I thought I might offer this.
Eindeckers, beige and the French Connection
Several months ago, thumbing through my collection of Scale Aircraft Modelling articles by the late Ian Huntley (IH), I was struck by one titled “Irregular Hand-drawn lozenge 1916” (SAM Vol.14 no.10 July 1992, p456–459; Ref.5). It coincided with my starting a beautiful Wingnut Wings (WNW) Fokker E.IV that I picked up at last year’s Scale Models Expo near Wellington, New Zealand.
Essentially, IH had access to some French Intelligence reports on the colours of German aircraft during the period 1915–1916, and he outlined the emergence of camouflage, starting with simple patch overpainting in pale-coloured dopes or paints and the development of polygonal schemes – precursors of the printed linen ‘lozenge’’ of mid-1917 onwards. Very few images of the early painted polygonal schemes exist in English language literature – those of an Albatros B.II and Pfalz E.IV are examples of patch/brush-stroke forms (Ref.3: photo 84; Ref.4: photos 80–81) but the Pfalz E.VI (?) on page 28 of the latter reference exhibits a perfect example of the lozenge-polygonal form. It is implied by IH that these patterns were quite common but, in my view, they may have been confined to a few German units or maintenance depots opposing the French rather than the British RFC/RNAS. No further discussion of this aspect is dealt with here.
Of more relevance to this article, is IH’s presentation of the simpler camouflage schemes and a probable link to the appearance of Fokker E-types, so-often described simply as ‘beige’. I have always struggled with this description as the photographic evidence (Refs 3, 6–9) is heavily at odds with it – even allowing for the use of unbleached linen (=CDL) and the fouling by rotary engine exhausts/castor-oil. There is also the side issue (or semantics) of the term ‘beige’ itself, its representation in WW1 aviation literature and art being diverse and often unlike the original meaning.
According to IH, simple overall finishes on German aircraft up to about May-June 1915 could be termed white, ‘beige’, blue or grey* depending on the covering material (cotton or linen), its treatment (bleached or unbleached) and possible dyeing, aside from the ubiquitous doping. From then on, the first attempts at terrain camouflage appear, coinciding with the introduction of the Fokker E-types. Colours recorded by the French at this time were ochre, applied as a dark varnish on upper surfaces, followed by light olive, olive-brown and light brown, applied as patches or bands of single colours. Very soon, two or three colours were observed used in combination with others, some light (lilac), most others dark: dark green, dark red-brown, mauve, black-green, and black-purple. Dark colours became dominant (and familiar) in the banded schemes so prevalent later in 1916–1917. For a glimpse of what an Eindecker with mauves/lilacs/purple during their late period of use might have looked like, it is worth noting Vladimir Martinicky’s representation of a Fokker D.III on the cover of Ref.2. Also, the unusual polygonal scheme on Reuschke’s Fokker E.1 (Ref.2: page 28) may belong in this group.
All this is non-controversial but how is it related to the Fokker E-types, other than its coincidence in the period? More recent interpretations of Eindecker colours, such as the instructions and colour guides in WNW kits, acknowledge original descriptions such as “dark brown”, “dark brown wings on the upper side”, “grey” and “butcher blue” that are clearly attempts at camouflage, including the inevitable “beige”.
Eindecker wings with a darker finish than the fuselage are found in various references (e.g. Ref.8: photo 9), supplemented in many cases with darker tail-plane and upper fuselage surfaces (e.g. Ref.8: photo 13). The wings are often shiny and indicative of fresh factory finish (e.g. Ref.8: photo 15) of coloured dope (ochre? see above) achieved by spraying or careful brush painting. These surfaces could then receive other overpainting, including those of the white of the cross panels [refs]. Fuselages are sometimes pale, indicative of clear-doped linen (e.g. Ref.7: photo 33) (see Ref.2: pages 4–6; Ref.8: photo 28 for unadorned Fokker fuselages), but are usually darker, showing vertical streaks or irregular patches not associated with engine fouling (e.g. Ref.7: photo 11; 2012b: photos 17, 25; Ref.9: page 19; plus many others). Some photos show both Eindecker forms in company (e.g. Ref.8: photo 31). My view is that these indicate field-application of the light-coloured dopes (light browns, olives, see above)
consistent with the time period and descriptions given by IH. Some of the faint streaking patterns on fuselages are reminiscent of Fokker’s later factory practice in 1916, but these were darker colours (olive?) as on the contemporaneous or overlapping Fokker D.III’s (Ref.1: photos 97–99).
