WWI Digest 27 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: Real Wooden Props- suggestions? by stonto@seaccc.sccd.ctc.edu 2) rumor mongering by hartc@spot.Colorado.EDU (Charles Hart) 3) Bf109s et al ad nauseum WAS: something else by stonto@seaccc.sccd.ctc.edu 4) Bf109s et al ad nauseum WAS: something else by Brian Nicklas 5) Re: Bf109s et al ad nauseum WAS: something else by bshatzer@ednet1.osl.or.gov (Bill Shatzer) 6) sea birds by hartc@spot.Colorado.EDU (Charles Hart) 7) Re: Bf109s et al ad nauseum WAS: something else by "Matt Bittner" 8) Re: Bf109s et al ad nauseum WAS: something else by Brian Nicklas 9) Re: Eduard Sopwith Triplane/Any news? by mnelson@compusmart.ab.ca (Mark K Nelson) 10) Re: Rotary Engines - Addendum by The Flying Wrench 11) Re: Sign D-VIII <> Edward D-VIII by The Flying Wrench 12) Re: Bf109s et al ad nauseum WAS: something else by The Flying Wrench 13) Re: rumor mongering by The Flying Wrench 14) Re: Bf109s et al ad nauseum WAS: something else by Jesse Thorn 15) Re: Bf109s et al ad nauseum WAS: something else by Brian 16) RE: One other GVW tidbit by SDW@qld.mim.com.au 17) RE: One other GVW tidbit by "Matt Bittner" 18) Re: Eduard Albatros/Any news? by JimMaas@aol.com 19) Re[2]: Eduard Albatros/Any news? by stonto@seaccc.sccd.ctc.edu 20) Re: One other GVW tidbit by Jose Valenciano 21) Laminated Props by NPWE28A@prodigy.com (LCDR KENNETH L HAGERUP) 22) Re: Real Wooden Props- suggestions? by Robert Woodbury 23) Re: Laminated Props by Jose Valenciano 24) Re: Real Wooden Props- suggestions? by gspring@ix.netcom.com (Greg Springer ) 25) Re: Laminated Props & lozenge decals by hartc@spot.Colorado.EDU (Charles Hart) 26) Re: Real Wooden Props- suggestions? by djones@iex.com (Douglas R. Jones) 27) Re: Eduard Albatros/Any news? by The Flying Wrench 28) Plastic model production by The Flying Wrench 29) Re: Real Wooden Props- suggestions? by The Flying Wrench 30) Models by huggins@Onramp.NET (John Huggins) 31) RE: Models by SDW@qld.mim.com.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 07 Feb 96 08:13:46 PST From: stonto@seaccc.sccd.ctc.edu To: wwi Subject: Re: Real Wooden Props- suggestions? Message-ID: <9601078237.AA823709799@SCCCGATE.seaccc.sccd.ctc.edu> Hi All, This is my first post to this newsgroup after having lurked here for a couple of weeks. Anyway, I'm in the process of putting together the Eduard Fokker E.V/D.VIII and was thinking of making the prop using sandwiched layers of veneer. I was wondering if anyone out in cyberspace would have any suggestions on how to tackle this. I have seen some really cool props made from laminated layers of paper. Carved out, etc. Probably easier and cheaper than veneer to use. Plus the DVIII is 1/72, right? The layers will be scaled better, I think. Seems like a lot of trouble to me; aren't real propellers molded in styrene? ----Stephen Tontoni ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 10:50:35 -0700 From: hartc@spot.Colorado.EDU (Charles Hart) To: wwi Subject: rumor mongering Message-ID: Matt typed: > >Another rumor I've heard: Eduard "accidentally" broke the mold for >the SSW D.III. True? False? Anybody really know? Enquiring minds, >and such. > That's the way I heard it. Charles hartc@spot.colorado.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Feb 96 08:32:24 PST From: stonto@seaccc.sccd.ctc.edu To: wwi Subject: Bf109s et al ad nauseum WAS: something else Message-ID: <9601078237.AA823710857@SCCCGATE.seaccc.sccd.ctc.edu> > Ken Hagerup (Bf109s aren't so bad.) Okay, forget that I know this guy. With that kind of statement here, I'm embarrased to be in the same group as him! ;-) Bf109s aren't so bad. Geez. And neither are root canals and vasectomy's, either! I had one of those "visits"..... and regarding the statements (Bf109 etc), I'm shocked and appalled. I'll get back to my (Vista) Fairey Fulmar to settle down a bit. (to interested parties: I just looked up "Fulmar" in the dictionary; its an artic seabird. Probably the Official waterfowl of Antarctica! So what's a "Gannet"? Its not in the dictionary) ------Stephen Tontoni (who just got netscape working on my computer at home; I may never finish a model again!) