Is this the Red Baron?

[Auimfo]

Hi all,

This photograph comes from my grandfather's collection. He served with the Australian Imperial Force. According to family legend he always claimed it was a photo of von Richthofen after having been shot and coming in to crash land.
From what I know von Richthofen crashed behind Australian lines on the Somme and this photo clearly shows Australian troops in camp watching the plane above.
The photo is a little short on clarity so I have enlarged the plane itself and this clearly shows a triplane that appears to be banking to the right (towards the viewer). I am no expert in the field of WW1 aircraft and wondered if it was possible to identify what type of plane this is. If the possibility exists that it is as my grandfather claimed, I imagine it would be a very rare photo indeed with quite some historical significance.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts,

Tim Lycett.

[StephenLawson]

Originally posted by Auimfo@Apr 21 2004, 03:52 PM
[b] Hi all,

This photograph comes from my grandfather's collection. He served with the Australian Imperial Force. According to family legend he always claimed it was a photo of von Richthofen after having been shot and coming in to crash land.
From what I know von Richthofen crashed behind Australian lines on the Somme and this photo clearly shows Australian troops in camp watching the plane above.
The photo is a little short on clarity so I have enlarged the plane itself and this clearly shows a triplane that appears to be banking to the right (towards the viewer). I am no expert in the field of WW1 aircraft and wondered if it was possible to identify what type of plane this is. If the possibility exists that it is as my grandfather claimed, I imagine it would be a very rare photo indeed with quite some historical significance.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts,

Tim Lycett.
Now posted on April 21, 2004. Most curious. I wonder what type of camera could take such a photo? Focal plane and such considered.

[Rod_Filan]

Don't be such a sceptic Stephen ! ;)

Take another look Auimfo, I clearly see the triplane flying away from the camera, perhaps banking to the left a little.

VBR
Rod

[wingstrutdotcom]

Who was your grandfather?
What was his rank?
What unit did he serve in?

[Auimfo]

Stephen, I also sense some scepticism in your reply. If I wanted to identify the camera I would have sent the photo to a photographic forum! Although I have no idea what camera was used, I possess the original photo and can guarantee you "it ain't no fake".
The photo is printed on card and on the back has printing as if it were a postcard. As many of you may know, this was a common way that the troops had their photos printed.

Rod, I can see what you are saying and agree the photo can be viewed this way however my first instincts showed it the way I explained and having shown it to quite a few people for comment, the general consensus was that the plane was banking right towards the viewer. (not unlike the picture in this website's gallery titled "Winner Takes All". Unfortunately, the lack of clarity does not make it at all clear and the planes actual position may never be confirmed.

Wingstrutdotcom, my grandfather was Lance Corporal William Dalton LYCETT (AIF). He originally served with the 4th Field Ambulance and then at the time of MvR's demise he was with the 15th Light Railway Operating Company. He served from September 1914 until February 1919 and I have his diaries that do not miss a single day throughout this period. I have checked these diaries and can confirm that he was no where near where MvR was brought down in April 1918. However, he had many photos in his collection that were given to him by brothers, cousins and friends before returning to Australia and I am certain this is one of those. (photos taken either 'of my' grandfather or 'by him' are not of the postcard type).

Whether this be MvR or not, does anyone think the type of aircraft can be determined from this photo?

Thanks,
Tim.

[retread]

The photo certainly has an authentic look. The aircraft appears to have three wings- which would limit it to a handfull of types. And, most interestingly, it seems to be drawing an unusual amount of attention from the groundbound diggers- which makes me think it is not just a passing Sopwith Tripe. Extemely interesting.

[Ginger.]

