WWI Digest 157 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Albatross DR.I by "Brian Bushe" 2) Re: Fokker E III Aeroskin by Robert Johnson 3) Re: Shameless commercialism by stonto@seaccc.sccd.ctc.edu 4) Re: Fokker E III Aeroskin by iceman@ro.com (Eli Geher) 5) FWD>RE>Fokker V7 by "Guy Fogel" 6) Re: Eduard Sopwith Pup by shingend@ix.netcom.com (Mark Shannon) 7) FWD>RE>Fokker triplane plan by "Guy Fogel" 8) Re: FWD>RE>Fokker V7 by Robert Johnson 9) Re: Allied Armament by Jim Barnes 10) Re: Allied Armament by bucky@postoffice.ptd.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) 11) Re: Moving Models by bucky@postoffice.ptd.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) 12) Re: Moving Models by Brian Nicklas 13) Re: Allied Armament by Jim Barnes 14) Re: Eduard Sopwith Pup by SMHead 15) Re: Moving Models by SMHead 16) Re: Allied Armament by bucky@postoffice.ptd.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) 17) Re: Allied Armament by bucky@postoffice.ptd.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) 18) Re: Moving Models by bucky@postoffice.ptd.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) 19) Re: Moving Models by bucky@postoffice.ptd.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) 20) Re: WW I Tanks by GRBroman@aol.com 21) Re: Allied Armament by "Matt Bittner" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 15:16:20 +0000 From: "Brian Bushe" To: wwi Subject: Albatross DR.I Message-ID: <199606121418.PAA03126@hades.itl.net> I was in Hannants in London on Saturday and looked at some new products. the best thing was they are all in the scale of kings! Hi tech: (from france) Albatros Dr.I conversion. real planes have at least three wings! beautiful resin wings. lucky i bought two albatros kits! naturally expensive, like any fine french resin. I may buy this (i will not, i will not, i will not, oh shit i did) Mercedes engine: very nice resin engine. expensive. separate cylinders and block, plus some plastic rod. Waldo resins: HB W29: a big piece of plane. Mostly resin, with metal details (armament, cockpit details). real planes only have one wing per side but they are huge. Wings have scribed rib detail ( is this appropriate in this scale). the real killer is the price- 27.95 pounds :-(( . i'll let you know how it goes together. No decals, very brief instructions. Bristol MC.I didn't look closely, as i could afford no more. bye for now, Brian 'always look on the bright side of life' - lots of people on crosses Brian Bushe syclone@itl.net Syclone Systems (44) 1628 789 470 Maidenhead Fax 789 513 Berkshire England ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 09:14:30 +0000 From: Robert Johnson To: wwi Subject: Re: Fokker E III Aeroskin Message-ID: <9606120908.aa23578@scosysv.speechsys.com> Alberto: You write, > I have seen the Renwall aeroskin Fokker E III being offered in some mail order > out of production dealers, but have never seen any kit myself, are they good ? I built one of these as a kid (ca. 11 or 12). It depends what you mean by "good." The kit wings consist of flat plastic parts with pronounced ribs for the pre-printed covering material. The directions said to soack the skin with liquid cement to attach and tauten it. I'm not sure I dared. But I did tack it down around the edges. It seems to me the "fabric" came away from the edges almost immediately. I remember the result looked more or less like an E.III. But it couldn't have been a great experience, because I had two others that I never built. One was a Jenny in a fantastic fish-scale scheme I could never have painted. I would surely have built it if the method had any promise. Im might buy it as a curiosity, but I wouldn't consider it for building. Rob, robj@speechsys.com. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jun 96 08:07:54 PST From: stonto@seaccc.sccd.ctc.edu To: wwi Subject: Re: Shameless commercialism Message-ID: <9605128345.AA834592211@SCCCGATE.seaccc.sccd.ctc.edu> Next is a hardcover book, 8 1/2" x 11", entitled "Fighter Aircraft of the 1914-1918 War". It was printed in the 60's by Aero Publishers, and was intended as a companion piece for their book, "Air Aces of the 1914-1918 War". It details 84 aircraft, each described with a page containing text and five photographs, opposite a page of 1/72 scale 3-view drawings. Lots of extra information in the back, too, including armament development, camouflage, engine development, and 12 photo- pages of experimental planes (the Naglo Quadruplane?). It's an old book and shows some outer wear (dust cover lost long ago), but overall highly enjoyable. Offers? If these are the same hardcover books -- there were 4-6 authors of each -- I bought them both some time ago at a rare/used bookstore and they are really cool. I believe that I paid $45 each for mine with the dust covers on. Mine are also autographed by all the authors which may have hiked up the price. I thought they were older than the 60's however; maybe I got