Need help on Dr.1 477/17 for MVR Aircraft Project

[Otis Glenn]

Good day everyone:

I am a modeler and a World War One aviation fanatic and I am currently in the middle of a research and model building project featuring many of the aircraft flown by Manfred von Richthofen. There will be about nine models in all ranging from his Albatros D.II to Fokker Dr.I 425/17. They will eventually go on display at the library where I work and I wanted to make sure the markings and other details are as accurate as possible because of this. I have used the Aerodrome forum as part of my research, especially since there are many posts by my favorite authors and historians. I have recently finished reading the True color of MVR Fokker Dr.I 425/17 thread and was pleased at the amount of information given in those discussions, not just about Dr.1 425/17, but also about Dr.1 477/17, which is an aircraft I would truly love to build for this project. After combing through information from that thread along with books talked about during those discussions as well as books published since the thread was finished in the summer of 2006, I have some questions as well as some observations about 477/17 that I would like to pass by the members, authors, and historians that post on the forum.

In regards to the markings of 477/17, it seems to me that there are essentially three schools of thought on this, each with their own interpretation of the evidence available at the time of the above mentioned thread. I will summarize the various details of what the thread has mentioned and what I have found in the research of these three schemes.

The first possible markings of 477/17, being von Richthofen’s primary aircraft in March of 1918, is that it was painted all red, just like 425/17. This interpretation is based on the pattern of coloration adopted by Richthofen for his primary and reserve machines as stated in Alex Imrie’s The Fokker Triplane. Evidence is also supplied by the interpretation of the following photograph:



According to Dan-San Abbott, the above photo and all of the other photos of the Triplane with the “V” blemish on the side is 477/17. This would make the color scheme look like this:



There seemed to be a long time leaning to 477/17 being all red. Other pilots from the First World War described this Triplane in this coloration. There are even flying reproductions of this aircraft in this scheme. Being Richthofen’s primary aircraft, this color scheme would fit the pattern of primary and reserve Triplane coloration. However, there are a good number of authors and historians that believe that this plane is actually 425/17. It has even been stated that Ray Rimell was able to read the numbers 425/17 on one of the photo negatives that he possessed of this aircraft. Also, this scheme does not fit the markings as described in Richthofen’s combat reports.

The next possible scheme is based on a photo that has been the source of much argument in the True Color of 425/17 thread. The following photo appeared in Alex Imrie’s book identified as 477/17:



Since then the photo has appeared in publications by Norman Franks & Greg VanWyngarden (in Fokker Dr.1 Aces of World War One) and Peter Kilduff (in The Illustrated Red Baron) with the same identification. If the above photo is indeed 477/17 then the markings would look like this:



The controversy surrounds the reading of the work numbers under the top wing. Alex Imrie read the numbers as 2103, which corresponds with 477/17. Ray Rimell read them as 2112 which is 486/17. A.E. Ferko said they were too indistinct to be identified. Other members of the forum who had access to enlarged sections from actual photos read the numbers in any range from 2103, 2113, 2102, and several other combinations. Taz changed his reading of the numbers from 2103 to another possible combination later in the thread. After careful analysis of the numbers, Cigogne stated that the numbers were either 2102 or 2103, but he was certain the first three numbers were 210. One poster claimed he had original information that showed the numbers to be 2183 which corresponds to 521/17, the Triplane that was eventually flown by Robert Greim, though the original source data was never posted. No matter what the truth, many publications that have come out since Alex Imrie’s book, and even some decal sheets produced for modelers, go with this scheme for 477/17. However, a couple of books that have been published since the True Colors of 425/17 thread ended have deviated from this view.

This leads me to the third scheme which is based on descriptions in MVR’s combat reports and photos of other similarly marked Triplanes that were flown by Richthofen. In these reports, the markings are described as being the same as 152/17, which are the standard colors we have come to expect of his reserve Triplanes. I have not seen many profiles of 477/17 in this scheme, aside from the old Aces book from Squadron, that is, until recently. The new Osprey Publications book Sopwith Camel vs. Fokker Dr.1 by Jon Guttman has a color profile of 477/17 based on the combat reports. The following picture is from that profile:



Peter Kilduff seems to favor this scheme now as well. In his latest book Red Baron The Life and Death of an Ace there is a color profile of 477/17 in the same colors as the above profile, except that it has the pre March 17 crosses. This would mean that he changed his mind about the markings of 477/17 since the publication of The Illustrated Red Baron.

All of this information leads me to a few questions. First, has new information surfaced in the years since the True Color of 425/17 thread that have changed the interpretation of 477/17 from one scheme to another? If so, what is the prevailing view now? For the collection that I am doing for display, I would like the most accurate scheme for this aircraft as possible, which may be a pretty tall order. For that purpose, I am not as concerned about the evolution of the scheme and when the changes took place as much as having a “snapshot”, if you will, of 477/17 sometime during its brief career while being flown by MVR. As an example, I would like to present 477/17 in the same way I am going to present 425/17, in a single moment in its history. In 425/17’s case, I am going to depict it as it looked on the last day Richthofen flew it, the one time that we pretty much know exactly what it looked like. This way I can avoid the controversy of when its crosses were changed, whether the red went on in stages, or if the red went on over streaky green or clear doped linen. Would one of the schemes mentioned here fulfill those criteria for 477/17?

