WWI Digest 40 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: Le Prieur questions by "Matt Bittner" 2) Re: Le Prieur questions by hartc@spot.Colorado.EDU (Charles Hart) 3) RE: Le Prieur questions by SDW@qld.mim.com.au 4) RE: Aluminised Paint Finishes by SDW@qld.mim.com.au 5) You be the judge by modlctzn@pacificrim.net (Mike Franklin) 6) Re: Le Prieur questions by bshatzer@ednet1.osl.or.gov (Bill Shatzer) 7) RE: Le Prieur questions by The Flying Wrench 8) Re: You be the judge by The Flying Wrench 9) RE: Le Prieur questions by SDW@qld.mim.com.au 10) RE: Le Prieur questions by The Flying Wrench 11) Shuttleworth LVG C.VI by Robert Woodbury 12) Re: Shuttleworth LVG C.VI by The Flying Wrench 13) RE: Le Prieur questions by The Flying Wrench 14) RE: Le Prieur questions by SDW@qld.mim.com.au 15) Windsock International by Jose Valenciano 16) Re: Windsock International by bshatzer@ednet1.osl.or.gov (Bill Shatzer) 17) Re: Le Prieur questions by "Matt Bittner" 18) Re: Windsock International by "Matt Bittner" 19) Time to split this group! (was Re: Eduard Albatros/Any news?) by denatale@nando.net (Rick DeNatale) 20) Re: Time to split this group! (was Re: Eduard Albatros/Any news? by stonto@seaccc.sccd.ctc.edu 21) Re: Shuttleworth LVG C.VI by SCLexicat@aol.com 22) Re: Windsock International by hartc@spot.Colorado.EDU (Charles Hart) 23) Re: Shuttleworth LVG C.VI by hartc@spot.Colorado.EDU (Charles Hart) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 15:06:50 -0500 From: "Matt Bittner" To: wwi Subject: Re: Le Prieur questions Message-ID: <199602201508.PAA08147@cso.com> On 20 Feb 96 at 15:44, Charles Hart typed diligantly: > >Again, in bringing back out my 1/72nd Nie.11 - and since I'm fitting > >it with Le Prieur rockets - I have the following questions. > > Refresh my failing memory, is this a conversion from a Ni.17 or a kit > (Merlin ??). A conversion of the ESCI Nie.17, using Rosemont's replacement fuselage and upper wing. > Ni.11 cockpit photos, of any kind, are pretty hard to come by. Check > the book on the Nieuport Fighters from the Classic Warbirds series, > published about 1985 by Arms & Armour Press. Its a collection of Jack > Bruce's photos. Apart from the Datafiles and Specials, there aren't too > many other places to turn to that I can think of. Thanks for refreshing my memory! I haven't had a chance to input these into my database, so whenever I query it, these don't come up. Matt ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 15:49:37 -0700 From: hartc@spot.Colorado.EDU (Charles Hart) To: wwi Subject: Re: Le Prieur questions Message-ID: Matt has written: > >A conversion of the ESCI Nie.17, using Rosemont's replacement >fuselage and upper wing. > Sounds as though you would only need a little bit of sheet styrene and some Aeroclub bits and you could save the kit bits for making a Ni.17. Charles hartc@spot.colorado.edu >> Ni.11 cockpit photos, of any kind, are pretty hard to come by. Check >> the book on the Nieuport Fighters from the Classic Warbirds series, >> published about 1985 by Arms & Armour Press. Its a collection of Jack >> Bruce's photos. Apart from the Datafiles and Specials, there aren't too >> many other places to turn to that I can think of. > >Thanks for refreshing my memory! I haven't had a chance to input >these into my database, so whenever I query it, these don't come up. P.S. Have you checked any WWI Aero Issues for cockpit shots of Nieuports ? ------------------------------ Date: 21 Feb 96 07:39:00 EST From: SDW@qld.mim.com.au To: wwi%pease1.sr.unh.edu@teksup.mim.com.au Cc: wwi%pease1.sr.unh.edu@teksup.mim.com.au Subject: RE: Le Prieur questions Message-ID: <199602202200.IAA29243@mimmon.mim.com.au> Matt asks: >Anybody know what a 2 volt accumulator looks like, and where it was >placed in the fuselage? Anybody know of any photo's of a Nie.11 >cockpit that was "La Prieur enabled"? How about *clear* photo's of >the firing wires, and how they led from the rockets to the fuselage? >TIA! Well, accumulator == battery, and way back then it would probably have been a lead acid cell, like a small car battery. However, I wouldn't have a clue what one looked like. I'm afraid we electrical types are always interested in the next type of device, seldom the last type and never the oldest (or anything like it). I hang my head in shame. Regards Shane ------------------------------ Date: 21 Feb 96 08:04:00 EST From: SDW@qld.mim.com.au To: your_userid%psulias.psu.edu@teksup.mim.com.au (Your Name) Cc: wwi%pease1.sr.unh.edu@teksup.mim.com.au Subject: RE: Aluminised Paint Finishes Message-ID: <199602202226.IAA00023@mimmon.mim.com.au> Hello Tim, You ask, >I'm getting ready to start a Russian Nieu-17 and would appreciate some >feedback on the proportion of silver/grey I should use. >Various color plates don't seem to agree on this matter! Well, the reference say that the Nieuports were painted with aluminium dope. I have _never_ seen any reference which claims that the dope was an aluminised pigmented grey dope like the 5 colour scheme (where aluminum was added to already coloured dope to provide extra protection against UV light). This means that you are trying to replicate a dope which consists of aluminium powder in a clear acetate medium, and need to get a flat aluminium finish. FWIW my opinion is that you should use any flat aluminium paint _maybe_ slightly dulled by adding a touch of pale grey, depending on scale. The finish should look near as dammit to any aluminium doped fabric aircraft, including those used between THE war and the OTHER war. By contrast, the Pfalz paint used a dope containing lamp black, zinc oxide and aluminium powder - it was a aluminised grey, and would need to look _much_ less metallic. All my opinion, supported by a few sources. regards Shane ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 14:05:45 -0800 From: modlctzn@pacificrim.net (Mike Franklin) To: wwi Subject: You be the judge Message-ID: <199602202205.OAA05045@olympic> This was in todays Seattle Newspaper, ALBION, Mich. - John Hall knew the offer was too good to be true: $3.000 for painted fabric logos once displayed on World War I airplanes. The logos were authentic. But the artifacts wern't legally for sale: They belonged to the Smithsonian Institution's Air and Space Museum. Hall, chairman of the History at Albion College, about 30 miles south of Lansing, had uncovered an assistant curator at the Smithsonian, Karl Schneide, who was stealing artifacts and selling them. Hall, 35, a British Citizen in his 9th year at Albion said he was seeking pieces for his collection of military memorabilia when he called Great War Militaria in Chamsberg, Pa. two years ago. That's when he was offered the fabric logos. Hall thought those were too rare to be for sale. On Feb. 21, 1994 Hall phoned an expert in aviation fabrics, Alan Toelle of Bellevue, Wash., who instantly recognised one of the pieces - a 6 foot piece of cloth bearing a U.S. flag and the number 17. The last time Toelle had seen the artifact was at the storage building in suburban Maryland. - - the article goes on to recount how Schneide was caught and prosecuted. He pleaded guilty to one count of stealing 18 objects between 1990 and 1994. Sentenced to 6 months in prison and $20,000 restitution. - - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- | _________________________|__________________________ | | | \ | / | | | "BEWARE THE PUN | ______\_O_O_/______ | | | IN THE SUN!" | / \ | | | annon. | (((((((+))))))) | | | ______|____________\_____/_____________|______ | | / \ | | []/_______\[] | | [] [] | | Mike Franklin is modlctzn@pacificrim.net | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 14:12:50 -0800 From: bshatzer@ednet1.osl.or.gov (Bill Shatzer) To: wwi Subject: Re: Le Prieur questions Message-ID: <199602202212.AA05787@ednet1.osl.or.gov> > >Matt has written: > >>Again, in bringing back out my 1/72nd Nie.11 - and since I'm fitting >>it with Le Prieur rockets - I have the following questions. >> >>In the article by Harry Woodman in the Vol 10 No 3 Windsock, he >>mentions that the firing system was "a 2 volt accumulator (listed as >>a 'Tudor BR2') placed at a convenient situation in the fuselage." >> >>Anybody know what a 2 volt accumulator looks like, and where it was >>placed in the fuselage? Anybody know of any photo's of a Nie.11 >>cockpit that was "La Prieur enabled"? How about *clear* photo's of >>the firing wires, and how they led from the rockets to the fuselage? > I've no idea exactly what the Nieuport '2 volt accumulator' looked like -but- an 'accumulator' (in the strange version of English spoken back in the mother country) is nothing more than a battery (of the wet cell variety). Thus, I'd