"LUDE" profile alternative

[LedZepplane]

After many futile attempts through various modeling forums and many postings, I finely came across a copy (on E-bay) of the October 1969 issue of American Aircraft Modeler featuring that “Full-Color Centerspread-1918 German Fokker D.VII” which illustrated von Hippel’s Fokker D.VII “LUDE”.
This “old” color reference has always been on the top of my wish list, and is my all-time favorite Fokker D.VII Markings (but von Hippel never achieved the title of ace, some of you may say...who cares!) I have gotten a few e-mails from certain individuals lecturing me on the “technical grounds” that this is old out-dated information and Mr. Pearson’s rendering of this aircraft is the last word on this aircraft. Well, I’m not so sure. I’m not taking anything away from Pearson. While the two color references are quite analogous to one another they also differ in many ways. And why is the ’69 rendering in AAM magazine automatically labeled as incorrect just because some “new information” has come along? Is it too hard for certain individuals to accept the possibility that maybe, just maybe von Hippel could have actually flown more than one Fokker D.VII with this same marking while posted to Jasta 71? I mean, how can an individual back in the 60s so badly misinterpret something as obvious as a solid colored wheel cover for one covered in lozenge with a big white dot painted in the center of it? I don’t know what information the illustrator had available to him at the time, but come on, could he have been that incompetent or dim-witted that he couldn’t tell the deference between the two earth-tones (green and violet) from a white disk on lozenge? … I think not.
There’s a pretty a good chance that two totally different aircraft that was flown by von Hippel are being illustrated here, and I’m not saying that Mr. Pearson’s beautiful color profile of “LUDE” is wrong, but something definitely isn’t right hear either . So, until other wise, I’ll always consider the ’69 rendering as a historically correct alternative to Pearson’s profile.


Danny

[jumpinjan]

Danny,
You should have asked me. I still have my original copy of that issue and I found another one on Ebay. I was going to build a gas, free flight scale model of it for the '70 Nats, but never finished it. I made silk screens for the lozenge printing on silk span and everything (I still have the model).
If you look at Anthology III, you will see a photograph on p39 and a color profile on page 32. There are some errors in the direction of the top wing fabric, it was sewn cordwise and not at 45 degrees.
Jan

[LedZepplane]

Howdy, Jan:
One problem that I had from the begging was that I didn’t even know the name of the publication that the LUDE profile was published in, and it took me awhile to figure it out, but once I did I had no problem finding a copy of AAM on E-bay.
As for the AAM profile itself I’m not saying that it’s perfect; right off you can tell the hand-painted lozenge on the cowling isn’t quite right.
To tell you the truth, I've never even seen a photograph of LUDE, except of one close up of von hippel sitting in the cockpit where you can plainly see a rear view mirror mounted on the top wing cut-out center-section, and I can’t even remember where I saw that? In the mean time I’ll track down Anthology III, I’m a bit anxious to see the photo...and If it’s not too much trouble I would like to see your model, so post a few pictures.

Danny

[StephenLawson]

The lozenge is laid out wrong in the art. Not angled or split on the spine.

[LedZepplane]

Hey, Stephen,
Actually I’m not disputing Pearson’s profile and the information he based it on, I’m sure he has every thing right-on the money; I’m just merely suggesting that maybe an entirely different source of information was used to render the AAM profile? And I’m more focus on the discrepancies between the two profiles concerning the legend “LUDE” and the other personal markings rather than the lozenge camouflage. I wouldn’t have made such a big deal out of it if people hadn’t e-mailed me and started giving me such hard time about the whole thing. What it comes down to, I like the ’69 AAM profile and the way the artist had rendered it…so you folks out there (not you Stephen, Jan) quit picking on me and stop trying to mess up my life!
That was my “Mad Max” impersonation, and yes, I listen to way too much John Boy and Billy.

Danny

[StephenLawson]

Hey Danny,

Just check with Dan San.

[Dan_San_Abbott]

LedZeppelin:
There are more things wrong with the Pearson's drawing of Ltn.von Hippel's Fok.D.VII(OAW)6428/18 than what are right.
1.The wings were covered chordwise, not diagonnly.
2.The cowling panels color patterns of the dark green and violet are incorrect as well as the colors.
3.He has 4 color printed fabric which is incorrect, it was covered with five color day intermediate printed fabric.
4.The wheel covers are not covered with printed fabric, they are painted dark green and violet.
5. There was no white dot on the center of the wheel covers.
6. The cross was not divided between the fin and rudder. It was entirely painted on the rudder.
7. The red and white stripes were not of unequal width. they were of equal width. however he has the colors correct, they were red and white.
8. He has omitted the black vertical/sloping narrow lines painted on the side of the fuselage delineating the location of the vertical and sloping steel tubes on the fuselage structure.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[LedZepplane]

Hi, Dan-San:

I have no doubt that the Person’s Profile is based on sound information and is rendered correctly. The real problem that I have is that (and this takes a lot of guts to admit) I simply love the ’69 AAM profile so much I’m just holding out in hopes that one day that some new information will materialize announcing that von Hippel actually flew a second D.VII as depicted in the ’69 profile…I know what your thinking “When pigs fly”
But I think with a few hours of therapy I’ll finely come to grips that Pearson’s “LUDE” profile is in fact the last word on the whole subject.
Thank you all for your comments.

Danny

[StephenLawson]

Originally Posted by LedZepplane

Hi, Dan-San:
I have no doubt that the Person’s Profile is based on sound information and is rendered correctly. The real problem that I have is that (and this takes a lot of guts to admit) I simply love the ’69 AAM profile so much I’m just holding out in hopes that one day that some new information will materialize announcing that von Hippel actually flew a second D.VII as depicted in the ’69profile…I know what your thinking “When pigs fly” But I think with a few hours of therapy I’ll finely come to grips that Pearson’s “LUDE” profile is in fact the last word on the whole subject.
Thank you all for your comments. Danny

Ok believe what you will. . . But maybe you don't know that his personal flight log exists? We have the complete serial listings of every aircraft he ever flew. While normlly it was possible for a commander to have two aircraft at their disposal this was not the case for von Hippel at this time. The Name "Lude" covers the last digit in the OAW serial. We were able to complete this when his flight log became available. Lots of luck with your theory.

[Sreiko]

Dan San and Stephen- is there any photo which you could present here to see authentic look of his airplane? Hope that i don't ask too much