Balkenkreuze of 425/17

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Gentlemen:
This is one of my favorite windmills to tilt! What if that Fok Dr.I is not
Fok.Dr.425/17? That would explain why the crosses seemed to be changed. The next question is, when did they change the crosses on Fok.DR.I 425/17. I am going to find a photo of that Dr.I with the guards and see if the lower wing crosses were changed. That would be a kettle of worms!
Blue skies Gentlemen,
Dan-San

[bristol scout]

HI Guys,

Alex Imrie seems to think the 'inverted 'v' blemish on the fabric under the cockpit confirms this as 425/17 --pages 80---and 65 for comparison. I do see the mark on the photos. in that book.

'The Fokker Triplane'--Alex Imrie'

Dave.

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Hi Dave:
That "V" mark defines all the photos thakrn at Le Chelle Airfield were that they are all of the same Fok.DR.I. However there is not one photo taken at the crash site or at Poulainville, where DR.I 425/17 taken and completely souvenired that can confirm the "V" mark was actually on Dr.I 425/17. It is the MvR Combat Report descriptions that the connections was made not by the "V" mark.
If a photo of the Fok.DR.I taken at LeChelle Airfied can be found that shows the lower wing crosses fully modified, it would confirm that it was not Fok.Dr.I 425/17, but was in act Fok.DR.I 477/17, which I have believed from day 1. It will also raise doubt about the validity of the MvR Combat Reports.
More later. Take a look at Richthofen by A.E.Ferko, page 66 top photo.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Gentlemen:
We know for a fact the lower wing cross was not completed with sides of the white borders being angular as it is displayed in the Austrlian Museum.
I have looked at all the photos of the all red Fok.DR.I taken at Le Chelle Airfield during March 1918. Below is a list of books and appropriate photos and pages.
1. Richthofen, A.E. Ferko. page 66, to photo. right under wing cross white borders are completed and parallel
2. von Richthofen's Flying Circus, Greg VanWynGarden, page 58, photo155. Left lower wing cross is completed with wide white border.
3. Ibid, Page 58, Photo 157. right lower wing cross is complete with wide white parallel borders.
4. WINDSOCK, Volume 4, No.1 Spring 1988. Inside front cover, Left lower wing cross, is completed with wide white parallel borders.
5. "Richthofen Circus', Jagdgeschwader Nr 1. page 76. Right lower wing cross. is completed with wide white border.
While these are the same two photos the all show the lower wing crosses were completed with full white borders on both the vertical and horizontal cross arms.
6.THE FOKKER TRIPLANE, Alex Imrie. Page 68, photo 98. This photo clearly shows the right lower wing cross white border finished ane the vertical and horizontal arms with the white borders parallel and completely finished.
7. Ibid, Photo .99. The lower left wing cros is completely finished with whiote parallel borders.
According to Alex Imrie in German Fighter Units, June 1917-1918, pages 12 and 13, that the above photos were taken on or after 26 March 1918, when Jagdgeschwader Nr.1 moved to Le Chelle Airfield.
These photos are not of Fok.DR.I 152/18. It was removed from service after 18 March1918 and shipped to Berlin. The MvR Combat Reports do not have Fok. DR.I 152/18 painted all red on 18 March 1918 when it was last flown by MvR.
Conclusion. With the lower wing cross border being finished with parallel white borders, this cannot be Fok.DR.I 425/17, Therefore it must be Fok.DR.I 477/17 which MvR was constantly flying and gained 11 victories during this time period of 26 March to 21 April 1918 at LeChelle Airfield.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

['14-'18aviationcollector]

Hi guys,

I meant to reply to this thread a long time ago, but I must have missed it, as I have with many other threads. This is not intentional of course, and I have some information which might help to clear up some of the confusion. The information I have about the middle cross is that it was overpainted relatively recently by a member of a volunteer group. If the story I have heard is correct, it was one of the guys who helped to "restore" the Albatros D.Va in the late 1960's ..... two priceless relics substantially ruined, but the main thing is that they still exist, and can be salvaged, as the Albatros has been. Understandably the Australian War Memorial was not happy about the cross (or the Albatros - there were a few questionable "restorations" and other issues in the earlier years), to say the least and I have no idea why someone, even a volunteer worker would do such a thing. I hope this helps to clear up some of the confusion.

Cheers,

David.

