WWI Digest 708 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: Internal ply panels by "TIM" 2) Re: Internal ply panels by "huggins@onramp.net" 3) Re: Internal ply panels by "Rob" 4) Re: Fokker D.VIII by "Paul Schwartzkopf" 5) AMS by Carlos Valdes 6) Re: Imries-Pictorial History of the German Army Air Service 1914-1918 by mgoodwin 7) Re: AMS by Geoff Smith 8) vintage flying by Charles Hart 9) Re: Internal ply panels by John & Allison Cyganowski 10) Re: Rene Dorme's #12 Nie.17 by Alberto Rada 11) Re: vintage flying by John & Allison Cyganowski 12) The Bf-10... Word (was: vintage flying) by kevinkim@interlog.com (barrett) 13) Re: Mail Order by bucky@mail.prolog.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) 14) Off topic: Carlos's taboo topic by "Scott M. Head" 15) Re: vintage flying, slightly back on-topic by "Rob" 16) Re: vintage flying, slightly back on-topic -Reply by Peter Mitchell 17) Re: Off topic: Carlos's taboo topic by "William B. Bacon, Jr." 18) Re: Internal ply panels by Mick Fauchon 19) Re: Internal ply panels by Mick Fauchon 20) Re: Off topic: Carlos's taboo topic by Hirohisa Ozaki 21) Help! by lothar@televar.com (mark) 22) Re: Off topic: Carlos's taboo topic by bshatzer@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) 23) Re: Off topic: Carlos's taboo topic -Reply by Peter Mitchell 24) RE: JEAN NAVARRE by bshatzer@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) 25) Re: Off topic: Carlos's taboo topic by Mick Fauchon ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 08:15:37 +0000 From: "TIM" To: wwi Subject: Re: Internal ply panels Message-ID: <199710131518.LAA15547@pease1.sr.unh.edu> I have used this method and it works very well! TIM ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 10:36:17 -0500 From: "huggins@onramp.net" To: wwi Subject: Re: Internal ply panels Message-ID: >Another " anal " contribution on this subject > >You can use real wood too - snip Check out the Cigars in the Tabacco shops. There are several types that come in aluminum or plastic tubes. In these tubes are sheets of very thin wood. I have used these in the past to do not only the insides but the fuselage of a Alb. The panels can be cut to size and glued down with contact cement or ca. Ask the shop owner about the makes and see if he/she would eith er save the empty's or get you in contact with one of his customers that uses them. John Disclaimer: Any errors in spelling, tact, or fact are transmission errors. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:41:44 +0000 From: "Rob" To: wwi Subject: Re: Internal ply panels Message-ID: <199710131550.LAA01215@mcfeely.concentric.net> I could help. Rob Johnson > Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 05:35:06 -0400 > Reply-to: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu > From: Suvoroff@aol.com > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: Internal ply panels > Mr. Fauchon posed the interrogatory; > "Am I the only ship modeller on this list?" > To which I foolishly reply; > "No". > Though the shipmodels I do (1/1200 warships of the 1890's) generally fall > outside of the normal techniques and materials associated with traditional > shipmodelling. > > I am corresponding with the Musee de la Marine and while they replied to my > missive in English (thank goodness!) there are forms they sent me in French > which I cannot, alas, read. I know this is off topic, but is there some > French speaking gentleman who could assist me with a little translation I > would most appreciate it. I am trying to order some photographs and plans. > > Yours, > James D. Gray > > nl. KIXI AM > nr. German Air Power in World War I > nb. Eduard Albatros D.V > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 11:57:06 +0000 From: "Paul Schwartzkopf" To: wwi Subject: Re: Fokker D.VIII Message-ID: <199710131658.LAA09306@tscrypt1.transcrypt.com> Paul H. wrote: > OK, I'll bite. What is AMS and why would it prevent your using the > kit markings. Advanced Modelers' Syndrome--prevents one from building out-of-box, and forces you to add details, etc. > The Windsock plans are highly suspect in my opinion, and they are the > ones that were used to master the DML kit.... Eduard kit is a lot tougher > to build, but the shape is closer to the real thing. Could be, but my philosophy lately is "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush". Since I have the DML kit, and not the Eduard, I will build the DML kit. With all the new kits coming out, I have to spread my hobby money out, and purchasing models I already have, but by a different vendor, will over-run my already stressed budget. Just my personal preference. Paul A. Schwartzkopf =================================================================== Development Engineer--Software Transcrypt International, Inc. Telephone: (402) 474-4800 E-Mail: pauls@transcrypt.com =================================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 