See here, the last photo:



This Belgian Nieuport 16 is a very strange affair... Vickers armed, exterior ammo drum on the fuselage (left side), propeller that, maybe, came from a Spad VII (?), fuselage panel that seems shorter than usual, trap door bigger than usual, bearing white stars on the (red?) wheels...

With Greif, we were discussing that a/c and we would ask forum's opinion:

1) Could the white star be also painted on the turtle deck?
2) plywood panel on the fuselage: for Greif it could be beige painted; for me it could be the plywood that became apparent (see under the trap: remnants of alu paint?) What do you think about all that?

Thanks, Daniel.

See here, the last photo:
This Belgian Nieuport 16 is a very strange affair... Vickers armed, exterior ammo drum on the fuselage (left side), propeller that, maybe, came from a Spad VII (?), fuselage panel that seems shorter than usual, trap door bigger than usual, bearing white stars on the (red?) wheels...

With Greif, we're discussing about that a/c and we would ask forumite's opinion:

1) Could the white star be also painted on the turtle deck?

2) plywood panel on the fuselage: for Greif it could be beige painted; for me it could be the plywood that became apparent (see under the trap: remnants of alu paint?)

What do you think about all that? Thanks, Daniel.

Hello all,
"...For the drum, are you sure that it is an ammo drum ? If I recall correctly, the ammo feeder was on the right of the MG. Is it not the empty belt drum (as mounted on early Spad VII) ? Greetings Edmond

Hello all,
"...Next, I'm not sure at all that the upper surfaces of wings are dark painted. It's maybe a possibility but another one exist. On the early ecru painted aircrafts, it appears on many photos that the edge of the wings are bordered (approximatively on 5 centimeters) in a contrasting colour (probably brown or black)..."

"...Finally, I think (personal opinion only) that the shorter fuselage panel is a field modification (maybe due to the adaptation of a Vickers gun). If you look its tacking, it appears to be non standard. As Stephen, and contrary to what I think after a first look, I think that it was painted ecru (as the whole aircraft) and the tonal difference is essentially due to use of different materials and oily stains..."

Greetings Edmond

I think that this not so experimental mounting, some late built Nie16 use this configuration. Coppens flew with a Nieu.16 with the same weapon system, for the fuselage color, one moment i have believe that the color was CDL, but after a discution with Edmond, i think now that the color is an aluminium dope and the upper surface are khaki,for the coppens fighters,in the Osprey book about the nieuport ace you have a pictures of Coppens with the Nie 16 with a Vickers, maybe I say maybe the right side of the Coppen's aircraft was similar on the all machines from this batch????? Sorry for my poor English TIA,best regards ,Greif (aka Osterkamp)

The reason I say the upper surface of the top wing was overpainted is the underside is uniformly dark as if the uppersurface was was not allowing any light penetration on a sunbright day. Note the high contasts of various other shadows. Note the reflected gloss areas under the top wing by the rear cabane struts.

Regards Stephen

Hi gentlemen, about the drum on the left side,i think that 's an empty drum,the ammunition drum is inside the fuselage,i belive that the ammunition system was the same of the early Spad 7. . . don't forget,this aircraft was an old warrior(look the state of the comet colors),underside fuselage and the wheels cover are dirty and "tired", cheers Greif