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 96 11:46:26 EST From: Brian Nicklas To: Subject: Bf109s et al ad nauseum WAS: something else Message-ID: <199602071646.LAA02117@pease1.sr.unh.edu> If we can't insult nationalities, why can we insult TYPES? :-) I have more Bf 109s in my collection than anything else, and I'm PROUD of it! (I just like the lines of the things..., esp. 109es and 109Fs. Same way I like Albatros D.Vs) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 08:48:28 -0800 From: bshatzer@ednet1.osl.or.gov (Bill Shatzer) To: wwi Subject: Re: Bf109s et al ad nauseum WAS: something else Message-ID: <199602071648.AA28258@ednet1.osl.or.gov> > > I had one of those "visits"..... and regarding the > statements (Bf109 etc), I'm shocked and appalled. I'll get > back to my (Vista) Fairey Fulmar to settle down a bit. (to > interested parties: I just looked up "Fulmar" in the > dictionary; its an artic seabird. Probably the Official > waterfowl of Antarctica! So what's a "Gannet"? Its not in > the dictionary) > Well, we're getting quite a long ways for WW1, now aren't we? :-) A gannet is another 'un of them seabirds. As are the names of all British naval fighters 'til we get to the WW2 hybreds like 'Sea Hurricane' and 'Seafire'. Cheers, -- Bill Shatzer - bshatzer@orednet.org -or- aw177@Freenet.Carleton.ca - "Cave ab homine unius libri!" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 11:12:58 -0700 From: hartc@spot.Colorado.EDU (Charles Hart) To: wwi Subject: sea birds Message-ID: Stephen wrote: > > I had one of those "visits"..... and regarding the > statements (Bf109 etc), I'm shocked and appalled. I'll get > back to my (Vista) Fairey Fulmar to settle down a bit. (to > interested parties: I just looked up "Fulmar" in the > dictionary; its an artic seabird. Probably the Official > waterfowl of Antarctica! So what's a "Gannet"? Its not in > the dictionary) As possibly the only member of this list that has been to Antarctica, I can tell you that there are NO Fulmars there, either mechanical or the flesh and blood variety. Skuas, petrels, yes you will find those there along with a bunch of flightless things in black and white, and sometimes a touch of yellow. Nuff said off topic. Charles hartc@spot.colorado.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 11:55:35 -0600 From: "Matt Bittner" To: wwi Subject: Re: Bf109s et al ad nauseum WAS: something else Message-ID: <199602071244.MAA02038@cso.com> On 7 Feb 96 at 11:47, Brian Nicklas typed diligently: > If we can't insult nationalities, why can we insult TYPES? :-) > > I have more Bf 109s in my collection than anything else, > and I'm PROUD of it! (I just like the lines of the things..., > esp. 109es and 109Fs. Same way I like Albatros D.Vs) The best reason I ever heard of for a public flogging...:-):-):-) Matt ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 96 13:28:50 EST From: Brian Nicklas To: Subject: Re: Bf109s et al ad nauseum WAS: something else Message-ID: <199602071829.NAA02608@pease1.sr.unh.edu> Hey Matt, Wanna buy my signed/co-signed Robert Taylor print of "Ace of Aces" Erich Hartmann's Bf 109? Resale market value is currently $4,000. Make me an offer :-) Brian ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 05 Feb 1996 16:40:27 -0700 From: mnelson@compusmart.ab.ca (Mark K Nelson) Subject: Re: Eduard Sopwith Triplane/Any news? Message-ID: In article <4f0ep1$sks@reader2.ix.netcom.com>, tsunami0@ix.netcom.com(Anthony & Ellen Sanchez ) wrote: > Hello all; > > Just wondering if anyone has any info./news on the release of the > Eduard Sopwith Triplane 1:48 scale? > > Thanks, > Anthony Sanchez > IPMS 33799 Rob @ Eduard in Nepean Ontario told me that the Albatros would be in late Jan/early Feb. with the Sopwith Triplane in late Feb. When I talked to him late last week he told me that the Albatros should be out within 2 weeks. -- Mark (An Employee at Kites & Other Delights in West Edmonton Mall) ------------------------ mnelson@compusmart.ab.ca ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 11:00:51 -0900 From: The Flying Wrench