True color of MVR Fokker Dr1 425/17 - Page 7

Langdon · 13 June 2006, 01:05 AM

Langdon,

Your metaphor of getting four or five speeding tickets in one month all in the same car doesn't mean that is the only car you have been driving that month is well taken. I have to believe MvR had more than one plane at his disposal.

Playing the "devil's advocate, you mentioned the evidenced upper wing damage to 425/17. From what you have seen of the surviving wing pieces is it possible that the fabric was removed from that wing panel and recovered in white fabric from a field repair and then had the red paint and had the cross reapplied? Since you see different versions of the cross, this would mean the repair would have had to occurred early in the life of the aircraft. May this also be an explanation for why this aircraft was "out of the loop" with active service as it may have had other damage that took some time to repair.

Hello Dave,

Thanks for being the voice of reason.

I do not know how much fabric was disturbed when the top right wing tip was repaired, all I know is that one rib had suffered damage that had to be repaired and bandaged with fabric (the cross field fabric remained undamaged as far as I can tell as it retains its original crosses under the modifications). There is no way that this damage can be dated and it is possible that it occurred prior to or during its delivery (I am stating this as I do not wish my comments to be misleading, if we have the available facts then each can draw their own conclusion).

Certainly any damage requiring repair will remove an aircraft from service. I would not expect this particular bit of damage to have kept the aircraft from service for long but we do not know if it was more extensive.

I believe there is strong evidence that the rudder was either replaced or re-covered. As I stated elsewhere the national markings would obviously have been the same over the entire aircraft (the later markings weren't but this is because they had not been fully completed, this aircraft is early enough that this would not have been a problem with its first modifications). This aircraft being an earlier build is more likely to have the incorrect narrow bordered rudder cross than 477/17.

I have not seen the existing rudder fabric that is held by the RCMI, does anyone have a photo of it they might share? It would be interesting to see if it has the original Iron cross under the modified one. If 425/17s rudder had never been over-painted in the cross field area then we would expect to see the works number applied to either, or at least one, side and if it was never over-painted then surely this identifying stencil would have been taken as a souvenir along with the remainder of the fabric. clearly this was not the case (also CWATSON please note the reverse side of the fabric does not show red paint as can be seen on the stabiliser).

It is impossible to say how 425 and 477/17 would have differed. If Dan-San is correct in his assumption concerning the LeChelle photos then the two aircraft would most probably have looked the same, If Alex Imrie is correct then 477/17 would have had a red top on its upper wing along with its inter-plane and centre-section struts, engine cowling and wheel covers, if anyone (Taz?) has a hi-res copy of photo #95 in Imrie's book it would be good if you could check the werks number under the top wing to see its clarity.

Dave_Watts · 13 June 2006, 01:58 AM

Hi all,

Langdon,

Thanks for posting the IWM print, it's a good one!

Just touching on the 425/17 damage and repair, it's at least one way to explain why we may have not had MvR scoring more in it, but I agree in that one plane may have been luckier than another. Who knows?

On the subject of crosses and type applied at the factory, I've never seen any deviation from a middle to late accepted 1917 aircraft to an early 1918 aircraft. There may be some little differences like the bottom of the rudder is painted streaky green, but that's it.

I think it is safe to assume 425/17 and 477/17 would have come with the "standard" early crosses.

Here are some images to illlustrate.

Dr.I 216/17

Dr.I 512/17

Dr.I 581/17

Photos via Imrie.

Best,
Dave W.

Langdon · 13 June 2006, 02:06 AM

Hi Dave,

I don't know what aircraft this is but it certainly isn't 425/17, maybe its 477/17 but the rear fuselage is painted in streaky camouflage and straight sided crosses, we know that 425/17 had all red fuselage with narrow bordered crosses prior to being modified to the straight sided crosses.

Taz · 13 June 2006, 08:33 AM

Langdon, Dave- Will see if I have a print of what Alex Imrie says was "almost certainly" Dr.I 477/17 WN 2103. The dark (olive good guess) stripe on the bottom of some late model Dr.Is (512/17 for example) is not a good distinguisher since it was not universally applied to late model Dr.Is (588/17 did not have it, as did not several others). Still do not understand why that stripe was there since it would have overpainted the WN and I have not seen any white WNs on the stripes. Will have to look at delivery batches on that one.

The only description we have of 477/17 colors is from MvR himself who describes it as similar to 127/17 and early 152/17 color schemes and Alex Imrie's photo # 95 bears that out. Note in photo #95, Alex notes the aircraft was undergoing a change in national markings to Balkenkreuze which nearly rules out the all-red Lechelle aircraft being 477/17. That aircraft was all red with original style crosses and reduced white cross fields. Photo #95 shows an aircraft with solid painted upper wing, cowl, wheels, and struts (presumably red), streaked middle and lower wing, and streaked fuselage side. Exactly as MvR described it. Rudder and fuselage crosses had already been converted although the bottom wing crosses had not. Also note that none of the aircraft in the background of photo #95 have had their crosses converted yet, indicating this aircraft had a high priority for being converted (MvR's aircraft?). Based on this and Alex' conservative attitude towards photo ID, I would have to say the preponderance of evidence comes down on the all-red Lechelle aircraft being 425/17. Overpainting the rudder white, which has already been done in photo #95 on 477/17 but not on the aircraft in the background, had to be done on all JG I Dr.Is, and existing photos of JG I line-ups show very uniform white rudders which we know were earlier red and other colors. The white rudder overpaint applied to JG II machines, as well, so rudder color is a very, very dubious (ie not at all) distinguisher between 425/17 and 477/17.