Perhaps it's a picture of a more remarkable bus....Albert Ball's SE5. <_<

[R Pope]

It looks more like a Sopwith Triplane to me. The top wing doesn't seem to have increased chord at the ailerons, and the horizontal tail surfaces look squared, not triangular. The axle looks too narrow to be the Fokker lifting surface, but admittedly, it looks thicker than the Sopwith axle. The vagaries of camera focus and the motion of the plane could account for these differences in perception, though. Seems to me that anyone making a fake photo would have been more careful to make it clearer and more easily identifiable. The overlap of the wings shows it to be banking right, towards the camera.

[Cigogne]

Scan the photo at a higher resolution. If possible, scan in on the area of the triplane. One of the problems is that the JPEG compression has added to the distortion.

What resolution did you scan it at? Scan it as a TIFF, at 600 dpi. That should allow one to zoom in on any details. It will be pretty grainy, but... perhaps there are some marking or other details.

Thanks!

[Cigogne]

To me the photo looks more like a Sopwith Triplane. Clues?

1. No axle wing.
2. Wings appear to be equal span and chord.
3. Tailplane doesn't appear to be triangular.

[Rick]

And, there appears to be a roundal smack in the center of the fuselage. R.

[ONEALM]

Looks like a Sopwith Tripe to me as well. If a clearer scan shows up I can tell you exactly how far away from the camera this guy is.... but the scan has to be pretty clear to work that out.

[ww1 ace]

I say that the plane shown is MvR's Fkker DR.1 Triplane.

[GregorySharp]

As much as I want to believe that a photo of such an event exists, the top wing itself is simply too similar in diameter to the bottom wing and it does not show the extended ailerons. The top and bottom wings of the DR I were very different from each other. Having built the DR I in great detail in a 3D modeling program and a few kits of the thing too, I simply see a British Tripe here.

So sorry to disapoint. :(

[GregorySharp]

Auimfo,
If you could do a hi res raw scan of the plane itself, crop it, we could post it on my site. It could be as large as ten megs if you needed. That way we could drag it into Photoshop and see if we couldn't extract some details from the image.

[Auimfo]

Ok Guys,

I'm sensing that no one is completely sure about this plane and to be honest I can't blame you. The photo is pretty thin on detail and as has been said , can be viewed from a couple of perspectives.

Perhaps the closeup below will help a little. I've zoomed in and scanned the plane at 1200 dpi which is as detailed as I can get. Unfortunately there are scratches along the wings and I'm pretty sure that in years gone by, someone (presumably my grandfather) has been using something sharp to indicate the three wings to others viewing the photo.

I hope this helps a little and with luck we can reach a general consensus and either 'accept the possibility' or 'put to bed' my grandfathers claim.

Tim.

[retread]

Taking a closer look at the photo this evening along with some aircraft profiles at hand I agree the plane in the photo is probably a Sop. It is still interesting the amount of attention the Aussies are giving it which leads me to think either they rarely saw a plane (at least at low altitude) in their sector or something of note is taking place- perhaps an emergency landing. Either way the man with the camera felt it was photo worthy.

[StephenLawson]

Originally posted by Auimfo@Apr 22 2004, 02:40 PM
[b] Ok Guys...Perhaps the closeup below will help a little. I've zoomed in and scanned the plane at 1200 dpi which is as detailed as I can get. Unfortunately there are scratches along the wings and I'm pretty sure that in years gone by, someone (presumably my grandfather) has been using something sharp to indicate the three wings to others viewing the photo.

I hope this helps a little and with luck we can reach a general consensus and either 'accept the possibility' or 'put to bed' my grandfathers claim.

Tim.
Sopwith Triplane with small tail plane (post May 1917), white bordered fuselage roundel/cockade, three equal chord wings. Seen in flight from below, no banking. Rudder appears striped. No overhang or balances to ailerons. small wing axle. Pretty good for a hand held personal camera. (Probably an officer with a Kodak.) Any of his contacts officers?