To: wwi Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Rotary Engines - Addendum Message-ID: <199602072000.LAA24532@anchor> At 04:55 AM 2/7/96 -0500, Paul Butler wrote: >In a recent posting, the Wrench wrote: > >After careful observation of the somewhat detail-obscured cutaway in my >book, I have found that it appears that my first impression of the mechanics >of this engine were mistaken. I was always under the impression the crank >throw was fixed, as this is how modern engines are constructed.. In most >cases with modern engines, the crank and the throw(s) are forged from a >single billet. The crank throw in a rotary is different in this respect; it >does move, it moves with the cylinders and the crankcase. It rotates around >the crankshaft as do the cylinders. That explains much about the mechanics >of this engine. The Wrench supplements: Just bought a nice Squadron/Signal Pub. (#158) on the early Fokkers, Spins through E.IV. In this new 1996 edition there is one brief reference to the rotary that further clearifies the operation of this rotating machine: Page 7 states "When the engine is started, the engine rotates, and when each piston fires the thrust of the power stroke is against the fixed, cammed crankshaft in such a way that a force is exerted in the the direction of the engine rotation". So then the rods are actuated by cams on the crankshaft hence a rotating throw. Each power pulse is transmitted to and absorbed by the crankshaft, that would seemingly make for bone jarring operation. However it appears the power pulses are damped by the dynamics of the engine itself, thus the power pulses are at least partially absorbed movement of the engine as well as its mass. This would smooth operations out a bit. Also point of interest: radial engines, when constructed and maintained properly, and are relatively smooth engines. I have always found radials smoother that flat opposed. This is due in part to the number of cylinders and their relation to the power pulses. A radial engine's power pulses move in a circular motion around the crank, whereas the power pulses on flat opposed engines, jump back and forth. At idle the radial (single engine aircraft) will tick over with a very low frequency vibration that is almost unnoticeable, whereas a flat opposed will often shake everything in the cockpit at idle. Of course both smooth out considerably at operational speeds, but even here I cannot remember a radial I operated that ever had placarded RPM operating ranges. This is where you pass through an RPM range but never linger for over 30 seconds or so, as the vibration can be determental to your health when something tears loose. The physical operational principals of the radial would seemingly apply to the rotary as well. Of course if you really want smooth then move into the jet age. Nothing beats a turbine for relativly vibration free operation. No power pulses here and no off-center mass being thrown about either. >I am not going to attempt to respond to that because I suspect that I will >get out >of my depth very quickly, however I can recommend an excelent book by one of >your US >compatriates: > > A History of AIRCRAFT PISTON ENGINES > > by Herschel Smith > > Sunflower University Press > ISBN 0-89745-079-5 > > Fifth Printing 1994 >The book is well worth a look. It cost me A$50 so I would expect it to be >around >US$20-25. Thanks for the reference and remember - this isn't rocket science. It's simply antique aircraft science.> The Flyin' Wrench ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 11:01:05 -0900 From: The Flying Wrench To: wwi Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Sign D-VIII <> Edward D-VIII Message-ID: <199602072001.LAA24537@anchor> At 08:20 AM 2/7/96 -0500, Matt Bittner wrote: >On 6 Feb 96 at 22:04, LCDR KENNETH L HAGERUP typed diligently: > > > >Great! FWIW, Ken is a member of the same IPMS group I'm in - don't >use that against him, though. Although not a "true" WW1 modeler :-) >he does dabble a bit. Ask him about his 1/72nd scratchbuilt A7V. > >Although this will sound trite to a LCDR, welcome aboard Ken! You >really