Will hunt for the print when I get home, but this round would seem to be going to Langdon, Alex Imrie, Ray Rimmel and Dave (as interested bystander). "Just the facts, ma'am."

Taz
Terry Phillips

CWatson · 13 June 2006, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taz

The only description we have of 477/17 colors is from MvR himself who describes it as similar to 127/17 and early 152/17 color schemes and Alex Imrie's photo # 95 bears that out. Note in photo #95, Alex notes the aircraft was undergoing a change in national markings to Balkenkreuze which nearly rules out the all-red Lechelle aircraft being 477/17. That aircraft was all red with original style crosses and reduced white cross fields. Photo #95 shows an aircraft with solid painted upper wing, cowl, wheels, and struts (presumably red), streaked middle and lower wing, and streaked fuselage side. Exactly as MvR described it. Rudder and fuselage crosses had already been converted although the bottom wing crosses had not. Also note that none of the aircraft in the background of photo #95 have had their crosses converted yet, indicating this aircraft had a high priority for being converted (MvR's aircraft?).
Taz

Taz ,
I have no doubt the plane undergoing the cross change with what appears to be a overpainted upper wing usually identified as 477/17 is not the all red plane with iron crosses,the pictures were taken the same day on the same airfield and Dan San mentions there is a picture that shows the wings of both aircraft at the same time. I do not have the picture Dan San mentions here but he states from the angle mentioned it was taken you can see the wing is not red but factory streaked, if you have this picture please post it. If you believe 477/17 was painted with at least a red wing this can not be the plane.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan_San_Abbott

7. Langdon, you said there is a photo of DR.I 477/17 in a streaked finish. Where might I find that photo? If you are referring to Alex imrie's book, "The Fokker Triplane", page 65, photo 95, I don't agree with Alex and neither does Paul Leaman, Paul has identified that machine as Fok.Dr.I 486/17, (see page 155 of "Fokker Dr.I Triplane" I also refer you Gentlemen to Osprey/ AIRWAR 17, "GERMAN FIGHTER UNITS JUNE 1917-1918, by Alex Imrie, pages 12 & 13. The photo on the bottom of the page. This photo was taken the same day as the in "The Fokker Triplane", page 65. The upper wing of the all red machine in front of the fourth Bessaneau Hangar, and to the right of the observer is the upper wing of the DR.I that Imrie has claimed to be 477/17 with the "The upper surface of the top wing is overpainted Red". The panarama photo distinctly shows the uper surface to be olive brown streaked wit white cross fields and Iron Crosses. Not consistant. It is not DR.I
477/17, it is DR.I 486/17.

Dave W.
In your post you mentioned you now believe the rudder was simply over painted yes? If I am wrong please let me know. If so look at the picture Langdon has posted of the rear view of 425/17s wreck. Look at the torn edges of the white material of the rudder, there is no red there. I do not believe this rudder was ever red.

Langdon,
You mention there may be remains of the rudder in the IWM. If anyone had pictures of this material it would end the discussion for good(yeah right

). If the rudder material had no red under the white but had a Iron cross under the strait cross it would prove it was not the "V" plane because the "V" plane is pictured at a time when other planes are already undergoing cross changes to the strait crosses so the would be no reason to paint a early iron cross before a later cross was added if the rudder had been recovered as you state may be the case.

If the material shows no sign of red or iron cross under the white but just the later strait cross then the argument for a repaired and recovered would be proven.

Now who has a picture of the rudder material

.

CW

RED BARON RETURNS · 13 June 2006, 11:51 AM

WOW..You guys are really into it now.
I like all the photo's.
Has anybody ever tried to blow the photo's up to see if they can get a better image of the two?
JP

Taz · 13 June 2006, 01:28 PM

CW- There is little evidence of red on the bottom fabric of the elevator, either, but we know the other side was red. I have a very good print of photo # 95 in Alex' book and can answer that question when I get home tonight. I also have the Fighter Units book and will look at that when I get home and see if I have a print of that.

Lots of wheel spinning going on here, but all in good fun and none of us are calling each other names, which is the way it ought to be. You would think there would be enough evidence to settle this one way or the other, but it has not worked out that way. The multiple cross changes on 425/17 certainly points to it being around Jasta 11/JG I quite a while, and not just after an arbitrary date in April when it was formally mentioned on paper. Would not bet my Z06 on either choice at this point, however.

Taz
Terry Phillips

CWatson · 13 June 2006, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taz

Lots of wheel spinning going on here, but all in good fun and none of us are calling each other names, which is the way it ought to be. You would think there would be enough evidence to settle this one way or the other, but it has not worked out that way. The multiple cross changes on 425/17 certainly points to it being around Jasta 11/JG I quite a while, and not just after an arbitrary date in April when it was formally mentioned on paper. Would not bet my Z06 on either choice at this point, however.

I would hope there is no name calling, we are only discussing a plane that we all happen to be interested in

.

Speaking of crosses, does the first picture in my post above look like you can just see the bottom of the vertical cross arm on the piece of white rudder material just across the tear line? If so the cross reaches alot closer to the bottom of the rudder then the cross on the plane of the second picture on that post, the one with guards around the "V" plane.

Dave W. on this thread, your post #60 has a plane you said was identified as 425/17 by Leaman and/or Carisella this plane is acually Fran Hemer's and there is a very clear copy of the same photo on a thread running right now. http://theaerodrome.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25935
CWatson