The final colours of some Eindeckers, notably the E.IV, included a possible light example (lilac?) (e.g. Ref.10: page 25) and darker variants, possibly dark green and reddish brown (see above) applied on both the fuselage and wings/tail-plane surfaces (e.g. Ref.2: photo 77; Ref.8: photos 23–28; Ref.1013: page 25). These were contemporaneous with Fokker D.II and D.III airframes painted in similar colours.
As for beige, this is often depicted as a creamy yellow colour (Windsock) yet equated with ‘straw yellow’. This is a misconception, as beige (a French term) was strictly a greyish-yellow (with cadmium-yellow basic hue), Methuen giving a typical value of 4C3 (with straw-yellow lighter and more saturated at 4B4). This colour-group is fairly consistent with some of the colours mentioned earlier such the ochre (4D5) of the relatively dark varnish applied to the upper wing surfaces and olive-brown (3–4)E5, both reached easily by adding small amounts of chromium yellow (Methuen hue 3) or cadmium-yellow, deep (Methuen hue 4) pigments to a black/white [grey] base.
Blues are not often associated with the Fokker Eindeckers (but see possible “butcher blue” record mentioned above), although WNW (Ref.10: page 25) suggest that a dark-green painted E.IV might have had sky blue under-surfaces. This is consistent with the French observing the appearance, in April or May 1916, of dyed blue fabric on a captured Fokker biplane (IH says D.II 225/16? but this seems to early). However, at this time no firm conclusion can be made with regard to the Eindeckers.
Overall, it is perhaps time for modellers to attempt some trickier and more interesting colour schemes on their Fokker Eindeckers and ditch the bland ‘beige’ – careful study of photographs will reward the observant.
References1. Grosz P.M. (1999) Fokker Fighters D.I–IV. R. Rimell (ed.). The Classics of WW1 Aviation, 2. Albatros Productions Ltd, 52 pp.
2. Grosz P.M. (2001) Fokker E.III. Windsock Datafile 15. Albatros Productions Ltd, 29 pp, 3rd Edition.
3. Grosz P.M. (2002) Albatros B.II. Windsock Datafile 93. Albatros Productions Ltd, 37 pp.
4. Grosz P.M. (1996) Pfalz E.I–E. IV. Windsock Datafile 59. Albatros Productions Ltd, 37 pp.
5. Huntley I. (1992) Irregular hand-drawn lozenge 1916. Scale Aircraft Modelling 14 (10): 56–59.
6. Rimell R. (2012) Fokker E.III 635/16, German fighter monoplane, 1915/1916. Albatros Productions Ltd, Windsock Worldwide 28 (5): 14–25.
7. Scott J. 2012a. Fokker Eindecker. Compendium 1. Albatros Productions Ltd, 56 pp.
8. Scott J. 2012b. Fokker Eindecker. Compendium 2. Albatros Productions Ltd, 56 pp.
9. Van Wyngarden G. (2006) Early German Aces of world War 1. Osprey Aircraft of the Aces, 73. Osprey Publishing Ltd, 96 pp.
10. Wingnut Wings Ltd. (2013) Fokker E.IV. [instruction booklet].
Table of mid 1915–mid 1916 colours observed on German aircraft, those in bold possibly on Fokker Eindeckers.The Resene visual matches should provide a decent representation of IH's Methuen call-outs, especially for OZ/Kiwi modelers.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/153980211@N07/48515563402/in/dateposted/