[Barker]

Originally posted by Weldboy@Apr 22 2004, 07:37 PM
[b] It is still interesting the amount of attention the Aussies are giving it which leads me to think either they rarely saw a plane (at least at low altitude) in their sector or something of note is taking place- perhaps an emergency landing. Either way the man with the camera felt it was photo worthy.
Most people had never seen an aircraft in 1916-18.
Aussies - whomever.

Been thinking the same thing you just mentioned.

Difficult to say why they are all looking in the same direction, for certain.
But.
We still take a picture of an aircraft flying over - especially if it is low.

In those days, it may as well have been a UFO.
I'd think an a/c flying over was still noteworthy to any of these folks.

Beyond that, the backstory is just about absent, is it not?

I agree with those who believe it to be a Tripehound.
Thin, narrow, rounded wings. No wing axle.
Same reasons as above.

[GregorySharp]

Auimfo,

Okay, take a look at this! Okay, so it's not conclusive evidence but still.

Bottom line, your grandfather had a photo he was very proud of and I'm sure he believed it with all his heart.

It's just down right fun to talk about this stuff so please take a look at what I did with your pic. :D

http://www.fokkerfactory.com/FokkerOrSopwi...rOrSopwith.html (http://www.fokkerfactory.com/FokkerOrSopwith/FokkerOrSopwith.html)

[R Pope]

The later rendering shows the scratches that made it look like the plane was banking. This pic is plainly a Sopwith, tail shape, wing tips and span, and, of course, the roundel. And its flying level, away from the camera. Not the Baron, but a great memento nonetheless.

[R Pope]

Just checked out Eduardfreak's site, no further proof needed! The bottom view is the right one, as the wing's angle of incidence makes the tips appear the same shape, the banking view distorts the roundness too much. Nice work!

[StephenLawson]

Originally posted by EduardFreak@Apr 22 2004, 08:26 PM
[b] Auimfo,

Okay, take a look at this! Okay, so it's not conclusive evidence but still.

Bottom line, your grandfather had a photo he was very proud of and I'm sure he believed it with all his heart.

It's just down right fun to talk about this stuff so please take a look at what I did with your pic. :D

http://www.fokkerfactory.com/FokkerOrSopwi...rOrSopwith.html (http://www.fokkerfactory.com/FokkerOrSopwith/FokkerOrSopwith.html)
Very cool!!!! Bravo Eduardfreak!!!

[Rod_Filan]

Nice work Eduardfreak !

Dinner or not; you did an excellent job.

[wingstrutdotcom]

SO if I understand we are all in consensus that MvR did IN FACT fly a Sopwith Triplane to his death. I must make a note of it.

(lol)

[Auimfo]

Thanks to everyone for all your input,

I think Eduardfreak has pretty much solved the mystery (what a pity) and many thanks to him for the excellent work. I don't think my grandfather was making the story up but probably retold the story as it was given to him.

As a matter of interest, how common were photos of aircraft in actual action during WW1. I've mostly only seen 'posed' photos of the planes on the ground. Is this still a fairly rare type of photo anyway (whatever the make of the aircraft).

Tim.

[retread]

Kudos for Eduardfreak. Anyone care to examine the possibilities of this photo a little further? I know the Naval Squadrons, or at least a few of them flew Sopwith Triplanes- how about the RFC? How widely scattered were the Naval Squadrons? At what point did the Camels push the Triplanes out of the combat flying picture? Likely time of year, place- a little photographic analysis anyone?

[Vin]

As far as I know, the RFC had no active triplane units. The Sopwith Triplane was restricted to the RNAS.

[R Pope]

All 150 or so Tripehounds were used by the RNAS, the ones delivered to the RAF were swapped to the Navy for Spads. They were operational from April till November 1917, replaced by Camels.

[Irish41]

Saw this posted on the Great War Forum,

Regarding cameras, we have an original 1917 army camera, and have taken many photos with it. It is a remarkable machine for the clarity it captures, and this could easily have been taken in 1917 with a similar camera, so I do believe it is from the period.