speculate it looks pretty much like a smallish battery - indeed, as it really didn't have to hold much amperage to ignite the rockets, I'd speculate -very- smallish - maybe as small as a cigarette pack, certainly not a whole bunch larger. I'd think it would be something you could omit in any smaller than 1/24th scale and not lose too many judging points. Cheers, -- Bill Shatzer - bshatzer@orednet.org -or- aw177@Freenet.Carleton.ca - "The only duty we owe to history is to rewrite it." -Oscar Wilde- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 14:04:48 -0900 From: The Flying Wrench To: wwi Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: RE: Le Prieur questions Message-ID: <199602202304.OAA06195@anchor> At 04:43 PM 2/20/96 -0500, SDW@qld.mim.com.au wrote: > >Matt asks: > >>Anybody know what a 2 volt accumulator looks like, and where it was >>placed in the fuselage? Anybody know of any photo's of a Nie.11 >>cockpit that was "La Prieur enabled"? How about *clear* photo's of >>the firing wires, and how they led from the rockets to the fuselage? >>TIA! >Well, accumulator == battery, and way back then it would probably have >been a lead acid cell, like a small car battery. The Flyin' Wrench disagrees: Accumulator = battery? Not necessarly so. The spark accumulator or "coil" of the model T Ford fills the accumulator bill nicely. This is what readily springs to my mind as an "accumulator" of that era. The model T coil differed from the modern ignition coil in that it would store a substantial charge like a large capacitor, which is what it was in fact, for a long period of time. The charge could be stored for a day or so depending on the quality of the coil. The coil (as I remember it) was a wooden box approximatly 5" square with a couple of lead contacts on the top, and it really packed a wallop. I have heard many stories of hooking up a charged, Model T coil to a contact plate on the seat of a car. The other lead was connected to the metal on the steering wheel or shifter so when the unsuspecting driver slid into the seat and grabbed the metal part - Pow! Or another favorite was to put a sparkplug in the exhaust pipe hooked to the Model T coil. The driver would shut the engine ignition off while cruising down the street in the cool of twilight and then close the Model T coil contacts - WOOOSH! A ten foot long flame would issue forth from the exhaust as the raw gas was ignited by the sparkplug. Suprise! Mr. tailgater. One gentleman who related this story to me did this to a cop! Boy was there hell to pay on that one. I would suspect with the battery technology of the day, dictating a large, HEAVY, ponderous, battery in the cockpit versus a small, light-weight, wooden box; The small wooden, coil-style, accumulator would have been the igniter of choice. Remember that one reason electric vehicle starters and electrical systems in general did not come into common useage until well after WWI was due to the crude battery technology of that era. Motorcycles, autos, and even aircraft of 1918 vintage used carbide lamps because of the lack of suitable batteries for an electrical system. Batteries were large, expensive, and did not function very well. Small, reliable, efficient batteries were unknown at that time. The plates of those old batteries often shorted out due to vibration and holding a charge was a maybe, maybe not, situation. In fact plate shorting is still a problem with Harleys because of their excessive vibration. I have no proof, but I would suspect that the Model T coil was a standard design for that type of component as often was the case for such components. When a good, functional design was hit upon by the engineers and designers of that era they would all jump on the band wagon. The component might have slightly different diminisions or look a little different, but inside it was usually the same device. Check out the many planforms that followed the Wright brothers original design. Or closer to all our hearts - look at Tony Fokkers E.I planform. It is well documented that Mr. Fokker bought a damaged Morane Type H and shortly after came up with his sucessful E.I design. The Flyin Wrench. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 14:10:58 -0900 From: The Flying Wrench To: wwi Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: You be the judge Message-ID: <199602202310.OAA06467@anchor> At 05:11 PM 2/20/96 -0500, Mike Franklin wrote: >This was in todays Seattle Newspaper, > >ALBION, Mich. - John Hall knew the offer was too good to be true: >$3.000 for painted fabric logos once displayed on World War I airplanes. The Flyin' Wrench covets: Forget the fabric pieces, I want an original Pfalz DIII for 3K and if you have one for sale let me know right away. No questions asked. The Wrench ------------------------------ Date: 21 Feb 96 09:41:00 EST From: SDW@qld.mim.com.au To: wwi%pease1.sr.unh.edu@teksup.mim.com.au Subject: RE: Le Prieur questions Message-ID: <199602210001.KAA02939@mimmon.mim.com.au> >The Flyin' Wrench disagrees: >Accumulator = battery? Not necessarly so. The spark accumulator or "coil" of >the model T Ford fills the accumulator bill nicely. This is what readily >springs to my mind as an "accumulator" of that era. The distinction between chemical, capacitive and reactive accumulators is probably a moot point of not much if any interest to most of the members of the list. However, Wrench is probably quite correct about the non use of what we now call batteries. One tends to forget just how long ago "back then" actually was unless one is of the more mature age group of list members ;-) Shane ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 17:47:57 -0900 From: The Flying Wrench To: wwi Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: RE: Le Prieur questions Message-ID: <199602210247.RAA14585@anchor> At 06:44 PM 2/20/96 -0500, SDW@qld.mim.com.au wrote: > > >>The Flyin' Wrench disagrees: > >>Accumulator = battery? Not necessarly so. The spark accumulator or >"coil" of >>the model T Ford fills the accumulator bill nicely. This is what readily >>springs to my mind as an "accumulator" of that era. > >The distinction between chemical, capacitive and reactive accumulators is >probably a moot point of not much if any interest to most of the members >of the list. However, Wrench is probably quite correct about the non use >of what we now call batteries. One tends to forget just how long ago >"back then" actually was unless one is of the more mature age group of >list members ;-) > > >Shane The Wrench forgets where he left his dentures: > That's right dadgum, smartypants and don't you fergit it! Why I remember back in 09' . . . . . Where's my cane Myrtyl, I'll show these young whippersnappers whose mature. The Wrench ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 11:34:34 -0500 From: Robert Woodbury To: wwi Subject: Shuttleworth LVG C.VI Message-ID: <312B499A.6364@per.dwr.csiro.au> Hello All, Is anyone out there familiar with the history of the LVG C.VI that's in the Shuttleworth collection in the UK? I happened upon it during my travels in that part of the world in 1994. All I recall was that it is still owned by the RAF. Has it been restored at all, if so how accurate is the lozenge on the wing upper and lower surfaces?? Rob. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 19:25:20 -0900 From: The Flying Wrench To: wwi Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Shuttleworth LVG C.VI Message-ID: <199602210425.TAA18652@anchor> At 10:32 PM 2/20/96 -0500, Robert Woodbury wrote: >Hello All, > >Is anyone out there familiar with the history of the LVG C.VI that's in >the Shuttleworth collection in the UK? > >I happened upon it during my travels in that part of the world in 1994. >All I recall was that it is still owned by the RAF. Has it been restored >at all, if so how accurate is the lozenge on the wing upper and lower >surfaces?? > >Rob. The Wrench Informs: The LVG C.VI is still part of the trust (at least it was as of 1995). It is unique in being the only original German two seater to survive in airworthy condition. It is powered by a 200 hp Mercedes Benz in line six. This example was brought down by two S.E.5as of No.74 Squadron on 2 August 1918. The LVG was rebuilt to flying status sometime before1937 when it appeared in the RAF Hendon pagent. It was aquired by the Trust in 1959 and has since been rebuilt again. When you viewed the LVG in 1994 it should have been in pristine flying condition as the photographs I have of it from that year show it as such. The pirep says it flys "like a heavy Tiger Moth". The LVG is truly a work of art especially in its woodwork. It is hard to believe such finely crafted