as neat, I would not expect them to if the photos were taken hours or even one day apart.These guys are flying sorties,sometimes more then one or two a day the position of the aircraft are going to be fluid.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ragIII

1.Lets look first at the panoramic view of Jasta 6 and 11? ( Originally Identified as Jasta 6 and 10 by Nowarra and Imrie in their earlier works)This we know is not true as jasta 10 dis not receive the triplane. COUNT from right to left. I am not going to post the number I come up with but we will compare later. All of these aircraft that are clearly visible are lined up closely, one next to the other. There are no breaks in the line. Almost all show Jasta 6 markings until the point markings are indistinguishable. To the left are triplanes in front of the hangars, a 2 seater with a number 3 on the fuselage, then the all RED triplane. Note the absence of the triplane in front of the all red bird. To the right and in front of the red Dr1 is a triplane facing the hangers. In the middle is the aircraft positioned similarly to the disputed 477/17. Behind this aircraft are Barricades?. Also note the tree line in the background.

Once it was thought to be Jast 6 and 10? That shows studing the pictures have brought out overlooked details over time. I see the two seater with the "3" on it and whether it was moved or not is not important it would not be visible in any of the photos showing 425/17 or 477/17 going by the angle the pictures were taken.The different numbers of planes visible as I mentioned above do not surprise me it is a active airfield.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ragIII

2. Now look at the photos showing the All red Dr1 and the disputed 477/17. The all red bird has another DR1 parked immediately in front of its location. There are 2 or 3 DR1s parked together, then a break, then the Jasta 11 lineup. Count the aircraft readily identifiable without any cross changes which are certainly Jasta 11 birds. Look in the background of the pics and the tree line is not where it should be compared to the panoramic view. There is a triplane to the right and in front of the all red DR1 but it is facing the wrong way to match to the Panoramic view. Look at the Landing gear visible under the wing in the foreground! I could be wrong but I believe the picture of the all red bird taken from the front would show the 2 seater if all aircraft were in the same position? What I am getting at is that the Numbers of Triplanes in the 2 pictures of the Lineups do not add up. We would need 6 to 8 more to equal the total of both! ( Maybe More) There is NO SEPARATION in the Panoramic view to the end of the line. THE ONLY AIRCRAFT NOT MOVED IS 425/17, A GOOD INDICATION THAT IT IS NOT IN CURRENT USE! So although there is a triplane in the same relative position as the disputed 477/17, I do not think ANYONE can say for sure it is the same Triplane, way too many differences in location and numbers for my comfort level! JMHO,
RAGIII

I see the plane in front of 425/17 with vertical stripes on the fuselage that appears to be having the landing gear worked on. How long to change a flat? Again I think you are wrong about the two seater, looking at photos of the red triplane in Ferkos"Richthofen" the angles of the photos do not show the area where the two seater is setting. You are correct 425/17 has not moved which shows it was not in service, which convinces me that the photos were taken in a similar time period. You have a specially built and painted triplane for JG1's boss, it is not going to be stored long term outside with the cockpit uncovered, this convinces me thes pictures could have been taken maybe hours or a day apart. We have two triplanes in the same photo in relative positions to each other in front of the hangers as the two plane identified as MvR's in other pictures, one we know is MvR's, the other is parked were MvR's other plane was parked and is the only plane in the photos that has the port aileron in the max up position, the starboard one max down and the prop in the same position and as mentioned it is parked in the same place, coincidence? Does this mean they are the same plane? No but I would not discard it completely.

Most important, I do not see is any plane in the two sets of photos that has a early style cross in one pic and a later style cross in the next, not one single plane. All these pictures show are planes in both sets of pictures with rudder and fuselage cross changes on some (Not All) and no wing cross changes. Not one plane has had all it's crosses changed. The panoramic could have been taken before the close ups as well. How? if you have 477/17 (a big IF that is what the rear view shows)with early crosses and a factory finished wing and the close up from the front shows the leading edge at least overpainted and the cross changes started, even one of the lower ones.

Proof of anything? Only that the pictures were taken in a similer time period, how long a period? Hours or a day maybe? Several days? I doubt it not one single plane even MvR's has had a complete cross change.

Interesting dicussion though,
CWatson

CWatson · 8 July 2006, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave_Watts

Hi all,

I was asked to post the zoom-in of the werk number from underneath the aircraft in question with the paint cans on the ground beside it.

What do you guys think?

Thanks for posting them Dave,
CWatson

Dan_San_Abbott · 8 July 2006, 12:30 PM

CWatsonL:
I just spent the last ten minutes staring at that number. THe first and last digits are the same and the two middle digits are the same. I get D.R.I 2112.
Blue skies
Dan-San

Taz · 8 July 2006, 01:15 PM

Dan-San- Somehow this does not surprise me. There is no sharp left point on the top of the third letter, unlike the second number, and the third number is rounded in the middle, unlike the second number. There is symmetry in the fourth number with a protrusion in the middle, unlike the first number. Sort of like the Wanamaker supposed "Du Doch Nicht!" photo where you see stripes and with all the the Photoshop enhancements I could try, I see no stripes. Even if it were 2112, which it plainly is not, and the aircraft were 486/17 or some other aircraft marked "von Richthofen's aircraft" in a photo album, the evidence (inverted "V", Ferko's ability to read the serial number, combat reports, fabric samples, cross changes etc), not unprovable analyses, shows the red aircraft at Lechelle with the prop and engine covers is 425/17.

Let's go back to Kilduff's excellent break-out of sorties during the period in question. There are dozens of sorties with no contact or no conclusive action where no combat report would have been filed. MvR flew many of those himself. Were any of them flown with 425/17? Beats me, but I can no more say yes than you can say no. No evidence. If I told you he flew 525/17 and 161/17, would you have believed me except for the photographic evidence of his visiting Jasta 5 in both aircraft? Certainly no combat report was filed after either of those sorties. What we have here is suppositon based on lack of written combat reports when that proves nothing. The majority of combat sorties resulted in no contact and no written report, so lack of combat reports with 425/17 mentioned proves nothing. At one point 127/17, 152/17, 161/17 (probably, based on the photos), and 477/17 were all painted in similar color schemes. 152/17 and 425/17 were indisputably painted all-red. There is still nothing but unprovable analysis to state 477/17 was ever painted all-red.

Taz
Terry Phillips

Taz · 8 July 2006, 01:27 PM

Dave- On reconstructing the numbers, maybe Cicogne is that good, but I am not.

RAGII, CW- You both make good points on the lay-out. An aerodrome is a fluid place and having Kogenluft photographers there probably made it more fluid. There could have been major movements of aircraft in relatively short periods of time. A major do or die offensive and what looks like good flying weather would mix things up, too. In the end, though, the preponderance of evidence (nearly all the real evidence) comes down to the red aircraft at Lechelle and later under guard with updated crosses (same inverted V) is 425/17.

Taz
Terry Phillips