an earlier edition? I highly recommend Fighter Aircraft. Neat stuff with close up photos of different engines (out of the airframe), machine guns and so forth. Even a little in the area of cockpit detail (not much however). --Stephen Tontoni ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 10:51:36 -0500 From: iceman@ro.com (Eli Geher) To: wwi Subject: Re: Fokker E III Aeroskin Message-ID: <199606121551.KAA16377@sh1.ro.com> Alberto Rada wrote > >I have seen the Renwall aeroskin Fokker E III being offered in some mail order >out of production dealers, but have never seen any kit myself, are they good ? >anyone that has one or seen one can tell me about it ? I know there was some >information in Windsock International some time ago, but I havent got that >issue, any one out there who has it can fax me the article, please. >My interest, beside sheer curiosity is that I made the Edward model, but was >not satisfied with the wings, as I did not end up with the same fragile >appearance >Any other approach ? >My Fax No. in Caracas is: 582 284 3257 > >Saludos > >Alberto > > I built most of the Aeroskin series many,.....,many years ago and I still have some unbuilt. There are propbably some built up examples packed in cartons, since throwing anything away is foreign to my nature. The kits are NOT good replicas. They make up into interesting little models with a minimum of effort, but I doubt that its worth the trouble to bring them up to the level of even the worst (Merlin) contemporary kit. There are no WWI subjects that are unique to the series, although there are pre-WWI subjects that are unique. The glued on paper covering worked well for me. Rigging did not seem feasible since there wasn't enough solid plastic to anchor the wires to. I didn't do much rigging in those days anyway. Eli Geher ------------------------------ Date: 12 Jun 1996 09:02:07 -0700 From: "Guy Fogel" To: "Mail List" Subject: FWD>RE>Fokker V7 Message-ID: Mail*Link(r) SMTP FWD>RE>Fokker V7 Forwarded for the enjoyment of the group... Guy Fogel ------------------------------ Date: 6/11/96 8:56 PM From: bshatzer@orednet.org Guy: You wrote: > 6/11/96 > Fokker V7 3:11 PM > >Hello Bill! >Had another triplane question... (It's great to find a place where I can ask >these questions!!!) >In a book, I have a side-view drawing of a Fokker "V7" experimental triplane. >The text says that this was the last triplane design by Fokker. The V7 was >fitted with a 130 hp engine (can't remember the name off-the-top-of-my-head) >and was 21 inches longer than the DR1 to accomodate the heavier engine. Also, >the cowling was slightly larger in diameter at the very front, but tapered to >meet the fuselage. The text also says the climbing stats were better than the >DR1, but the V7 was not ordered because the engine kept malfunctioning and >used too much fuel, which I suppose was a consideration near the end of the >war. >Do you have any more info on this V7? Funny you should ask, I was just looking at this 'un the other evening. Actually, there were apparently four V.7's built, outfitted with a variety of engines - V.7/I (werk number 1788) was equipped with a 160 hp Seimens-Halske 'double acting' rotary (the crankcase spun one way at 900 rpm and the crankshaft turned at 900 rpm in the opposite direction - don't ask me to explain that 'un!). This was entered at January fighter competition and apparently its climb rate and altitude were outstanding. Understandably however, the overly complicated engine was not ready for either mass production or combat use so the aircraft was dropped from consideration. The second V.7 (V.7/II-No. 1830) was equipped with a 160 hp 'Gnome' engine but it isn't really certain which 'Gnome' engine - perhaps a captured single row Gnome like used on the Nieuport 28 or perhaps one of the twin-row Oberursel German 'Gnome' copies which were often referred to as 'Gnomes' by the Germans. V.7/III (No. 1919) was equipped with an experimental 170 hp Goebel Goe.III engine and was also entered in the Jan. '18 fighter competition where it displayed climb and altitude performances similar to the V.7/I. However, the Goebel engine was no more ready for service and production than was the V.7/I's Seimen- Halske engine and it was likewise dropped from the competition. It was later re-engined with a standard Oberursel and redesignated as Dr.I 599/17 (apparently the last Dr.I serial number assigned.) V.7/IV (no.1981) was manufactured without an engine and shipped to MAG in Hungary where it was fitted with a 145 hp Steyr rotary copy of the French LeRhone. It was assigned the Austro-Hungarian serial of 90.03. It was intended to enter this a/c in the July 1918 Austro-Hungarian fighter competition but it was damaged in a landing accident prior to the completion and was able to compete. There! That's probably more than you ever wanted to know! :-) You've my permission to post this and my previous message to the list if you wish. I'd do it myself but