I have one final observation from the True Color of 425/17 thread. On post #77 of that thread the following image was provided:



This photo appeared in Paul Leaman’s Fokker Dr.1 Triplane where he identified the nearest Triplane as 477/17. I am surprised that there was no discussion or scrutiny of this photograph during the debates over 477/17. If this is 477/17 then we may have a photo that shows the painted areas of this Triplane much better that the contested photograph above. A blow up of an original may actually be able to show the numbers on the side of the fuselage and whether or not the plane was fully painted red or partially painted. Does anyone have access to an original or a close to original copy of this photo that can be analyzed? With this, we may be able to solve some of the questions surrounding 477/17’s markings, at least at the time this photo was taken.

Thank you all for taking the time to read this huge posting. As the project goes on, I may ask some questions concerning the other aircraft I am planning to do. Any input into this by forum members would be greatly appreciated. Again, thank you all.

Glenn

[Tim West]

The truth is you'll prolly never get anyone to agree

You seem to have a lot of info...why not just use your research and do the scheme you feel is right?

[Otis Glenn]

Thanks for responding Tim.

I pretty much figured that I couldn't get anyone to agree after reading the True Colors of 425/17 thread. They really went after each other there! What I would like, and the reason for bringing up the issue again, is information that I don't have access to that members of the forum do. I can get just about any book I want since I work in a library, but original combat reports and actual photos are out of my reach. I do have an I idea of which scheme I favor, but I'm uncertain enough about it to seek outside help. What I would love is some photos that I can analyse myself, so I can make up my own mind. For instance, if I had a actual copy of the heavily disputed photo from my second scheme description, I could blow up the numbers and make up my own mind about it. The digital copies of the photo that were posted on the True Colors of 425/17 thread were too "pixelated" (is that a word?) for me to make up my mind one way or another. The same goes for the photo from Leaman's book. If I had a copy of the photo I could study, rhater than just a small photo in a book, that would be great. I'm still looking for that one bit of info that will sway my opinion. It basically boils down to a matter of indecision on my part.

In any case, thanks for the imput. I'm going to wait and see what else turns up.

Glenn

By the way, I love your C.G. artwork. AWESOME stuff!!!!!

[Tim West]

lol..I feel your pain....I think they keep their photos so we buy their books

I'll comment on the Leaman photo you reference....the caption actually states "it is "possible" that the triplane nearest the camera is 477/17." He doesnt claim it to "be" 477/17. My guess is that even with the original photo, you'd not be able to positively identify that plane. So it's almost irrelevant.

Good luck with your project...maybe others will bite


And..thanks for the kind words

[tcrean7828]

Mate,
Welcome to the flagship of the Aerodrome - where the greatest minds on the planet get together and talk about their favorite subject - WW1.

ttfn

tcrean7828

tom

P.S. Werner Voss fan here.

[alex_revell]

Otis,
As everyone will tell you after this post, I know nothing about Fokker triplanes, don't even know how many there were. But in respect of the different works numbers which people have put forward as being their interpretation of 477/17, I can offer this, for what it's worth. Alex Imrie has many photographs which are first generation prints from the original plate glass negatives. On some of these he has even been able to read serial numbers under thinly applied paint washes, and works numbers on such prints are easily discernable. Alex is the most painstaking, accurate, and long standing (over sixty years), of all the researchers into the German air force. His photo collection alone is simply amazing - and vast, beyond many people's conception. It has to be seen to be believed. Many of the photos owned by the present people, such as Paul Leaman, Taz, Laser LLoyd etc., are prints (some, three or four generations from the original negs, and often copies of copies) even if they don't know it, or acknowledge it, from photos which originated from Alex. Alex's favourite phrase to describe many of the people currently researching Fokker triplanes is: 'They're not even at the races!!' To such people he comes across as pretty arrogant, but as someone once said: 'What's wrong with being arrogant, when you're right.' To sum up: If I were you, I'd take Alex's assessment above all others. I'll now take cover before the proverbial hits the fan.
Best regards

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Glenn:
The one question, that has not been answered is."If all the photographs are off Fok.DR.I 425/17, which there is no evidence that MVR ever flew operationally, prior to 19 April 1918. Further, All this while, from at least 26 March 1918, to 11 April 1918, he was flying Fok.DR.I 477/17, then where are the photos of this machines which several photographers took pictures of for the home print media?
These opinions are are based on a description in a translated MvR combat report with no provenance. Where are the original combat reports in German?? If a translation was made there has to be originals, Hmmmm?
I contend that the photos are of Fok.DR.I 477/17. Why photograph a machine he was not flying. OK, well you will get that he must have or could or would have or what ever, but you will not get an answer to the above question.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[Tim West]

lol....see what you started Otis

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Hi Tim:
I am not going to get into a long discssion on this tiring subject. I have made my only post on this thread.Blue skies,
Dan-San

[Tim West]

Originally Posted by Dan_San_Abbott

Hi Tim:
I am not going to get into a long discssion on this tiring subject. I have made my only post on this thread.Blue skies,
Dan-San

Heya Dan,

A dead horse for sure...I sort of thought this thread would go this way Hence my first post in this thread. Sometimes I wonder if threads like this "do" get started just to stir things up.

I do have something to say to the people who own the plates or early gen prints though...please do us all a favor and publish a picture book with larger copies...like a coffee table book...nice big photos. I'd buy it.

Indeed..blues skies all