Albatros Factory Aircraft Production in Germany during World War I - HD Stock Footage

[Olham 164]

Time to repeat some old footage from the Albatros Flugzeugwerke, Germany.

Thanks to CRITICAL PAST, we can all watch it today.

It only has projector noise, so better turn the volume down. Enjoy!

 

[JFM 18]

Eye candy!

[JFM 18]

I love when they pull it out at 6:30. The fuselage gleams like glass! That machine has a straight rudder and footstep in the nose, revealing it's a 600 or 750 series Alb D.III. 

[Olham 164]

I find new details every time I watch it.

 

I had always thought, that the tailplane was a kind of "additional semi-wing" providing some lift.

But when I see those tiny plugs they push it on to, I can't imagine it had any lift at all.

 

Is it the "warm tone" of the plywood making it appear so dark in B/W footage?

Or could these be fuselages with a brown finish?

Edited May 6, 2017 by Olham

[JFM 18]

I'd say it's just a trick of the type of film making the fuselages so dark. As far as I know there is no evidence of stain used on the wood. And there are clear examples of the same plane appearing very dark in one photo but light in another, ostensibly from the different film used. 

 

The tail of an airplane generates lift--but probably not how you think. It generates lift downward. Why? The center of lift (also called center of pressure) on an airplane is located aft of the center of gravity. Without a tail, the airplane would pitch forward, because the center of gravity is pulling down and the center of lift is pushing up. The tail provides a downwards force that keeps the plane balanced levelly. When you see film of planes with their tails shot off, they immediately pitch forward and crash vertically. 

 

I just found this online real fast. Imagine the tail gone--plane pitches forward. 

 

[Olham 164]

I'd say it's just a trick of the type of film making the fuselages so dark. As far as I know there is no evidence of stain used on the wood. And there are clear examples of the same plane appearing very dark in one photo but light in another, ostensibly from the different film used.

 

Great info again, Jim. I see I had no idea how aircraft lift and balancing work.

[+Geezer 3,569]

Yes, its the type of photographic film - orthochromatic - that makes the fuselages seem dark, and was the most common type of film used until just before WW2.  That's why British and French roundels appear to have reversed colors in WW1 photographs. 

 

Orthochromatic photography refers to a photographic emulsion that is sensitive to only blue and green light, and thus can be processed with a red safelight in a darkroom. The increased blue sensitivity causes blue objects to appear lighter, and red ones darker.  Yellow also appears a bit darker, so the combination of red and yellow in the wood results in the gray tones appearing to be much darker than they really were.

 

Shot below shows the effect of orthochromatic film on the Union Jack flag - the dark blue appears light, and the medium red appears dark.

[Olham 164]

Thanks for the info, Geezer - I wouldn't have thought it even darkens the plywood fuselage that much.

But then it appears quite warm-toned indeed, as we can see on these Albatros replicas.

There might be brighter and darker versions of plywood, depending on the grain?

And then of course it depends, in which kind of sunlight (daytime) it was photographed.

 

Edited May 7, 2017 by Olham

[+Geezer 3,569]

There might be brighter and darker versions of plywood, depending on the grain?

And then of course it depends, in which kind of sunlight (daytime) it was photographed.

 

Good point.  Also affected would be camo paint with large amounts of red, yellow, or blue pigment - German violet is an example.

Edited May 7, 2017 by Geezer

[JFM 18]

The ortho film is what led to a lot of theories that the fuselages were stained at the factory. There is just no evidence of that. It's the film. I am not a photography expert but I'm friends with one in Germany (who is writing a book that will cover this very subject) and he sent me examples of the same plane photographed with different film. One wood fuselage was dark, one was light, neither had been painted in-field. Also, like in Geezer's Union Jack photo, most of the skies in WW1 photos are very light gray and you can hardly see any detail, due to the blue being affected by the ortho film. 

[Olham 164]

What a pity that we have so little evidence left of some of the colours.

So, while the lozenge fabric is pretty much covered today, we still do not have any reliable proof

(as far as I know) of how the painted wing camos looked - the dark green-pale green-redbrown,

and the dark green-mauve.

[JFM 18]

The British were pretty descriptive of the colors of Jasta 11 Georg Simon's captured Albatros D.III camouflage. More than just "light green," etc., they said "pale Brunswick green and white [meaning a mixture of the two]," "olive green," and "Dark Venetian red." And that's just for the top wing. The lower starboard wing was described as "chocolate color or common crimson oxide" and "medium bronze green." Still, lots of wiggle room there. No description of the lower port wing. The upper wing gets more UV than the lower wings, often shaded, which is likely the reason for different descriptions. Love to have Albatros factory documents about their paints! 

[Olham 164]

... they said "pale Brunswick green and white [meaning a mixture of the two]," "olive green," and "Dark Venetian red." And that's just for the top wing.

The lower starboard wing was described as "chocolate color or common crimson oxide" and "medium bronze green." Still, lots of wiggle room there.

 

Hmm - maybe one would need to get a colour chart from a British maker of Artists' Oil Colours.

The specific naming sounds a lot like such companies and artists might name the tones.

[JFM 18]

It's already been done forever ago. Hence the usual colors we see. 

[JimAttrill 24]

This may help from Wiki:

"Brunswick green is a common name for green pigments made from copper compounds, although the name has also been used for other formulations that produce a similar hue, such as mixtures of chrome yellow and Prussian blue. The pigment is named after Braunschweig, Germany (also known as Brunswick in English) where it was first manufactured. It is a deep, dark green, which may vary from intense to very dark, almost black.

The first recorded use of Brunswick green as a color name in English was in 1764. Another name for this color is English green. The first use of English green as a synonym for Brunswick green was in 1923.

Deep Brunswick green is commonly recognized as part of the British racing green spectrum, the national auto racing color of the United Kingdom.

A different color, also called Brunswick green, was the color for passenger locomotives of the grouping and then the nationalized British Railways. There were three shades of these colors and they are defined under British Standard BS381C – 225, BS381C – 226, and BS381C – 227 (ordered from lightest to darkest). The Brunswick green used by the Nationalised British Railways – Western Region for passenger locomotives was BS381C – 227 (rgb(30:62:46)). RAL6005 is a close substitute to BS381C – 227. A characteristic of these colors was the ease for various railway locations to mix them by using whole pots of primary colors – hence the ability to get reasonably consistent colors with manual mixing half a century and more ago."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shades_of_green#Brunswick_green

 

Here is the Flying Scotsman being hand painted with British Racing Green

 

http://www.flyingscotsman.org.uk/flying-scotsman-gets-painted/

Edited May 12, 2017 by JimAttrill