should have written an intro on yourself. > >> Ken Hagerup (Bf109s aren't so bad.) > >Okay, forget that I know this guy. With that kind of statement here, >I'm embarrased to be in the same group as him! ;-) > >Bf109s aren't so bad. Geez. And neither are root canals and >vasectomy's, either! What's a Bf-109? Is this a tank or something? A bifurcated 109? Put 109 Bfs in a room and you have "Bf-109"? Can I buy a vowel? Seriously though I am almost certain a guy down the street bought one of these things from Chevrolet of Italy years ago. I think it had a hemi somthing under glass. The Flyin' Wrench ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 11:01:08 -0900 From: The Flying Wrench To: wwi Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Bf109s et al ad nauseum WAS: something else Message-ID: <199602072001.LAA24539@anchor> At 11:38 AM 2/7/96 -0500, stonto@seaccc.sccd.ctc.edu wrote: > >> Ken Hagerup (Bf109s aren't so bad.) > >Okay, forget that I know this guy. With that kind of statement here, >I'm embarrased to be in the same group as him! ;-) > >Bf109s aren't so bad. Geez. And neither are root canals and >vasectomy's, either! > > I had one of those "visits"..... and regarding the > statements (Bf109 etc), I'm shocked and appalled. I'll get > back to my (Vista) Fairey Fulmar to settle down a bit. (to > interested parties: I just looked up "Fulmar" in the > dictionary; its an artic seabird. Probably the Official > waterfowl of Antarctica! So what's a "Gannet"? Its not in > the dictionary) > Gannet, pn, - Large publishing house that is absorbing most of the visible spectrum. The Flyin' Wrench ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 11:01:11 -0900 From: The Flying Wrench To: wwi Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: rumor mongering Message-ID: <199602072001.LAA24544@anchor> >Matt typed: >Another rumor I've heard: Eduard "accidentally" broke the mold - Snip - That's funny people say the same thing about me - usually with a little note of thanks posted on the end. The Flyin' Wrench ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 15:17:54 -0500 (EST) From: Jesse Thorn To: wwi Subject: Re: Bf109s et al ad nauseum WAS: something else Message-ID: On Wed, 7 Feb 1996, Matt Bittner wrote: > The best reason I ever heard of for a public flogging...:-):-):-) Aye, and maybe some aversion therapy, too, matey. Make him build 100 of the blasted things using tube glue in an unventilated room and THEN let's hear how he feels about their 'graceful lines', har har har. --Jesse "There's hamburger all over the highway in Mystic Conn" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 96 15:21:40 EST From: Brian To: Subject: Re: Bf109s et al ad nauseum WAS: something else Message-ID: <199602072022.PAA03320@pease1.sr.unh.edu> Jesse - Been There, Done That!(gotta use them decals up some way) Har Har Back at ya! Brian ------------------------------ Date: 08 Feb 96 07:20:00 EST From: SDW@qld.mim.com.au To: wwi%pease1.sr.unh.edu@teksup.mim.com.au Subject: RE: One other GVW tidbit Message-ID: <199602072140.HAA15638@mimmon.mim.com.au> Hi Matt, You posted: >Another rumor I've heard: Eduard "accidentally" broke the mold for >the SSW D.III. True? False? Anybody really know? Enquiring minds, >and such. I heard from someone (the importer I think) that the SSW mould had worn badly and wasn't useable any longer AND that the master had been badly damaged in producing the mould. The upshot was that there would be no more SSW D.III production and that there would be no more kits after the (then) current batch. I hoped it was just pressure being applied to my wallet, but no more SSW kits have been sighted. regards Shane ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 15:42:53 -0600 From: "Matt Bittner" To: wwi Subject: RE: One other GVW tidbit Message-ID: <199602071631.QAA04794@cso.com> On 7 Feb 96 at 16:23, SDW@qld.mim.com.au typed diligently: > I hoped it was just pressure being applied to my wallet, but no more SSW > kits have been sighted. That has got to be good news to Koster. ;-) Matt ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 17:41:56 -0500 From: JimMaas@aol.com To: wwi Subject: Re: Eduard Albatros/Any news? Message-ID: <960207174151_417040007@emout06.mail.aol.com> A friend was at the Paris model show and saw a test shot of the Eduard D.V. He said that Eduard has started using a better mold technology and "you''' have a hard time telling this from a major-manufacturer kit". Also, they're doing double their normal run in anticipation of higher demand (and rightly so - Jasta 5 alone will keep me busy for years). - Jim ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Feb 96 15:10:17 PST From: stonto@seaccc.sccd.ctc.edu To: wwi Subject: Re[2]: Eduard Albatros/Any news? Message-ID: <9601078237.AA823734796@SCCCGATE.seaccc.sccd.ctc.edu> A friend was at the Paris model show and saw a test shot of the Eduard D.V. He said that Eduard has started using a better mold technology and "you''' have a hard time telling this from a major-manufacturer kit". Also, they're doing double their normal run in anticipation of higher demand (and rightly so - Jasta 5 alone will keep me busy for years). - Jim This is very exciting news; while I really love the Eduard offerings and the PE (drool drool drool) I have been very disappointed with the molding (fit and detail). This is very good news indeed. Right now I am taking a break from the Sopwith Baby .... lots of sanding and filling. I will get back to it in a week or so and polish it off. Kind of rumor that makes one's day! -----Stephen Tontoni ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Feb 1996 07:30:37 +0800 (HKT) From: Jose Valenciano To: wwi Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: One other GVW tidbit Message-ID: On Wed, 7 Feb 1996, Matt Bittner wrote: > On 6 Feb 96 at 18:12, Jose Valenciano typed diligently: > > > Bob Norgen of Sierra tells me that the Gotha is on Eduard's "to make" list. > > Yikes! If a C-type is around $40, then how much for a G-type? $50, > $60? I'd imagine closer to a $100. Maybe $80 up. ********************************************************************* Joey Valenciano WW1 modeller, teacher, jazz musician, joeyval@pusit.admu.edu.ph sitarist tel. (632) 921-26-75 Metro-Manila, Philippines "The more you know, the more you don't know." ********************************************************************* ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Feb 1996 19:12:12 EST From: NPWE28A@prodigy.com (LCDR KENNETH L HAGERUP) To: wwi Subject: Laminated Props Message-ID: <096.00604529.NPWE28A@prodigy.com> Has anyone actually tried the laminations of paper method for duplicating laminated props? It seems that if a CA-type glue was used to saturate the paper, the resulting lamination would be stiff enough to withstand sanding. How does the Pegasus Albatros D V compare with the Airfix example? Squadron Mail Order has it on sale for 14.99 this month. My impressions of Pegasus' kits have varied from good to awful and I've never seen their D V. It is really three of four times as good as the Airfix kit? What's the collective wisdom of this august (if era-centric) group on the accuracy of Aeromaster's lozenge decals? Ken (Did I forget to mention my affection for EA-6Bs?) Hagerup ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Feb 1996 08:26:03 -0500 From: Robert Woodbury To: wwi Subject: Re: Real Wooden Props- suggestions? Message-ID: <3119F9EB.5431@per.dwr.csiro.au> Matt Bittner proclaimed: > > On 6 Feb 96 at 23:39, Robert Woodbury typed diligently: > > > This is my first post to this newsgroup after having lurked here for a > > couple of weeks. > > Welcome, and glad you could be here. Since you've been lurking, you > know that 1/72nd is *THE* scale, all other *static* scales just don't > cut it! (HUGE :-)) > > Matt Well Matt, You know what they say- one man's meat is another man's poison! 