my answers don't make much sense without your questions and I don't post private e-mail to public lists without permission. Cheers and regards, Bill -- Bill Shatzer - bshatzer@orednet.org -or- aw177@Freenet.Carleton.ca - "Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 10:09:24 -0700 From: shingend@ix.netcom.com (Mark Shannon) To: wwi Subject: Re: Eduard Sopwith Pup Message-ID: <199606121709.KAA23483@dfw-ix5.ix.netcom.com> Charles Duckworth wrote, most carefully: > >Mark, a couple of other areas that need work on the Pup, there is a 'V' shaped >area behind the engine to assist with cooling that Eduard missed, if you look >at the Datafiles of the Sopwith Triplane or 1 1/2 strutter it show up better >than in my Pup sources, also the side lacing is missing - I am trying to >locate Fotocut 1/48th lacing so I can add it to mine model. Also the back of >the fuselage needs to be cut out on the bottom where the tail skid goes into >the interior and in front of the tail. The article does a much better job of >describing what needs to be done here. > >We can only hope that the Triplane would be corrected based on Windsock's >review of the Pup. > and along with this Mark Nelson and Jim Maas answered the specific question,: >The article is in the latest Windsock....the problem is that for the >Pup (and Tripe) the aft fuselage decking has an upsweep at the rear >where it meets the horizontal tail. Nothing much happens at the >centerline, but the side stringers curve 'up' to create a straight >line (thus, I guess, reducing drag). to all I give my thanks. I always like to find out what's happening when someone mentions a problem with a kit, but I can't get the article or such. I hate it when I finish a kit to find it doesn't quite look right, and find out there was some simple thing, if I'd only been looking for it in my research. Again, thanks a bunch, and keep in touch. Mark L. Shannon ------------------------------ Date: 12 Jun 1996 11:27:59 -0700 From: "Guy Fogel" To: "Mail List" Subject: FWD>RE>Fokker triplane plan Message-ID: Mail*Link(r) SMTP FWD>RE>Fokker triplane plans Also for the enjoyment of the group... ------------------------------ Date: 6/11/96 8:11 PM From: bshatzer@orednet.org Guy: You wrote: >I don't have 1/48 plans, but I do have a question. >I have a book showing drawings of the various Fokker V1 through V5 designs. >It looks like the V4 had the rounded leading edge stabilizer and unbalanced >elevator. It shows the "modified V4" (later V5) with the straight leading >edge stabilizer andbalanced elevator. The V5 then became the F1 prototype >series (101/17, 102/17, and 103/17). Let me know............ >Just trying to keep my facts straight! I think you've got this pretty much correct although it does appear to me that there were -three- different horizontal stabilizers on this series - the original V.4 which had a severely curved leading edge, the V.5/F.I type which was much less curved but still not completely straight and the Dr.I variety which was absolutely straight. However, this is based just upon an examination of the photos and I've seen no definitive mention of the possibility of -three- varieties of tail planes in the literature. There aren't that many photos of the V.4/V.5 so I might be being misled by 'funny' camera angles. The V.5 did, indeed, serve as the 'prototype' for the F.I's although the exact evolution of this aircraft is a little uncertain. For instance, it never did get an F.I number but, apparently, it was eventually assigned a number in the Dr.I series. I suspect that does -not- mean that it was ever brought up to Dr.I standards but merely that the Dr.I numbers were the ones they were using when they got around to actually assigning a military serial to this plane - but one never knows. Cheers, Bill -- Bill Shatzer - bshatzer@orednet.org -or- aw177@Freenet.Carleton.ca - "Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 12:37:46 +0000 From: Robert Johnson To: wwi Subject: Re: FWD>RE>Fokker V7 Message-ID: <9606121231.aa25782@scosysv.speechsys.com> Bill Shatzer writes: >... a 160 hp Seimens-Halske 'double acting' rotary (the crankcase spun > one way at 900 rpm and the crankshaft turned at 900 rpm in the > opposite direction - don't ask me to explain that 'un!). It's actually not all that hard to explain. The Siemens-Halske arrangement eliminated the ferocious torque associated with radials and combined a very high effective rpm (for faster breathing and higher power) with lower inertial loadings on the parts (for reliability) and a lower propellor rpm (for efficiency). It was a clever arrangement, tried experimentally by a number of other manufacturers on both sides. Its only drawback was evidently poor cooling due to aerodynamic interference between the prop blades, the cylinders, and the cowling (hence the tendency to cut the latter away). Rob, robj@speechsys.com. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 17:18:09 -0400 From: Jim Barnes To: wwi Subject: Re: Allied Armament Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19960612152127.503f2ed6@chelsea.ios.com> >> What was the first French fighter to enter combat with a synchronized gun >> (Nieuport 17?) and when did that take place? Which British fighter was >> first to be fitted with a synchronized MG (Pup? Bristol Scout?) and when >> did it first begin combat service? > >My guess would be Bristol Scout (D?) for the English and Morane Saulnier N >for the French, although maybe the Nieuport 17 now that I think of it. > >-Al > Thanks for the input, Al. I didn't get a lot of responses to these questions and am still looking for the answers. Any suggestions concerning books that might cover this area? Thanks for your help. Jim **************************************************************************** * Jim Barnes -- barnes29@chelsea.ios.com * * * * "Out on that Information Superhighway---I'm riding a moped." * **************************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 17:40:51 -0400 (EDT) From: bucky@postoffice.ptd.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) To: wwi, Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Allied Armament Message-ID: <199606122140.RAA25858@ns1.ptd.net> At 05:17 PM 6/12/96 -0400, Jim Barnes wrote: >>> What was the first French fighter to enter combat with a synchronized gun >>> (Nieuport 17?) and when did that take place? Which British fighter was >>> first to be fitted with a synchronized MG (Pup? Bristol Scout?) and when >>> did it first begin combat service? >> >>My guess would be Bristol Scout (D?) for the English and Morane Saulnier N >>for the French, although maybe the Nieuport 17 now that I think of it. >> >>-Al >> > Thanks for the input, Al. I didn't get a lot of responses to these >questions and am still looking for the answers. Any suggestions concerning >books that might cover this area? > > Thanks for your help. > > Jim At lunch today I was reading a book by Lee Kennet called The First Air War 1914-1918. The book spends a lot of time talking about the build-up/early years before the Albatross D-I & IIs. He seems to think the Bristol was the first RFC with sync.It seems hard to think of the Morane w/deflector blades as synvhronized, but that seems to be the way he handles the first French sync. Apparently, patents for a sync. for machine guns were taken out pre-war in France, Germany and Italy, at a minimum. He gives no specific reference for this, but I seem to remember reading something in Over The Front about the patents that existed before Tony Fokker created his system. I got the Kennet book for Christmas as a present, and it has proven to be a pleasant surpirse. He spends quite a bit of time on pre-war buildup. He also has copious footnotes for each chapter. The book was published by The Free Press in 1991. I've never seen it reviewed, and wonder if anyone else has had a chance to read it. Hope this helps. Mike Muth ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 17:48:51 -0400 (EDT) From: bucky@postoffice.ptd.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) To: wwi, Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Moving Models Message-ID: <199606122148.RAA27703@ns1.ptd.net> I plan on going down to the Over the Front convention/seminar next week in Washington, D.C. They are having a model contest in conjunction with the seminar, and I've finally got enough courage to show some of the stuff I've done in public.(For those of you obsessed with this, both scales are included and no Me 109s!) Anyway, I'll be driving down and wondered how to pack this stuuf so they don't get totalled in the car trunk. People will be sitting in the car itself, so it seems like the trunk is my only option(other than putting my daughter on the roof...something she actually might enjoy.) Any suggestions????????Please. Mike Muth ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jun 96 18:34:05 EDT From: Brian Nicklas To: Subject: Re: Moving Models Message-ID: <199606122232.SAA01508@pease1.sr.unh.edu> Slip the model into a plastic bag, puf in some air (not balloon tight), then place the model on a bed of plastic foam chips in a box. Add more models if there is room, or just do the one, then pour chips around the bagged model. The chips prevent damage, the bag prevents damage from the chips. If you inflate the bag too tightly, the bag might rupture, or bounce around inside the bag. The other method is to take a foam board, cut holes/slots for the wheels/skids/lower bits, rest the fuselage and lower wing on the foam board, secure with string or paper strips, add foam towers to keep the board from rising in the box, and close the lid. (This one works better with a diagram.) Hope this helps. If you don't see me there, and you pop over to the Air and Space Museum, ask for me at the desk. (if you want to meet up - only if you want to discuss 1/72nd :-) Brian Nicklas Archives Division - National Air and Space Museum ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 19:13:30 -0400 From: Jim Barnes To: wwi Subject: Re: Allied Armament Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19960612171648.24371fcc@chelsea.ios.com> >> What was the first French fighter to enter combat with a synchronized gun >> (Nieuport 17?) and when did that take place? Which British fighter was >> first to be fitted with a synchronized MG? > >I think the Sopwith 1.5-Strutter was the first British production >airplane to carry a synchronized gun in action. The Pup was probably >the first single seater. Some Sopwith Baby floatplanes carried a >synchronized Lewis gun, but the system was apparently not successful, >perhaps due to irregularities in the firing cycle of the weapon. > >French planes are harder for me. I know British-flown Morane scouts had a >Vickers with an early (pre-Constantinescu) type of synchronizer. >Whether these pre-date Nieuports I don't know. SPAD 7s might also be >contenders here. Of course, French Moranes had the first guns firing >through the propellor (Hotchkiss weapons with deflector plates added >to the prop blades). I seem to remember that the deflectors were originally >developed to make up for the inadequacies of an early French >synchronizer (by Berguet?). >Rob, >robj@speechsys.com. > Hey, Rob-- You and Al Wright were the only responders to the synchronized MG question. Can you suggest any books, or other sources, which might confirm the Pup and Morane/Nieuport/Spad nominees? Thanks for your help. Jim **************************************************************************** * Jim Barnes -- barnes29@chelsea.ios.com * * * * "Out on that Information Superhighway---I'm riding a moped." * **************************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 19:59:13 -0400 From: SMHead To: wwi Subject: Re: Eduard Sopwith Pup Message-ID: <9606121831.aa15659@mail.iapc.net> All this Sopwith Pup talk has me a bit out of sorts. You see, I finished rigging my Aeroclub vacuformed Pup just before Eduard announced theirs! I just can't bring myself to buy one, it would hurt too much to see all those nice brass and cast parts that I had to scratchbuild. And I think I'd cry if I ever see one on the display table. I guess that makes me the Pup martyr. It's someone else's turn. How 'bout somebody starting a vac Staaken soon??? ; ) Scott 'One Eyed' Head ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 19:59:17 -0400 From: SMHead To: wwi Subject: Re: Moving Models Message-ID: <9606121847.aa15823@mail.iapc.net> Another method: A big box and lots of wadded up toilet paper! If your rigging is relatively protected (no crazy aerials or linkages from wingtip to tail, etc.) it should work just fine. The lightly wadded toilet paper is suprisingly forgiving, and will keep a model intact through most traffic, potholes, and offensive driving tactics, even on Houston's harrowing streets. Lost one pitot tube a few years back in the "Battle of the Gulf Freeway", nothing since. NOTE- take along a small dusting drush, the toilet paper leaves fibers behind. Hope this helps! Scott Head ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 20:57:14 -0400 (EDT) From: bucky@postoffice.ptd.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) To: bucky@postoffice.ptd.net (Mary-Ann/Michael), wwi, Subject: Re: Allied Armament Message-ID: <199606130057.UAA20531@ns1.ptd.net> At 04:50 PM 6/12/96, wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu, Multiple recipients of list wrote: >At 05:17 PM 6/12/96 -0400, Jim Barnes wrote: >>>> What was the first French fighter to enter combat with a synchronized gun >>>> (Nieuport 17?) and when did that take place? Which British fighter was >>>> first to be fitted with a synchronized MG (Pup? Bristol Scout?) and when >>>> did it first begin combat service? >>> >>>My guess would be Bristol Scout (D?) for the English and Morane Saulnier N >>>for the French, although maybe the Nieuport 17 now that I think of it. >>> >>>-Al >>> >> Thanks for the input, Al. I didn't get a lot of responses to these >>questions and am still looking for the answers. Any suggestions concerning >>books that might cover this area? >> >> Thanks for your help. >> >> Jim > > At lunch today I was reading a book by Lee Kennet called The First Air War 1914-1918. The book spends a lot of time talking about the build-up/early years before the Albatross D-I & IIs. He seems to think the Bristol was the first RFC with sync.It seems hard to think of the Morane w/deflector blades as synvhronized, but that seems to be the way he handles the first French sync. Apparently, patents for a sync. for machine guns were taken out pre-war in France, Germany and Italy, at a minimum. He gives no specific reference for this, but I seem to remember reading something in Over The Front about the patents that existed before Tony Fokker created his system. > I got the Kennet book for Christmas as a present, and it has proven to be a pleasant surpirse. He spends quite a bit of time on pre-war buildup. He also has copious footnotes for each chapter. The book was published by The Free Press in 1991. I've never seen it reviewed, and wonder if anyone else has had a chance to read it. >Hope this helps. >Mike Muth > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 20:58:23 -0400 (EDT) From: bucky@postoffice.ptd.