machines were ever built to be expendable. Two other examples of the LVG C.VI exist, one in the Brussels Air Museum and the other has been restored by the Memorial Flight Association on behalf of the Musee de l'air. As for the lozenge, I don't know for sure, but knowing the Shuttle Worth Trust's attitude about such matters, if it is not an exact match it is close enough to use for modeling purposes. I have a book titled "Wind in the Wires" that has a beautiful, full page, color photograph of the cockpit. It looks like your climbing into the aircraft. Aside from the ubiqutous placards, especially the bright red one that says "NO SMOKING" and a bit of modern, braided, clear tubing peeking out from under the panel, the interior is completely original. All instruments are the original German ones with perhaps the exception of a more modern oil pressure gage that is obscured by the coaming to the point of being indeterminate. The Flyin' Wrench History? What history? All I know is what I saw as I stood there watching it happen. Anon ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 19:36:35 -0900 From: The Flying Wrench To: wwi Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: RE: Le Prieur questions Message-ID: <199602210436.TAA19143@anchor> Shane wrote: >The distinction between chemical, capacitive and reactive accumulators is >probably a moot point of not much if any interest to most of the members >of the list. However, Wrench is probably quite correct about the non use >of what we now call batteries. One tends to forget just how long ago >"back then" actually was unless one is of the more mature age group of >list members ;-) > >Shane Charlie Wrench puzzles: I know first two, but what is - reactive accumulator. Perhaps electronics degree is as old as Model "T" coil. Please to inform, as number one son soon return to interrupt most desirable thought process. Thank you so much. Wrench ------------------------------ Date: 21 Feb 96 14:44:00 EST From: SDW@qld.mim.com.au To: wwi%pease1.sr.unh.edu@teksup.mim.com.au Subject: RE: Le Prieur questions Message-ID: <199602210505.PAA11755@mimmon.mim.com.au> Charlie Wrench puzzles: I know first two, but what is - reactive accumulator. Perhaps electronics degree is as old as Model "T" coil. Please to inform, as number one son soon return to interrupt most desirable thought process. So's mine. And fingers which work faster than my brain nowadays. Scratch raective, try inductive -- oops. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 15:53:44 +0800 (HKT) From: Jose Valenciano To: wwi Subject: Windsock International Message-ID: To Brian Bushe, Hi! If you're still on line I would like to thank you for the issue you mailed to me. I received it yesterday and it contained great info. I don't know where to write to you so I'm mailing to the list. Hope this reaches you. To everyone, It's the first time I've seen a copy of Windsock International. I got the Nov/Dec issue, the one with line drawings of an AEG J.I. Are the other issues this good? If they are then I'm subscribing! It sure beats getting a copy of Fine Scale. Also, I didn't know that you could "subscribe" for Windsock Datafiles. I thought that you just bought them as they came out. Apparently they're issued 6 per year (bimonthly?). On the WWI historians mailing list there was some discussion regarding Cross & Cockade, now called Over the Front. How does this periodical compare with the Windsock? To all repliants, thanks for the info... ********************************************************************* 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, 21 Feb 1996 00:22:34 -0800 From: bshatzer@ednet1.osl.or.gov (Bill Shatzer) To: wwi Subject: Re: Windsock International Message-ID: <199602210822.AA19292@ednet1.osl.or.gov> Joey Valenciano writes: -snips- >Also, I didn't know that you could "subscribe" for Windsock Datafiles. I >thought that you just bought them as they came out. Apparently they're >issued 6 per year (bimonthly?). > >On the WWI historians mailing list there was some discussion regarding >Cross & Cockade, now called Over the Front. How does this periodical >compare with the Windsock? > Whole different emphasis and orientation. O'er the Front has pretentions of being a historical journal with lots of coverage of the 'arcane' aspects of WW1 aviation - obscure pilots' diaries, obscure