1:48 - the only scale! Have Fun, Rob ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Feb 1996 09:59:34 +0800 (HKT) From: Jose Valenciano To: wwi Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Laminated Props Message-ID: On Wed, 7 Feb 1996, LCDR KENNETH L HAGERUP wrote: > Has anyone actually tried the laminations of paper method for duplicating > laminated props? It seems that if a CA-type glue was used to saturate the > paper, the resulting lamination would be stiff enough to withstand sanding. I'd like to know how this is done as well since wood veneer isn't available here. ********************************************************************* Joey Valenciano WW1 modeller, teacher, jazz musician, joeyval@pusit.admu.edu.ph sitarist tel. (632) 921-26-75 Metro-Manila, Philippines "The more you know, the more you don't know." ********************************************************************* ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 18:14:42 -0800 From: gspring@ix.netcom.com (Greg Springer ) To: wwi Subject: Re: Real Wooden Props- suggestions? Message-ID: <199602080214.SAA18148@ix10.ix.netcom.com> You wrote: > >Hi All, > >This is my first post to this newsgroup after having lurked here for a >couple of weeks. > >Anyway, I'm in the process of putting together the Eduard Fokker >E.V/D.VIII and was thinking of making the prop using sandwiched layers of >veneer. I was wondering if anyone out in cyberspace would have any >suggestions on how to tackle this. > >Thanks for the help, and I've been enjoying the posts. > >Rob Woodbury > Hi Robert and welcome! I like to use maple and dark cherry in alternating layers. They both have very dense grain and are the right colors naturally. Veneer is a little too thin for 1/48 (The Scale of Kings) but just right for 1/72 (The Scale of Matt). There is a product which is a self-adhesive tape for edging counter tops. It is a thicker cut veneer. The adhesive backing has been easy to remove on the examples I've found. This product is available at woodworking supply houses. You'll want 7 layers for 1/48 Axial props. I built a Fokker D VI conversion that took a 2nd at the '87 Nationals. It had a 9-layer prop and 5-color lozenge. Don't tell anyone! Consult photo references for the specific prop you want. I laminate the layers with gap-filling cyanoacrylate. This permeates the wood and gives great strength. I rough shape the prop with a Dremel tool coarse sanding drum.(Wear a dust mask!) Then finish up with emery boards and sandpaper. Avoid open grain woods like oak or mahogany. For a four blade prop make a single cross piece with two pieces butt-jointed at it's center. Alternate the direction of the solid piece on each layer and you will have a very sturdy structure. Hope this helps. Cheers! Greg ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 21:23:34 -0700 From: hartc@spot.Colorado.EDU (Charles Hart) To: wwi Subject: Re: Laminated Props & lozenge decals Message-ID: Ken (Did I forget to mention my affection for EA-6Bs?) Hagerup writes: >How does the Pegasus Albatros D V compare with the Airfix example? >Squadron Mail Order has it on sale for 14.99 this month. My impressions of >Pegasus' kits have varied from good to awful and I've never seen their D V. > It is really three of four times as good as the Airfix kit? My personal opinion, the Airfix kit is not that bad. Its wings may need refinement and the fuselage cleaned up and ot be honest it has been a long time since I held up the kit to a set of drawings. The Pegasus kit is very nice though it is cheaper to buy it direct from Pegasus, cost from them is 9.99 pounds equals about $15.40 and you don't have to pay postage, your kit(s) arrive airmail. I think that Squadron charges a minimum of $3.50 or $4.00 for UPS. Pegasus takes credit cards and orders to them come in about the same time it takes to get your parcel from Squadron. >What's the collective wisdom of this august (if era-centric) group on the >accuracy of Aeromaster's lozenge decals? > Of the Aeromaster lozenge releases, 4-color top & bottom plus 5-color top & bottom, the 5-color top has the most correct look as far as colors are concerned. Both sets of bottom colors are too bright in my view. The 4-color top also has somewhat intense colors compared with pieces of the fabric that I have seen. When you compare the color pattern of the 5-color decal with the pattern in the Smithsonian Albatros D-V book, I feel that there are some discrepancies in the decal which have lost the true "feel" of the original pattern, but then this could be because I have spent too long looking at this pattern sometimes. It is harder to judge the "accuracy" of the 4-color pattern since it is relatively poorly documented. The Aeromaster 4-color decal appears to draw upon the old Peter Gray drawing of this pattern which is based mostly on analysis of photographs. The 5-color pattern in the Smithsonian book is made from tracing a genuine specimen of the original fabric. Charles hartc@spot.colorado.