It would be great to have it scanned, blown up to ID the troops in the foreground a bit better, and the wing structure.

At any rate, thanks for sharing it with us!

Cheers,
Scarlett

[Cigogne]

EduardFreak,

"Freak Out"!!! Nice bit of comparing which totally illustrates that the plane is a Sopwith Tripe. Nice side by side comparisons!

[Langdon]

Originally posted by Weldboy@Apr 23 2004, 07:08 PM
[b] Kudos for Eduardfreak. Anyone care to examine the possibilities of this photo a little further? I know the Naval Squadrons, or at least a few of them flew Sopwith Triplanes- how about the RFC? How widely scattered were the Naval Squadrons? At what point did the Camels push the Triplanes out of the combat flying picture? Likely time of year, place- a little photographic analysis anyone?
This would take some sleuthing! It would be nice if this were an Australian pilot buzzing Aussie troops, i.e. Major R.S. Dallas, 1 Naval Wing or Captain R.A. Little, 8N. Both flew tripes.

Langdon

[ww1 ace]

Now I definitly think it's a Sopwith Triplane!

[retread]

There looks like what may be to these aged eyes trees and or bushes in the background bearing a healthy amount of vegatation, if so it is probably between May- October (at the latest) 1917.
Auimfo- would you happen to know your Grand-daddys location or locations through that period? If we could match that up with RNAS locales we could possibly determine a likely Squadron of our Tripe.
I am still impressed by the attention drawn to the aircraft- as Barker said, in 1917 the majority of humanity had never seen an airplane. However, the majority of humanity was not serving on the Western Front in France. I would think most soldiers would be less visibly impressed with a passing aircraft- an event which over the majority of the front had to take place, very conservatively, a dozen times a day (in flying weather). Beyond that the troops seem to lack spit and polish, they have what seems (at least to me) a veteran appearance. I'm guessing they are either new to the world of aviation or something unusual is taking place. If it is the former and these guys are veterans they have to have been serving somewhere in which A/C were either rare or non-exsistant. Perhaps new arrivals from one of the wars more exotic fronts? Anyone else for some speculation? Better yet,anyone else with some information?

[pmirl]

I agee that it appears to be a Sopwith. One question though. Can you blow up the area that shows what appears to be a smokestack in the background? Maybe this will give us a clue!


Paul

[AAC Cadet Leader]

That's talent, EduardFreak!

[Langdon]

Originally posted by Weldboy@Apr 24 2004, 07:47 AM
[b] I am still impressed by the attention drawn to the aircraft- as Barker said, in 1917 the majority of humanity had never seen an airplane. However, the majority of humanity was not serving on the Western Front in France. I would think most soldiers would be less visibly impressed with a passing aircraft- an event which over the majority of the front had to take place, very conservatively, a dozen times a day (in flying weather).
Aircraft often draw considerable attention even today, especially high performance aircraft and the tripe was one of the greatest in its time. Also we do not know what this aircraft was doing, it could have been stunting or the guys on the ground might not have known it was friendly but then again nobody is pointing a gun at it.

Unless they were trench strafing or balloon busting pilots tended to keep above 2000 feet over the lines because of ground fire so I think a low flying aircraft would draw considerable attention.

Langdon

[pmirl]

Especially if it were a new type of aircraft, such as a tripe.

[GregorySharp]

So glad to help. :)

[flyingclaret]

As a point of interest I had correpondence a few years ago from Baron Braybrooke who came face to face with the Richthofen Jasta while taking trench phots in an FE2B. The Jasta left them alone-obviously, he said they had bigger fish to fry!

[NC74392]

If you look closely, you'll notice the axle would look twisted if the Tripe were indeed banking toward the camera. Also, the fuselage would be offset to the right . Of course this is not the case, so the aircraft is flying overhead, away from the camera, slight left bank.

I have to concur- it is indeed a Sopwith Triplane. Still a quite remarkable photograph IMO.