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) To: bucky@postoffice.ptd.net (Mary-Ann/Michael), wwi, Subject: Re: Allied Armament Message-ID: <199606130058.UAA20805@ns1.ptd.net> Jim, I just resent a message I tried to send earlier regarding this. Let me know if it got through. Mike Muth ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 21:00:40 -0400 (EDT) From: bucky@postoffice.ptd.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) To: wwi, Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Moving Models Message-ID: <199606130100.VAA21553@ns1.ptd.net> At 06:33 PM 6/12/96 -0400, Brian Nicklas wrote: >Slip the model into a plastic bag, puf in some air (not balloon tight), >then place the model on a bed of plastic foam chips in a box. Add more >models if there is room, or just do the one, then pour chips around the >bagged model. The chips prevent damage, the bag prevents damage from >the chips. If you inflate the bag too tightly, the bag might rupture, >or bounce around inside the bag. > >The other method is to take a foam board, cut holes/slots for the >wheels/skids/lower bits, rest the fuselage and lower wing on >the foam board, secure with string or paper strips, add foam towers >to keep the board from rising in the box, and close the lid. (This >one works better with a diagram.) > >Hope this helps. If you don't see me there, and you pop over >to the Air and Space Museum, ask for me at the desk. (if you want >to meet up - only if you want to discuss 1/72nd :-) > >Brian Nicklas >Archives Division - National Air and Space Museum Brian.....Thanks for the advice. Try not to laugh too hard when you see my stuff. Hope to see you there, regardless of the scale. Mike Muth ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 21:02:17 -0400 (EDT) From: bucky@postoffice.ptd.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) To: wwi, Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Moving Models Message-ID: <199606130102.VAA21997@ns1.ptd.net> At 08:00 PM 6/12/96 -0400, SMHead wrote: >Another method: > >A big box and lots of wadded up toilet paper! If your rigging is relatively >protected (no crazy aerials or linkages from wingtip to tail, etc.) it >should work just fine. The lightly wadded toilet paper is suprisingly >forgiving, and will keep a model intact through most traffic, potholes, and >offensive driving tactics, even on Houston's harrowing streets. Lost one >pitot tube a few years back in the "Battle of the Gulf Freeway", nothing >since. NOTE- take along a small dusting drush, the toilet paper leaves >fibers behind. Hope this helps! > > >Scott Head Thanks for the idea. I"m debating which ideas to use and will let everyone know which worked. I'm leaning toward wadded tissue paper, plastic bags, and anything else anyone can think of! Mike Muth ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 08:22:00 -0400 From: GRBroman@aol.com To: wwi Subject: Re: WW I Tanks Message-ID: <960613082200_555365313@emout09.mail.aol.com> A huge brain cramp descended over me and severly violated the airspace about my head and shoulders. There *IS* another reference on the Marks I-V. It is the Profile series book on the Marks I-V. I just got the Bellonna info from Matthew Burchette (Thanks big guy, your too nice for your own good) and the interesting thing is that the plans in the Profile ar the same ones as the Bellona except the Profile ones are reproduced smaller. Much better text and photo coverage. BTW, there was an excellent article and photos of "Little Willie" in this moths issue of the Journal of Military Ordnance, which was formerly Museum Ordnance magazine. That is two issues in a row for WWI armour. Life is good. Auf Wiederschreiben, Glen ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 07:23:22 -0500 From: "Matt Bittner" To: wwi Subject: Re: Allied Armament Message-ID: <199606130725.HAA13071@cso.com> On 12 Jun 96 at 17:39, Mary-Ann/Michael typed diligantly: > I got the Kennet book for Christmas as a present, and it > has proven to be a pleasant surpirse. He spends quite a bit of time > on pre-war buildup. He also has copious footnotes for each chapter. > The book was published by The Free Press in 1991. I've never seen > it reviewed, and wonder if anyone else has had a chance to read it. I too have read this. It is wonderful. I had completely forgot about it, since it's more on the historical side, than the modeler side. I had also forgot about it since I read it in '93. Hey, three years is a long time to remember things! Matt meba@cso.com ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 157 *********************