True color of MVR Fokker Dr1 425/17

[CWatson]

Originally Posted by Taz

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.

I agree with most of what you have said here except one note, RAGIII and I were not debating the identities of 477/425 ect.. we were dicussing whether the other plane shown in the panoramic picture to right of the red upper wing was the same plane you copied the werke number off regardless of what the number is.


CWatson

[Dave_Watts]

Hi all,

When I first looked at Taz/Aaron's photos with "uninfluenced eyes", I read the number as "2142". Dan-San sees it as "2112". I thought it was interesting that he arrived at a very similar number to me. Okay, if "2103" is our target, how far was my estimate from that; "2142" vs. "2103"? Both begin with "21" so drop that. Now I have "42" vs "03". I concede that a "4" and a "0" are somewhat similar in form, so possible. And as to the "2" vs "3", the same could be said.

Somewhat inconclusive based on the number alone as it stands.

Taz,

Could you ask Aaron if he could work some magic and try to set up a couple of different werk numbers in the same font, angle, and size to see what matches up the best?

Anyone have the correct font for the characters we need? If so please post them so we can go to work on this. Even if we can get the font for just the werk number we could print it out and shoot a digital photo of it set at the correct angle and see what we come up with.

I don't think we should drop the werk number image just yet!

Best,
Dave W.

[CWatson]

Originally Posted by Dave_Watts

I don't think we should drop the werk number image just yet!
Best,
Dave W.

I agree this is worth further study. Is the werke number under the wing the supose to be the same font as on the wing struts and rudder?

I had a couple friends over today for lunch and had them take a look at these numbers, or I will say markings and asked them if they had to,what would they say they were if they HAD to guess. None of these people are interested in WWI aviation and none would know what a werke number is. Here is what they say they saw on my monitor one at a time and one picture at a time.

Pic #1



J sees: bUI 7002
M sees: ?UI 2102
Wife sees: ?HI 7002
Pic #2


All thought this one the clearer picture.

J sees: DUI 7102
M sees: DUI 2102
Wife sees: DHI 2002

Staring at it after reading their interpetations I see DUI 2102 even though I know the "U" shoud be a "R".

Nobody saw a "3", maybe it is the font but everybody saw a "2".

CWatson

[Taz]

CW- I do not think they are the same aircraft. The top wing on the aircraft in question clearly has its top wing overpainted. I went over the photo again today to make sure we were not fooled by a wing leading edge tape, which is fitted to some Dr.Is. But no, you can clearly see the seam in the fabric, which the tapes were applied to cover. All the overpainted red Dr.I top wings I have seen look relatively solid in photos, so I would not expect to see streaking as plain as on the aircraft you, Dan-San and RAGIII are referencing. Plus on the front view of the aircraft, there is no evidence of the white panels clearly seen on the long range shot. Those white panels extended all the way forward to the fabric seam and should be plainly visible in the front view of any Dr.I with factory panels. I believe what we are seeing is a different aircraft recently delivered from the factory.

Incidentally, the prop can only come to rest in a finite number of positions because of the fixed crankshaft and cylinder compression. Do not know how many positions, too much thought required. Need to ask Fred Murrin.

Dave- Will ask Cicogne when he comes back. Incidentally, just went over a very high res image of 152/17 and I now believe the rudder is undamaged except for groad and peeling paint. Look at the fuselage cross panel and you will see the same effect from peeling paint. It looks so much like the surrounding weeds/grass it just fooled us all.

Dan-San- Hopefully you are still speaking to me, old friend.

Just the facts, ma'am. Good images are a wonderful thing. WN interpretation is difficult. Most of us agree the first three numbers are 210. Last digit is the toughest. I am still comfortable with 3, but we are all working with the same data now, so make up your own mind. If any of us were trying to fudge, we would not be sharing the images.

Taz
Terry Phillips

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Taz:
Ten people who witnessed a fender-bender will have ten stories. This is a mole hill Taz, not a mountain!
Blue skies,
Dan

[Taz]

Dan-San- Well said. Keep up the good work and think how much you have taught me.

Taz
Terry Phillips

[Copperhead]

K guys, I'm up from models ok? But my question is, what's the FS#? I've got an old Revell 1/28 kit in "fire engine red" I built for my son some years ago. My take is a dark red. What's the skinny? JW

[RAGIII]

OK, knowing how much I would love to say I see 2103 here is my TRUE analysis. I looked at the photos for a long time and saw nothing discernible. My wife looked and guessed "Moon Landscape" I put my reading glasses on and still saw nothing. Went back to my bi focals and BACKED away from the puter! The farther away I got the better this image looked! I began to see the "Possibility" that these were indeed letters and Numbers! I saw 2149, 2148! I moved to the left and looked at an angle. I could actually see the R as an R and not a U! The numbers I read as 2108 or 2109. I think there could be some reverse thinking going on in my mind, I don't want to see 2103 because everyone expects that from me In the end an 8 is close to a 3 and I do see the possibility. I do not see 2112( No surprise there guys right?) My conclusion (Based on this posting) WHO KNows? I think Ferko had it right, too indistinct to be positive. Which brings us back to something Taz said a few posts ago: 477/17 or not, the evidence still points to the all Red Triplane in question being 425/17
RAGIII

PS: Time for an Eye Dr. Appointment

[Dave_Watts]

Terry/Taz,

I'm ready to discuss this "hole" in the rudder fabric further. You'd better send me your high res. scan, as I think it is a hole (until convinced otherwise). Look at how low of an angle the camera is. You can see under the horizontal stabilizer and elevator. I believe you are seeing thru the hole and the sunlite grass beyond. Compare the tonal values of the surrounding illuminated grass and I think you will agree. I believe you can see the top edge of the hole has the fabric rolled inward, much as you would expect with a "popped" hole in fabric. At the moment, you have me at a disadvantage with your high resolution photo.

Best,
Dave W.

[Taz]

Dave- You have it now. What do you think? Looks different when you can really zoom in on it.

Taz
Terry Phillips