squadrons (the current issue has a history of Jasta 47W which I'd never heard of before), historical studies, biographies, etc., etc. Not really a -modelers- publication although they've added an aircraft modeling section to the mag recently and the magazine contains -lots- of previously unpublished photos - too often (for my tastes, anyway) the photos are of obscure pilots stiffly posed for the cameras or a bunch of the boys whooping it up at the local canteena but, often enough to keep my interest, a previously unknown (to me at least) photo of interesting aircraft. For instance, the Jasta 47W article has a blurry but interesting photo of Ltn d R Walter Kypke's D.VII (9 victories) with a large bird (swan? goose? seagull?) painted on the side together with a somewhat clearer three view drawing of the aircraft. Hmmm! Might make an interesting model! I've never seen this 'un illustrated anyplace else before. If you're interested in WW1 airplanes, period, I really can't recommend it - the price is $37 a year and for that price you can probably get more -airplane- information outa Windsock or the datafiles. BUT, if you're interested in WW1 aviation in general, it has a lot to recommend it. To my interests, its worth the price several times over. Address for subscribing is Membership Secretary, League of WW1 Aviation Historians, PO Box 2475, Rockford, IL 61132-0475 More information gladly provided upon request if anyone needs or wants it. Cheers, -- Bill Shatzer - bshatzer@orednet.org -or- aw177@Freenet.Carleton.ca - "The only duty we owe to history is to rewrite it." -Oscar Wilde- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 07:33:59 -0500 From: "Matt Bittner" To: wwi Subject: Re: Le Prieur questions Message-ID: <199602210735.HAA16172@cso.com> On 20 Feb 96 at 16:36, Charles Hart typed diligantly: > >A conversion of the ESCI Nie.17, using Rosemont's replacement > >fuselage and upper wing. > > > > Sounds as though you would only need a little bit of sheet styrene > and some Aeroclub bits and you could save the kit bits for making a Ni.17. True. I did think of this. There was no real reason to "ruin" *two* ESCI Nie.17's to make this Nie.11. However, I wanted to try it for the article I wrote. Using the Rosemont replacements, and *not* using the ESCI lower wing, you could get away with scratching the lower wing. I ended up scratching the entire tail parts, so I didn't even think about using the kit parts. BTW, to make a *correct* Nie.17 out of the ESCI kit requires more than using the Revell kit. The ESCI top wing not only doesn't have the diehedral (the only thing lacking in the Revell kit), but is to small tip-to-tip as well. And to "correctly correct" it, you have to add plastic just outside of the aileron cranks. > P.S. Have you checked any WWI Aero Issues for cockpit shots > of Nieuports ? Yep. Nothing in the way of Le Prieur outfitted Nie.11's. Matt -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Matthew Bittner WW1 Modeler, ecto subscriber meba@cso.com PowerBuilder developer; Omaha, Nebraska Disclaimer: opinions expressed by me are my responsibility only. "Ex-lovers make great speed bumps" - Bumper Sticker -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 07:33:59 -0500 From: "Matt Bittner" To: wwi Subject: Re: Windsock International Message-ID: <199602210735.HAA16176@cso.com> On 21 Feb 96 at 3:24, Bill Shatzer typed diligantly: > Whole different emphasis and orientation. O'er the Front has > pretentions of being a historical journal with lots of coverage > of the 'arcane' aspects of WW1 aviation - obscure pilots' diaries, > obscure squadrons (the current issue has a history of Jasta 47W > which I'd never heard of before), historical studies, biographies, > etc., etc. Not really a -modelers- publication although they've added > an aircraft modeling section to the mag recently and the magazine > contains -lots- of previously unpublished photos - too often (for > my tastes, anyway) the photos are of obscure pilots stiffly posed > for the cameras or a bunch of the boys whooping it up at the local > canteena but, often enough to keep my interest, a previously unknown > (to me at least) photo of interesting aircraft. For instance, the > Jasta 47W article has a blurry but interesting photo of Ltn d R > Walter Kypke's D.VII (9 victories) with a large bird (swan? goose? > seagull?) painted on the side together with a somewhat clearer three > view drawing of the aircraft. Hmmm! Might make an interesting > model! I've never seen this 'un illustrated anyplace else before. > > If you're interested in WW1 airplanes, period, I really can't > recommend it - the price is $37 a year and for that price you > can probably get more -airplane- information outa Windsock or the > datafiles. BUT, if you're interested in WW1 aviation in > general, it has a lot to recommend it. To my interests, its > worth the price several times over. Sorry to include most of the post, but there was no "clean" way to snip it. One point I would disagree with is that Bill said it's not a modelers magazine. Sure, it's geared more towards the history part, but with the new modelers section, as well as the numerous plumage, colors, and squadron histories, it definitely does help the modeler. Want to find an obscure scheme for whatever aircraft you're working on? Chances are OtF will have it. As Bill mentioned, an article in Jasta 47w with tonal drawings of a couple of machines, giving color info. Previous issues included one devoted entirely to the kingdom of Wurtemburg - including tonal drawings for colors. Some real obscure stuff here. There also was an article dealing with Roland D.II colors (currently, a topic dear to the heart ;-))...etc.etc.etc. Sure, Windsock is geared entirely towards modelers, but OtF comes real close. Closer than it's international cousin, Cross & Cockade International. Matt -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Matthew Bittner WW1 Modeler, ecto subscriber meba@cso.com PowerBuilder developer; Omaha, Nebraska Disclaimer: opinions expressed by me are my responsibility only. "Ex-lovers make great speed bumps" - Bumper Sticker -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 08:59:10 -0500 From: denatale@nando.net (Rick DeNatale) To: wwi Subject: Time to split this group! (was Re: Eduard Albatros/Any news?) Message-ID: >At 11:35 AM 2/8/96 -0500, Matt Bittner wrote: >>On 8 Feb 96 at 11:11, Carlos Valdes typed diligently: >>> > PS - I'm sick of Bf109s too. How about some Yaks and Sturmoviks? >>I can't wait for the Sturmoviks.... Heck, if Hasegawa is releasing a >>Morane MS-500 (520?) and a new Brewster Buffalo, maybe a Sturmovik >>isn't far behind? One could only hope. >>Anybody who picked up a Hasegawa Hurricane willing to admit to it and >>give me an assesment? >Wait a minute, I've seen one of those kits, it only has one wing. Everyone >knows one wing is not sufficient to actually sustain flight. Messerschmitts? Sturmoviks? Buffaloes? Hurricanes? What is all this. .... Next think you know we'll be talking about chevies and fords! Oops, I thought that this was rec.models.scale!? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Feb 96 08:01:57 PST From: stonto@seaccc.sccd.ctc.edu To: wwi Subject: Re: Time to split this group! (was Re: Eduard Albatros/Any news? Message-ID: <9601218249.AA824918643@SCCCGATE.seaccc.sccd.ctc.edu> >At 11:35 AM 2/8/96 -0500, Matt Bittner wrote: >>On 8 Feb 96 at 11:11, Carlos Valdes typed diligently: >>> > PS - I'm sick of Bf109s too. How about some Yaks and Sturmoviks? >>I can't wait for the Sturmoviks.... Heck, if Hasegawa is releasing a >>Morane MS-500 (520?) and a new Brewster Buffalo, maybe a Sturmovik >>isn't far behind? One could only hope. >>Anybody who picked up a Hasegawa Hurricane willing to admit to it and >>give me an assesment? >Wait a minute, I've seen one of those kits, it only has one wing. Everyone >knows one wing is not sufficient to actually sustain flight. Messerschmitts? Sturmoviks? Buffaloes? Hurricanes? What is all this. .... Next think you know we'll be talking about chevies and fords! Oops, I thought that this was rec.models.scale!? Hmmmm interesting idea. I got it; let's combine the groups RMS and this one! Just kidding. The little forays that this group takes into non-WWI stuff is mostly about modelling issues that in some way effect WWI stuff. It gets back quickly enough. I am on the other list also and the "lets split this group" recurring algorithm (virus) gets pretty tiresome. This group is much more focussed than that one. ---Stephen Tontoni ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 11:32:23 -0500 From: SCLexicat@aol.com To: wwi Subject: Re: Shuttleworth LVG C.VI Message-ID: <960221113221_328684007@emout09.