13:11:43 -0400 From: Carlos Valdes To: wwi Subject: AMS Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971013171143.006a57c8@conted.swann.gatech.edu> AMS: Advanced Modeling (or is it Modeller's?) Syndrome; a malady that strikes some in our hobby, leading them to eschew the out-of-the-box "leave well enough alone" approach and instead indulge in all sorts of minute modifications and scratchbuilding in an effort (some would say futile) to produce a perfect replica of the original subject. Off-topic BTW: a report just reached me that the last flyable ME-109 crashed in England; the good news is that the pilot is OK and the machine is slvageable. Another argument against flying old warbirds. Carlos ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:31:20 -0700 From: mgoodwin To: wwi Subject: Re: Imries-Pictorial History of the German Army Air Service 1914-1918 Message-ID: <34427708.7F05@ricochet.net> Graham Nash wrote: > > This is in a 2nd hand bookshop for GBP7.50. D/J a bit tatty. > > Anyone like me to try and get it for them? Graham, This may seem a silly question, but how much do you think it might be to send it over the Pond? Riordan ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 16:23:54 -0400 From: Geoff Smith To: "INTERNET:wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu" Subject: Re: AMS Message-ID: <199710131624_MC2-23C5-5998@compuserve.com> Carlos Valdes writes: > Off-topic BTW: a report just reached me that the last flyable ME-109 >crashed in England; the good news is that the pilot is OK and the machin= e is >slvageable. Another argument against flying old warbirds. Carlos Picked up this report: Aviation experts are to launch a full-scale investigation after a top RAF officer narrowly missed crashing a Second World War German fighter plane into a motorway. = The Department of Transport's Air Accident Investigation Branch had planned to rely on a written report of Sunday's accident from the pilot, Air Chief Marshall Sir John Allison, Commander-in-Chief of RAF Strike Command. = But officials today changed their minds and decided to question Sir Jo= hn about the incident, at Duxford, Cambridgeshire, and examine the wreckage = of the crashed Messerschmitt 109. = A Department of Transport spokeswoman said AAIB officials decided they= wanted a fuller report. Initially they had planned to ask Sir John to fil= l in a standard accident form because no one was injured. = "Inspectors will now examine the plane and talk to the pilot about the= accident," said the spokeswoman. = The Messerschmitt was the last Second World War German combat plane in= flying condition. = It was making its last flight at an air show at the Imperial War Museu= m at Duxford before going on to become a static exhibit at the RAF Museum i= n Hendon, north London. = Sir John was making the last flight of the final Duxford airshow of th= e summer before thousands of spectators when the plane bounced on the runwa= y over the M11 and landed upside down in a farmer's field. = Some eyewitnesses said they thought Sir John, who flies vintage aircra= ft in his spare time, was travelling too fast as he came into land. Others said there appeared to be something wrong with the plane. = Duxford officials prevented reporters from questioning Sir John, who w= as unscathed, about the crash. = The wreckage of the aircraft has been recovered from the field and is now at Duxford. It is thought that it could be many months before the pla= ne is restored. = Sorry to disagree, Carlos, but this and many, many restored aircraft had been completely rebuilt and could almost be said to be "new". If you take= accidents as a criterion for not flying, where does that leave many "new"modern combat aircraft? Where does it leave airshows and at what poi= nt do you say an aircraft should no longer fly? Are the F-117s going to stay= grounded for ever because of a crash? No. The simple fact is that things break or stop working at the wrong time or people make mistakes and the only way to stop air crashes is to stop everything flying. = Cheers, Geoff ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 14:59:42 -0700 From: Charles Hart To: wwi Subject: vintage flying Message-ID: > Carlos Valdes writes: > > >> Off-topic BTW: a report just reached me that the last flyable >ME-109 >>crashed in England; the good news is that the pilot is OK and the machin= >e >is >>slvageable. Another argument against flying old warbirds. > Carlos > >Picked up this report: > > Aviation experts are to launch a full-scale investigation after a top >RAF officer narrowly missed crashing a Second World War German fighter >plane into a motorway. = > > The Department of Transport's Air Accident Investigation Branch had >planned to rely on a written report of Sunday's accident from the pilot, >Air Chief Marshall Sir John Allison, Commander-in-Chief of RAF Strike >Command. = <<<<>>>> > >Sorry to disagree, Carlos, but this and many, many restored aircraft had >been completely rebuilt and could almost be said to be "new". If you take= > >accidents as a criterion for not flying, where does that leave many >"new"modern combat aircraft? Where does it leave airshows and at what poi= >nt >do you say an aircraft should no longer fly? Are the F-117s going to stay= > >grounded for ever because of a crash? No. The simple fact is that things >break or stop working at the wrong time or people make mistakes and the >only way to stop air crashes is to stop everything flying. = > > >Cheers, > >Geoff Threateningly off topic here as it were. The attitude in the Warbird community strikes me as "we'll fly 'em till we break 'em" which includes scouring museums for serviceable engines and parts. Well OK, we can rebuild these things and re-manufacture parts when vintage spare bits are no longer available. Unquestionably with unlimited dollars, pounds, marks or yen anyone can keep a 50+ year old military airplane in the air. True, things will break at inconvenient times and there is also that unfortunate tendancy to break things so badly that there isn't much to recover or rebuild, including the pilot. However, these things aren't being flown over uninhabited desert 100% of the time and when they are flown near populated areas they draw a crowd, including myself. its wonderful to see these things fly and hear the noise of a vintage engine. However, just as spare parts become scarcer and scarcer for these machines, the number of people alive that flew these things on a daily, routine basis becomes equally scarce and will become extinct before too much longer. There are lots of capable people out there to fly these vintage machines, no question, but putting them thorugh their paces in front of hundreds or thousands of people by someone relatively less experienced on type to put the plane through such a routine decidedly increases the risk factor for something going wrong and for that accident to have fatal consequences. The take home message here is , maybe we should consider keeping more than a few of these valuable vintage aircraft on the ground. Fire them up once and a while, taxi them if you will and maybe do a circut of the field, but to simulate air combat of 50 or more years ago perhaps becomes too risky as machine age increases. Sure, the Duxford museum will have the 109 on display sometime in the future, but now with a lot of re-manufactured parts. So what are we seeing when we go there a "real" 109 or a "replicated" 109 with some original bits ? Soapbox mode off. Charles hartc@spot.colorado.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 19:19:24 -0400 From: John & Allison Cyganowski To: wwi Subject: Re: Internal ply panels Message-ID: <3442AC7C.12C@worldnet.att.net> Suvoroff@aol.com wrote: > > Mr. Fauchon posed the interrogatory; > "Am I the only ship modeller on this list?" > To which I foolishly reply; > "No". > Though the shipmodels I do (1/1200 warships of the 1890's) generally fall > outside of the normal techniques and materials associated with traditional > shipmodelling. > > I am corresponding with the Musee de la Marine and while they replied to my > missive in English (thank goodness!) there are forms they sent me in French > which I cannot, alas, read. I know this is off topic, but is there some > French speaking gentleman who could assist me with a little translation I > would most appreciate it. I am trying to order some photographs and plans. > > Yours, > James D. Gray > > nl. KIXI AM > nr. German Air Power in World War I > nb. Eduard Albatros D.V I work with a French guy (from France!). I might be able to arrange some help. Let me know. Cyg ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 19:29:29 -0400 From: Alberto Rada To: wwi Subject: Re: Rene Dorme's #12 Nie.17 Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19971013192929.006d1cbc@pop.true.net> Hi Riordan The model is the Hobby Craft 1/32, Americal Gryphon's decals come with a very complete booklet with some information on the planes, there are two of Dorme's planes included, this and a Spad VII, the machine where he was probably killed. This machine ( the Nie.17 ) serial unknown was suposedly painted in the silver whitish dope . SALUDOS ALBERTO At 11:17 PM 12-10-97 -0400, you wrote: > >Alberto, > >Nice 17s! Which model did you use for this? I have an issue of WINGS >with pictures of Dorme in a camoflaged (black bordered white >numerals/white stork) #12 Nie.17. Any info on this one? > >Cheers, > >Riordan > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 20:08:32 -0400 From: John & Allison Cyganowski To: wwi Subject: Re: vintage flying Message-ID: <3442B800.550F@worldnet.att.net> Charles Hart wrote: > > > Carlos Valdes writes: > > > > > >> Off-topic BTW: a report just reached me that the last flyable > >ME-109 > >>crashed in England; the