[Michael Skeet]

A number of points that no one else has mentioned yet:

1. This has to have taken place well behind the lines -- ten miles? Nearer the front, nobody would have been standing about in broad daylight.

2. Interesting that nobody is shooting at the triplane. If there was any doubt that the machine in the photo was a Sopwith, the absence of anyone in the photo showing any alarm at all would prove it. (Closer to the front, men tended to shoot at anything that flew, whether it could be identified as friend/foe or not.)

3. It was against military regulations for soldiers to have cameras in an operational sector. Obviously this was a rule honoured fairly often in the breech, but it was a rule nonetheless.

[stephen]

Auimfo;

Roughly 144 Sopwith Triplanes were built, and all were used by the RNAS. A handful of them were later re-fitted with twin Vickers guns and five more were sent to the French navy for testing purposes. Nearly all were out of service by November of 1917.

[Lufbery]

Hi all,

I'm coming late to this thread, but I've thoroghly enjoyed getting caught up.

Regards,

[MikeW]

Originally posted by stephen@May 12 2004, 05:03 PM
[b] Auimfo;

Roughly 144 Sopwith Triplanes were built, and all were used by the RNAS. A handful of them were later re-fitted with twin Vickers guns and five more were sent to the French navy for testing purposes. Nearly all were out of service by November of 1917.
Oh dear......... please ignore the above incorrect information - though I suppose the last sentence is not drastically incorrect.

1) 160 were built - don't care what you read elsewhere, I can prove it.

2) Flown operationally by No.1 Naval Squadron, No.8 Naval Squadron, No.9 Naval Squadron, No.10 Naval Squadron, The French Escadrille Terrestre de Chasse du Cam de Dunkerque, No.2 Wing RNAS in the Aegean, and the Manston War Flight. Also flown by No.11 Naval Squadron and No.12 Naval Squadron where they saw limited action.

One flown by the RFC and RAF at Orfordness Experimental Establishment, another at the RNAS Isle Of Grain Experimental Establishment, and one other flown by the RFC and the remains of the Imperial Russian Air Service in Russia (later captured by the Bolsheviks).

Several on strength at Royal Naval Air Stations at Chingford and Eastchurch, and the Manston War School, one each at the RAF schools at Sedgford, Marske and one at the Southeast Area Fighting school.

Oh yes, nearly forgot the one (one NOT 4) loanded to the French Air Service.


3) In active service, No.1 Squadron was still using triplanes at the end of November 1917.

4) None were refitted with twin Vickers guns, but 10 were in fact specially built with twin vickers guns, 1 by Sopwiths, 6 by Clayton and Shuttleworth, and 3 by Oakley.

[meissner]

Originally posted by pmirl@Apr 24 2004, 05:19 AM
[b] Especially if it were a new type of aircraft, such as a tripe.
Or if it were chasing or being chased by another plane not in the picture?

The crowd clearly seems focused on the plane. Perhaps it was having engine trouble or was flying erratically. THe pilot could have been badly injured or dead. It could have dropped out of a dogfite a few thousand feet above.

I agree with whoever pointed out that the location is probably well behind the lines and that an airplane flying at a couple of hundred feet would be unusual there.

Fun to speculate.

Mybe he was just buzzing the Aussies for fun. Maybe it was their first look at a plane with three wings.

Were there any Aussie pilots flying triplanes for the RNAS?

[Philip_Hawes]

if it is indeed a sopwith Triplane (or another british aircraft), why are these Australian troops so interested? surely the volume of aircraft in the 1917 wouldn't cause a soldier to stop and look at every aircraft to fly over. perhaps there had been a low level dogfight, or this aircraft was damaged in someway (as originally suggested). i feel that perhaps these men had never seen a triplane before, perhaps this would spark the interest shown! is there a date with the photograph? i fear not because of the debate...

i'd really like to see an improved copy of this picture if its being made available.