• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Almost deadly hit

What's more amazing is the bullet strike right in the center of the cockpit... how the hell did he avoid being killed on that run... only God knows.

I like the picture on the right, that has a possibility to be Udet, but by the looks of the Mottling on the fuselage, I wonder if it is. His D.III with Jasta 15 was all brick-red, with a black rudder and nose. So this looks like an early J10, or J5 crate without any green tail. Not really sure.

That nose could be white, yellow, green, or light blue even. And the rudder could be autum red. I can't make out the serial number, but if you do, either Ted, or DSA (DanSann Abbott) might know.

OvS
 
Absolutely right, OvS, that's said to be Udet too. I tried in Photoshop, changing contrast and all, but it's very low resolution.
The number could be: D 16261 or D 19261, but it's more a guess, really.
 
Hello,
the second photo is indeed also Udet, or so i have read.
Anyway the shots in photo #1 are really close ... is this "opening" in the windshield really a shot, or some gunsight/whatever ?
Thanks for posting and greetings,
Catfish
 
The lower bullet hole looks somewhat oblong to me, which would indicate that the bullet that made it hit at an angle, either from the lower left or the upper right. Not sure if they are entrance holes or exit holes, they almost look more like exit holes.
 
ovs said:
What's more amazing is the bullet strike right in the center of the cockpit... how the hell did he avoid being killed on that run... only God knows.
OvS
Click to expand...

Simple actually, a severe case of lack of Beer Gut, or the projectile was on a upward angle, or 'God was his wingman' :kilroy:
 
Studying the picture closely, I'd say, the shot came from below, as I've drawn in. The round hole in the windscreen does not look like a bullet hole. It's neatly round, and there are rings around it. I would assume, it was for aiming over the right maschine gun. Does anyone know, if that could be so?
 
Yeah, that thing in the windscreen does look like some sort of "optic" port or sight. And I believe you are right Olham, in your assesment of the bullet angle. In any case, its pretty sure they didn't go straight in, and either came from an angle above or below, or he would have likely been a dead or injured pilot. Still darn close in any case, and from any angle!! Brave guys that lot.

ZZ.

PS. Good investigative eye Olham.
 
Those holes look too regular and as if through "metal", maybe someone added them in the lab later to make the photo more dramatic or to "represent" the moment.

The tail/vertical looks like it is painted to me can't tell what colour of course.
 
After Pol's comment I would like to add, looking at the bullet holes around the cockpit, how did they not hit him? They sure look like pretty straight in shots and not angled at all.

Good picture though.

WF2
 
Both these photo's are in the book "Ace of the Iron Cross"/"Mein Fliegerleben". The caption for the first reads "This is the way a fighter pilot looks fifteen minutes after he has had some of his tail feathers plucked. Behrend counted 21 hits in the trusty Albatros D.V". The second one reads, "Albatros D.III with Udet's mechanics Behrend and Guntelmann." Dont wanna split hairs over the authenticity of the bullet holes or the origins of the second photo - just stating what the book says.

-Rooster
 
Yeah no problem Rooster it's not an attack on anyone at all, just what I see - I used to be a photographer for what it is worth so they just stick out to me as being odd.

The bullet holes also look black and white when the rest of the pic is sepia/yellowed to very odd.
 
I understand Pol. Youre right that they dont look like bullet holes in plywood, theres no splintering in the wood as I think there should be. Now that I look at it again....they do look more like exit holes from something metal.

-Rooster
 
That photo of 1941/16 was taken on 1 January 1917 at Habsheim. G vanW, whose photo it is, says it has a reddish brown stained fuselage and camouflaged rudder. Wings in the production run D.1910/16 to D.2309/16 were in three colour camouflage - light green, dark olive green and rust brown.
Looking at the rudder, I would guess it is the olive green. The spinner and nose band have different tonal values than the white of the Eisenkreuz, and yellow often shows up very dark, almost black. I would guess sky blue, same as the undersurfaces.
Cheers,
shredward
 
I had another close look at the bullet holes in Photoshop, and I would guess, that they have used little stripes of any white cardboard, rounded it and put it into every hole. This could have been done, cause the picture was meant to be printed somewere (newspaper), and they knew, that in a low resolution print, the holes might have looked like rivets or anything but bulletholes.
I'd think this even more, as the hole in the (leather?) ring round the cockpit shows the same white rounding, although it's a different material.