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 21/02/96 03:38:40, you write: >Is anyone out there familiar with the history of the LVG C.VI that's in >the Shuttleworth collection in the UK? > >I happened upon it during my travels in that part of the world in 1994. >All I recall was that it is still owned by the RAF. Has it been restored >at all, if so how accurate is the lozenge on the wing upper and lower >surfaces?? Don't know how accurate the lozenge is, but I do know that it isn't lozenge printed fabric, it's painted on (They couldn't afford to get the fabric specially made). As for originality, it sports a Renault car radiator, and has something of a propensity for overheating. Regular crews are said to carry teabags as part of their forced landing kit. Simon ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 11:03:15 -0700 From: hartc@spot.Colorado.EDU (Charles Hart) To: wwi Subject: Re: Windsock International Message-ID: Joey has inquired: >Also, I didn't know that you could "subscribe" for Windsock Datafiles. I >thought that you just bought them as they came out. Apparently they're >issued 6 per year (bimonthly?). > This is true, the Datafiles are mailed at the same time the Windsock issues are sent out, in the same envelope if you have a "combined" subscription. >On the WWI historians mailing list there was some discussion regarding >Cross & Cockade, now called Over the Front. How does this periodical >compare with the Windsock? > There have already been posts with views on Over the Front, a publication that emerged from the original Cross & Cockade Journal published in the U.S. Do not forget that there is another "historical" journal with a similar name, Cross & Cockade (GB), now called C&C International. C&C I is an excellent publication, again focusing on the historical aspects of WW I aviation and is now in its 27th year of publication. Pretty good for a society with on ly 1437 members world wide. C&C I is not a "modelling" publication, but both it and OTF(and earlier C&C) bring out new data from obscure places that otherwise might have been lost. C&C I members have sought out families of RFC personell and uncovered diaries, logbooks, photographs and other memoribilia that give us a more complete picture of military aviation between 1914 and 1918. Sure, not every issue deals with "well known" pilots with 20+ kills and a flashy paint scheme on his a/c, but then these guys were the superstars in some very large air services. By finding out about the men who served in relative obscurity and their impressions of service life and aviation I think that we gain a much more realistic impression of military aviation during this time. If you just want modelling data, get all the Windsocks you can find. There is useful modeling information to be found in both OTF and C&CI, it just requires a little more digging into the subject. My $ 0.02. Charles hartc@spot.colorado.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 11:25:41 -0700 From: hartc@spot.Colorado.EDU (Charles Hart) To: wwi Subject: Re: Shuttleworth LVG C.VI Message-ID: to continue a thread: >>Is anyone out there familiar with the history of the LVG C.VI that's in >>the Shuttleworth collection in the UK? >> >>I happened upon it during my travels in that part of the world in 1994. >>All I recall was that it is still owned by the RAF. Has it been restored >>at all, if so how accurate is the lozenge on the wing upper and lower >>surfaces?? > >Don't know how accurate the lozenge is, but I do know that it isn't lozenge >printed fabric, it's painted on (They couldn't afford to get the fabric >specially made). > >As for originality, it sports a Renault car radiator, and has something of a >propensity for overheating. Regular crews are said to carry teabags as part >of their forced landing kit. From the photos I have seen the lozenge looks pretty good color wise. It is painted on, but they did a good job in replicating the appearance of how the lozenge fabric would have been applied to the airframe (chordwise across the wing and all that). The replica lozenge fabric that later came out of Germany for the Halberstadt restorations is printed on linen and is NOT flight rated. Charles hartc@spot.colorado.edu ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 40 ********************