A new member says hello

[Epee]

Hello all! About every ten years my latent interest in WW1 aviation flares up. This board is a contributing symptom of the latest bout. Allow me throw out a few questions;

Was it common/standard/regulation for pilots to carry sidearms once machineguns became the aerial weapon of choice? The only mention of such I can recall is Mannock and Luke.

Were personal and non-regulation unit markings really as bold and dense as modern profiles depict or were they thinner and more translucent like a wash?

In Osprey’s “Fokker Dr1 Aces” there is a picture of Jasta 11’s Dr’s in a line. The first craft in line has a light colored band with thin swastikas behind the cockpit. Studying the photo I noticed that on all the planes of which you can clearly see the noses, cowl to cockpit, are very dark, seemingly glossy, and very uniform, ending in a very straight, perpendicular line. I suppose the profiler’s think this is shadow as the color plates of the book don’t address this but I’m wondering if it’s not red paint. Any thoughts?

Thanks

["Junior"]

Welcome Epee (wouldn't happen to be a fencing chap would you?)

Most of what limited material I have read suggests that side arms were often carried by pilots. Although whether every RFC pilot chose to carry the elephant-gun-like regulation Webley is debatable! A quite famous "gunfight" involving a downed pilot is the shootout between the American Balloon Buster, Frank Luke and German troops. Unfortunately for Luke he was killed in the exchange resisting capture.

As for personal and non-regulation unit markings being bold or translucent. I would have to say fairly bold. Remember these were painted on with paint and so depending on the paint used would be fairly opaque.

Sorry but I'm no help with your third question but someone here will know!

Cheers,

Junior.

[StephenLawson]

Welcome to the Aerodrome!

[fltmech]

Welcome Epee At least you WW1 illness goes into remission, mine is incurable, and the Aerodrome is just the medication I need.

[wingstrutdotcom]

Originally posted by fltmech@Aug 12 2004, 01:38 PM
[b] Welcome Epee At least you WW1 illness goes into remission, mine is incurable, and the Aerodrome is just the medication I need.

This board is therapy. Otherwise there will be a lot of old men walking the streets looking up and talking about why they see no planes with two or three wings in the sky anymore. B)

[Epee]

Heh Heh, thanks all!

Yep Junior, I used to be a fencing chap (Back in a younger and leaner life)


The reason I ask about handguns is there was never any mention of someone removing von Richthofen's pistol. With all the looting going on I'd imagine that would be a pretty choice piece. Luke's shoot-out I have heard of. Likewise I have read that Mannock carried a handgun with which to kill himself rather than burn. I rather get the impression that pistols were rather uncommon. After all if you land on your side of the lines you don't need it and if you land in between or on the enemy's side its not like you're going to shoot your way home without a lot of help.

[Gregvan]

Hi Epee,

First of all, welcome to the forum!! Glad to have you here.

Yes, the density of paint applied in unit and personal marakings varied with the availabilty and type of coloring material used. Try as I might, we can't always get the profile artists (or editors) to agree to depict these machines as dirty and translucently-marked as they may have been, but I think Harry Dempsey does a marvelous job. If you'll look at the profiles in the Fokker Triplane aces book, you'll see the streaky camouflage underneath showing through the overpaint in a number of places. Sometimes paint was thined in the interest of economy, and sometimes it really was pretty densely applied.

As for the Fokker Dr.I line-up at Léchelle in late March, yes, the first aircraft in particular looks like it is very dark to a point aft of the cockpit (this has been discussed a lot). Looking at a good print I could still discern the light blue undersurface color applied as a border to the bottom edge of the fuselage in that area. This was done at the factory, so I have assumed that that area was simply very densely streaked camouflage and not overpainted, which would have obscured the blue border. Of course, I could be wrong-as some on this forum will no doubt agree! As for the other aircraft, I think they had red cowlings, struts and wheel covers only. There are plenty of Jasta 11 triplane photos which show this area from cowling to the cockpit as typical streaked fabric. The German journalist Oblt. a D. Peter Martin Lampel visited Jasta 11 in early April 1918, and he said all the triplanes had red cowlings ('Kappe', meaning hoods or cowls).

Incidentally, the Dr.I with the swastika was flown by Ltn. Eberhardt Mohnicke. He had previously served in Kagohl 2, which used a swastika unit marking, and he brought the marking with him from that unit.

Very best regards, and again-welcome.

Greg VanWyngarden

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Epee:
Welcome to the Forum.
I think for the most part the painting of German aircraft in Jasta or personal markings was in one coat of paint. In a lot of cases, Like Jasta 15, the blue paint did not completely cover the fuselage cross, it was still apparent through the blue paint. This was oil based paint, it was not colored dope. You will find this addictive!
Blue skies,
Dan-San

["Junior"]

Dan-San's right Epee, and this place is horrendously addictive as well! Probably should be some kind of warning on the front page

Junior.