I don't think, the plywood would splinter much, as it was certainly treated and painted to make it weatherproof. If a tracer bullet, rotating at high speed, would enter it, I should assume, it would leave a hole like a drill - rather neat and round and clean. Splinters, I'd only expect on the bullet-leaving side.
But well, it's all guesswork, still.
 
As you mention Olham, entrance and exit "wounds" vary. With plywood that is varnished an entrance hole should not show much if any splinterring, depending on the angle it struck the surface. But the .303 rounds used by the British would deform upon impact, so the exit hole was bigger as the the round after impact would start to tumble. This was showed in ballistic tests with an old WWI Vickers mounted on a tripod, and fired into one of those sacks containing a substance to simulate human flesh and bone. So if those were holes made by bullets entering the plane, they should be small neat round[ish] holes. If they were exit holes, there would and or should be big gaping holes with splinterring as the bullet though force of impact, and that the bullet would be tumbling from striking the opposite side, which would do more damage as it exited the plane.

There was that documentary on the death of the Red Baron, where the forensic specialist made a note that is sometimes left out of the equation, is not just the damage done by the projectile, but the sonic shockwave of it travelling at mach 3 roughly when it strikes and object.

Next time I go out to the firing range, I'll take some plywood, and see the effects of the rounds from my carbine on it, as it is of 30 caliber, although a smaller projectile, with smaller casing. And I'll set up the pieces so I hit it at different angles from pertpendicular to almost parallel, and report what I find. I'll even go get some old fashioned varnish and use use 3ply and 5 ply to see the effects of what happens. I think the Albatros had 3 ply sheeting if I remember correctly. Makes me wish I still had my old bolt action Eddystone cira 1917, as it was chambered and bored to fire .303 British rounds. That would give a better representation of the effects on plywood.
 
Sounds like a good test Hylander, but after having done this test probably over a couple hundred-thousand times in my life, and on many different materials, I can tell you unequivocably that if these were entry holes, they look about right. You will have splintering of the ply on the inside, NOT the outside. And the only way you would have any tearing on an entry at all would be if they were grazing hits. These very well could be the real deal. So if its a doctored photo, they did it right. Personally, I believe its authenticity, unless of course someone has proof otherwise.

ZZ.

Also Hylander, when you photograph the results of your shooting spree, take the photo-shot from at least 5 feet away, as this seems to be at least the distance this photo was shot from.
 
I thought that the .303 British round had a full metal jacket. Even so, in my experience (using a 30.06, 120 grain lead tipped hunting round) the bullet makes a clean round entry hole when fired at 3/4" plywood. That's a good bit thicker that the skin of an Albatros. The exit hole had some splintering on exit, but not much. The 30.06 has a muzzle velocity of approximately 2800fps (roughly 900 meters per second) which is so fast that when penetrating wood approximately 1/4" thick there is not much time for mushrooming from entry to exit. With a full metal jacket, there should be almost no splintereng upon exit. The most damage to be seen would be on the other side of the plane (not visible in picture) from the bullet tumbling or striking internal components of the aircraft and ricocheting. A full metal jacket round would, IMO make a fairly clean hole through both sides of the aircraft if no internal components were struck causing the bullet to mushroom or change trajectory and flight characteristics (deformation of the bullet or tumbling). This is not based on any "experiment" but rather on practical experience.

CJ
 
Sounds about right CJ. Also, it wouldn't suprise me if they took white paint and outlined the circumfrence of the holes to make them more apparent in the photo shot. This isn't really doctoring of the photo, as much as it is highlighting the holes that otherwise would appear as hard to see dark specks. In other words, it doesn't automatically mean the photo was "faked" because of this.

ZZ.

PS. Does anyone know if this is a natural finish Albatros, or painted. If its painted, the white cirumfrences could well be from the paint chipping or blasting away on impact right around the rim of the entry. Just another possibility. This happens frequently on painted metallic surfaces, wood might behave the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top