Steve replied:
> I agree, though Hasegawa (for example) came out with the Polikarpov
> I-16, and will come out with the Dewotaine(SP?) D.520 (both in
1/72)
Tom Continued:
>What's the BIG difference between these two kits and an Alb. D.III? NO
RIGGING
>IMHO that's why the big guys (I consider DML a "medium guy") don't mess
with WWI:
>they think that rigging is beyond the patience and ability of most
modelers.
>OK, I'll prove my point (Shane, you better back me up on this!). When
you show
>your work to non-WWI modelers/family/public what do they oooh and aah
over and
>ask you, "How did you EVER do that? The rigging, right?
>The defense rests.
Happily for Tom, I must agree. As a long time judge of model
competitions I have become quite used to hearing even experienced judges
on the panel saying "Shit, look at that !! " on first viewing a well
rigged (or even a complicated but badly rigged) biplane. Sadly, though
it intimidates them, it doesn't necessarily translate into trophies,
since the judges don't know what else to look for, aren't sure how good
a replica it is and so on. For example, one of the posters on the recent
Boxkite thread had a judge pan his model for having the engine behind the
prop (where it actually DOES belong)
I contend that rigging is no harder than most tasks in modelling, just a
bit repetitious and fiddly. However I note that I almost never convince
ANYONE that it isn't almost impossible, and I'll bet the manufacturers
are well aware of that sentiment
Shane