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Feb 1996 21:18:42 -0600 From: djones@iex.com (Douglas R. Jones) To: wwi Subject: Re: Real Wooden Props- suggestions? Message-ID: <9602080319.AA24222@deimos.tx.iex.com> >You know what they say- one man's meat is another man's poison! > >1:48 - the only scale! No! No! No! 1/6 - THE only scale! Doug -------------------------------------------------- 'I am a traveler of | Douglas R. Jones both Time and Space' | IEX Corporation Led Zeppelin | (214)301-1307 | djones@iex.com -------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 18:41:01 -0900 From: The Flying Wrench To: wwi Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Eduard Albatros/Any news? Message-ID: <199602080341.SAA10626@anchor> At 05:40 PM 2/7/96 -0500, JimMaas@aol.com wrote: >A friend was at the Paris model show and saw a test shot of the Eduard D.V. > He said that Eduard has started using a better mold technology and "you''' >have a hard time telling this from a major-manufacturer kit". Also, they're >doing double their normal run in anticipation of higher demand (and rightly >so - Jasta 5 alone will keep me busy for years). - Jim> I have always found it difficult to believe that the German aircraft with the highest production numbers in WWI has such lousy representation in miniature. To be sure there have been and are many poor representations of this aircraft with most of them in 1/72. But a really high quality injection kit really does not exist - yet. You can always get a reasonable kit of the DR.I or D.VII in virtually any scale. The DR.I, probably the most overproduced kit of any WWI subject, suffered one of the lower, if not one of the lowest production runs of any German aircraft. The late blooming D.VII also had a minor production run by the aircraft production standards of that day. Witness the latest 1/28th from Revell - a D.VII, everybody groans and will protest that this is not a high quality kit but I would counter at least it exist. I would much rather see a Revell 1/28 D.V of the same quality - with all the faults. I have always found it much easier to modify a kit's error then to build it from scratch. I suppose it is not unusual that probably the worst WWI kit I ever encountered was the Glenco D.V kit. Even the D.VIII which came on the scene in the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month has far better representation in plastic than it ever did in actual service. It seems backwards to me. On the other hand the allied aircraft comparable to the D.III and D.V have excellent representation in injected styrene. It is strange indeed. I have the Eduard D.V on order - Here's hoping. The Flyin' Wrench The saloon is the poor man's club Bishop Williams - 1900 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 18:40:45 -0900 From: The Flying Wrench To: wwi Subject: Plastic model production Message-ID: <199602080340.SAA10620@anchor> I have never really seen a good description of model aircraft injection molding process. Can anyone out there give a good description of the process? And can anyone list the various imperfections that result from that process? The name of the flaw, The appearence of the flaw in the plastic, and what part of the production process results in the flaw. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 20:11:23 -0900 From: The Flying Wrench To: wwi Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Real Wooden Props- suggestions? Message-ID: <199602080511.UAA13919@anchor> >>You know what they say- one man's meat is another man's poison! >>1:48 - the only scale! >No! No! No! 1/6 - THE only scale! The bigger the better. Actually 1/1 would be just fine except for the not so small matter of price and shelf space. I've never seen a a Peggy D.V, is it really that nice - aside from being small enough to dress a flea for the pilot figure. Wrench ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 23:32:54 -0600 (CST) From: huggins@Onramp.NET (John Huggins) To: wwi Subject: Models Message-ID: Brian, and any one else who builds other than WWI models. I am in your court. There are other subjects of interest than WWI . True, they are some of the most colorful, Have some of the most romantic history and just plain look good. It just seams to me, that if one limits themselves to just one period in history,they miss a lot of the world around them. It kind of all comes together when you have an F-117 or an XB-70 on the shelf and can look back through the minature history books on the shelves and see that it all started with something like the Salmson 2A2 or Albatros DIII. If I limted myself to just WWI A/C, I think I would have missed out on a tremendous number of friends who have taught me many new ways of doing things within this hobby we call model making. In the past 40+ years, I have had the honor to rub elbows and talk models with some of the best scale modelers in world. We have learned a great deal from the others in our midst, but the one thing that stands out most about these giants (George Lee, Gil Godfrey, Bill Koster, Lee Thomas, Cookie Sewel, etc,) is that they have never chastised any one for what they build. They don't limit themselves to just one era, and they celebrate what you do instead of condem it. I feel that we should all respect each other for what we do. I prefer 1/72 scale, but I don't condem a modeler for building 1/6 scale kits. I have learned a lot from those who model in the other scales, as they have learned from those of who build in God's scale. If any of you are going to Dallas in May for the ScaleFest, or to Va. Beach for the Nationals, I'll see you there, and we can talk about the great days in aviation history, and maybe even look at a Mustang or Messerschmitt and think about what great airplane from the past led to their page in the history book.. TTFN John Disclaimer: Any errors in spelling, tact, or fact are transmission errors. ------------------------------ Date: 08 Feb 96 15:56:00 EST From: SDW@qld.mim.com.au To: wwi%pease1.sr.unh.edu@teksup.mim.com.au Subject: RE: Models Message-ID: <199602080613.QAA22242@mimmon.mim.com.au> Hello John, You posted (in part) >Brian, and any one else who builds other than WWI models. I expect that this includes everyone on the list. Certainly in the time I've frequented it I cannot remember any claimants to absolute purity. > I am in your court. There are other subjects of interest than WWI . Absolutely. I for example build about 60% WW1 and 40% all other eras. Mostly aircraft, but not exclusively. >I feel that we should all respect each other for what we do. I prefer 1/72 >scale, but I don't condem a modeler for building 1/6 scale kits. I have >learned a lot from those who model in the other scales, as they have >learned from those of who build in God's scale. One of the greatest things about this group is the gentlemanly way in which the foibles of others are countenanced. The fliers and the static modellers get along just fine, we build in all scales and no-one ever makes a serious attack on anyone for their choice of poison. Of course the list has a great sense of humour and also includes an recurring and entirely tongue in cheek flame war regarding the absolutely fallacious assumption of 1:72 as the king of scales - but we put up with that ;-) However I think we do have to remember _why_ this list is called the "WW1 Mailing List". No-one really objects to an occasional off topic discussion (and we have them often enough) but it would be a pity if we forgot the charter and drifted off to become just another general modelling group. My thoughts ... Shane ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 27 ********************