[Dan_San_Abbott]

David:
I wonder why they let someof these in the front door. At the National Air and Space Museum in Wash.D.C. They have a priceless Pfalz D.XII, that They painted it up, like it appeared in "Hell's Angels". They are idiots!
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[PFFF]

Manfred von Richthofen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia has pictures of MVR plane after it crashed 1918-see video postings

['14-'18aviationcollector]

Hi Dan-San,

I can't comment too much because I don't know the full story, but if it was the person I think it was, he was known and trusted, and yet at some time was responsible for painting such a priceless relic and effectively ruining it. I am sure it will be possible to have some sort of restoration or conservation work carried out on it, and that it can be saved at least to a degree. The standard of work carried out by the volunteers I worked with varied. Many cared about what they were doing, but there was so much second rate work being carried out that some relics have been ruined to a degree. Some of the people I worked with worked on earlier restoration efforts. It is a relatively small community, and most of them knew the person who was responsible for painting the surface of that cross. The explanation given seems to vary depending on who tells the story, so a definitive explanation is as elusive as it is with many other issues. One explanation I was given was that some paint was spilled on it, when it was being used for reference, and this was then covered with a completely new coat of paint. Unforgivable. Just look at the standard of work done during the first "restorations" of the Pfalz and Albatros, and you will see the same level of "workmanship".

Museums themselves can be just as bad, at times as you pointed out. It really just depends on the staff who are there at the time, how much experience they have and the resources they have access to. Was it you who was telling me that the same "Pfalz" if you could still call it that had its' fuselage covered in fibreglass? I do actually have some issues with the way the NASM has carried out some of their restorations. Discarding the original Albatros D.Va plywood fuselage skin and the wing fabric are two things I will never understand. Even in their deteriorated condition, they are just as valuable as any other component of the aeroplane. I think they sold both of those skins off in small pieces to raise funds, which is understandable, but surely there could have been another way to raise funds for the project. Unfortunately they don't always listen to people at the time who tell them that they are making a mistake they will never be able to rectify.

Regards,

David.

[Dan_San_Abbott]

David:
The National Air and Space Museum loaned the Experimental Aircraft Association Museum the S.E.5a and Pfalz D.XII these two priceless aircraft, well they fibreglassed the fuselage of the Pfalz D.XII. I don't know what they did to the S.E.5a. I think some people have no brains at all. They fall into the category of Anal orifice third class.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[Laserlloyd]

Hi Hans:

I would like to go back to your original question.

The RCMI cross is from 425/17. I have looked at the photo posted here for a long time and pondered many questions myself. I then read Alan Toelle's article "Good-Bye To All That Red" in C&C (Vol.26 No.3 1995) this started me on my path on the finding the known 425/17 samples and studying the to see what we can learn from them.

I had contacted Alan on some questions I had to learn more on his endeavors in the studies of the 425/17 samples. Alan has studied and examined lots of the known samples and the one held at the RCMI was examined for six hours front and yes the back with the help of his microscope. Photos were taken, sketches were done and an 9 page report on his findings was made on this sample.

Here is a vary lose translation of what your seeing from photo to how the sample looks now. The way the RCMI sample looks today is not how it would of looked back in 1918. One of the factors in the red paint is called "Hiding Power" he has indicated that this sample has a poor hiding power or a low hiding power factor. He has indicated that when it has painted the hiding power would have started to take it's effect to what we know see in the RCMI sample.

1). 425/17 did have the Eisernes Kreuz with the white field. (Every Dr.I was done this way)

2). Sometime between late January to March 17 the first cross change was made. The white field was cut-down to a 50 mm border around the Eisernes Kreuz.

3).The second cross change was ordered by March 17, 1918 to the Balkenkreuz (the beam wide cross style)

4). The third cross change was then ordered to take effect on April 10 to the Balkenkreuz with a length-to-width ratio of 1:4 and a white border of 150mm. (the thinner beam cross style)

So 425/17 had "4" styles of cross on it and this is evident in the RCMI photo. In A.E. Ferko's Windsock Special "Richthofen" on page 44 had a vary good illustration that Rimell did showing the changes along with photos of three of the crosses.

The photo you posted with the guards around the plane would have had all of these changes on it. Remember that just because you can't see it in the photo means that the hiding power of the red paint was at it highest value because it was fairly new paint.

I believe if you were looking at it when the photo was taken you would be able to see these chances.

I would like to make one other point that I'm in the school of thought that the rudder was repaired so the fabric was replaced and would only have one cross pained on it.

Sorry to be a bit long....

Lloyd...