good news is that the pilot is OK and the machin= > >e > >is > >>slvageable. Another argument against flying old warbirds. > > Carlos > > > >Picked up this report: > > > > Aviation experts are to launch a full-scale investigation after a top > >RAF officer narrowly missed crashing a Second World War German fighter > >plane into a motorway. = > > > > The Department of Transport's Air Accident Investigation Branch had > >planned to rely on a written report of Sunday's accident from the pilot, > >Air Chief Marshall Sir John Allison, Commander-in-Chief of RAF Strike > >Command. = > > <<<<>>>> > > > >Sorry to disagree, Carlos, but this and many, many restored aircraft had > >been completely rebuilt and could almost be said to be "new". If you take= > > > >accidents as a criterion for not flying, where does that leave many > >"new"modern combat aircraft? Where does it leave airshows and at what poi= > >nt > >do you say an aircraft should no longer fly? Are the F-117s going to stay= > > > >grounded for ever because of a crash? No. The simple fact is that things > >break or stop working at the wrong time or people make mistakes and the > >only way to stop air crashes is to stop everything flying. = > > > > > >Cheers, > > > >Geoff > > Threateningly off topic here as it were. The attitude in the Warbird > community strikes me as "we'll fly 'em till we break 'em" which includes > scouring museums for serviceable engines and parts. Well OK, we can > rebuild these things and re-manufacture parts when vintage spare bits are > no longer available. Unquestionably with unlimited dollars, pounds, marks > or yen anyone can keep a 50+ year old military airplane in the air. True, > things will break at inconvenient times and there is also that unfortunate > tendancy to break things so badly that there isn't much to recover or > rebuild, including the pilot. However, these things aren't being flown > over uninhabited desert 100% of the time and when they are flown near > populated areas they draw a crowd, including myself. its wonderful to see > these things fly and hear the noise of a vintage engine. However, just as > spare parts become scarcer and scarcer for these machines, the number of > people alive that flew these things on a daily, routine basis becomes > equally scarce and will become extinct before too much longer. There are > lots of capable people out there to fly these vintage machines, no > question, but putting them thorugh their paces in front of hundreds or > thousands of people by someone relatively less experienced on type to put > the plane through such a routine decidedly increases the risk factor for > something going wrong and for that accident to have fatal consequences. > > The take home message here is , maybe we should consider keeping more > than a few of these valuable vintage aircraft on the ground. Fire them up > once and a while, taxi them if you will and maybe do a circut of the field, > but to simulate air combat of 50 or more years ago perhaps becomes too > risky as machine age increases. > > Sure, the Duxford museum will have the 109 on display sometime in the > future, but now with a lot of re-manufactured parts. So what are we seeing > when we go there a "real" 109 or a "replicated" 109 with some original bits > ? > > Soapbox mode off. > > Charles > > hartc@spot.colorado.edu Let me add 2 cents to this discussion (or should it be 2 Pfennigs?). I have heard both sides of this argument. Let us remember that these "warbirds" have been restored by private individuals at great cost to themselves and their backers. If these people want to risk these incredible investments in such a foolhardy manner, I say let them! As far as flying over populated areas is concerned... Don't buy a house near an airport if you are concerned. We elect public officials to deal with these safety issues so let them do their jobs. I think we should have approved flight plans for airshows. If I want to see an "artifact" then I will certainly visit the Air & Space Museum or the Air Force Museum. These kinds of institutions will insure that I and my children can see these originals, and that scholarly research can be done. As far as banning private initiative, I say absolutely not. I have sat in the pilots and bombardier's position of "Box Car". It was the thrill of a lifetime. But I would still like to see "Fifi" in flight. If we open the door to prohibitive regulation, how far do we carry it? Does this mean that Rhinebeck could no longer fly the Hanriot or Bleriot? That would be a sad day. Okay, this is actually $5.00 worth. I am not claiming I am right, just opinionated. P.S. Check out the Policarpov site on the IMPS web site. These guys are going to fly a Bf-109 E with a Diamler-Benz Engine! Doesn't that make your heart skip a beat? Doesn't Chino fly a real BF-109G once a year? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 21:27:52 -0500 From: kevinkim@interlog.com (barrett) To: wwi Subject: The Bf-10... Word (was: vintage flying) Message-ID: Aaaaaak! > >P.S. Check out the Policarpov site on the IMPS web site. These guys >are going to fly >a Bf-109 E with a Diamler-Benz Engine! Doesn't that make your heart skip >a beat? >Doesn't Chino fly a real BF-109G once a year? He said the word! He said the word! Not once, but twice! Make him stop! (Yes I know this was part of a serious thread - no offense intended - but still!) Kevin Barrett BTW: A minor hand operation and a pending vacation (aaaah!) have conspired to defer work on the 1/48 Fok Dr.I. More on developments later. nb: Fok Dr.I nu: Lots of SE5as In the future: Gotta finish all those half-built machines! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 22:56:02 -0400 From: bucky@mail.prolog.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) To: wwi, Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Mail Order Message-ID: <199710140256.WAA16755@pease1.sr.unh.edu> At 10:21 AM 10/10/97 -0400, TPTPUMPER@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 97-10-10 08:54:52 EDT, you write: > >> I have had numerous occasions to deal with Barry at Rosemont Hobby and >> while other mail order sources may be good (or even excellent) it's hard >to >> imagine how any could be better. Ira Nice model of the Floh...a truly but-ugly airplane, however ;-) Mike Muth ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 23:03:44 -0600 From: "Scott M. Head" To: wwi Subject: Off topic: Carlos's taboo topic Message-ID: <9710132303.aa18183@mail.iapc.net> Carlos, > > Off-topic BTW: a report just reached me that the last flyable ME-109 >crashed in England; the good news is that the pilot is OK and the machine is >slvageable. Another argument against flying old warbirds. > Carlos Would that be Black 6 of Duxford? Cheers! Scott M. Head IPMS/Houston IPMS/USA 32841 smh@iapc.net IPMS/Houston Scale Model Forum: http://web-hou.iapc.net/~smh ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 22:44:43 +0000 From: "Rob" To: wwi Subject: Re: vintage flying, slightly back on-topic Message-ID: <199710140453.AAA16598@marconi.concentric.net> I have to back my comrade Charles on this question. The "fly-'em-til-they-break" laissez-faire attitude is one reason why there are so few WW1 planes around. Many were wrecked in war movies and in accidents that resulted when they were sold as high-performance sport planes, often to owners with no experience with the technology (notably, the rotary engine). A war bird that is flown is a warbird that will never make it to posterity. It will eventually break up or burn out so badly that nothing authentic is left. Then it won't be around for detail and cockpit shots when some future Rimmel decides to create a datafile on it. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 15:29:49 +1000 From: Peter Mitchell To: wwi Subject: Re: vintage flying, slightly back on-topic -Reply Message-ID: I too must agree with Charles and Rob, Too many beautiful and often rare planes have been lost performing things they shouldn't be doing at air-shows. I don't mind them so much if they fly a circuit or just taxi around, but when they start doing aerobatics it's just irresponsible (and perhaps they shouldn't fly some of them at all). These things are irreplacable and I believe those lucky enough to be in possession of such have a responsibility to provide good stewardship. I still have memories of the last Blenhiem cartwheeling along an airfield, add to this the lightning and mosquito that were lost not long ago and this recent Bf 109 incident. What if the Smithsonian decided to fly the newly restored Albatros at an air-show? It would be great to see, but would you risk it? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 00:42:36 -0500 From: "William B. Bacon, Jr." To: wwi Subject: Re: Off topic: Carlos's taboo topic Message-ID: <3443064C.3388@netjava.net> Scott M. Head wrote: > > Carlos, > > > > Off-topic BTW: a report just reached me that the last flyable ME-109 > >crashed in England; the good news is that the pilot is OK and the machine is > >slvageable. Another argument against flying old warbirds. > > Carlos > Yes it would. Soap box time. As a life member of both the Confederate Air Foce and the Canadian Warplane Heritage, a properly maintained aircraft flown by a competent proficient pilot, with emphasis on all adjectives, is no more dangerous than any other. I agree that some private owners hve acted or seem to have acted irresponsibly. Micheal J. O'LLeary, self appointed, self anointed god of all things with wings would have you believe otherwise. I agree that the owner has a right to do anything he wants with the a/c so long as it endangers nobody. "Black 6" was properly maintained and the Air Chief Marshal pilot was undoubtedly competent but was he proficient in the A/C? I have three good friends who probally have more total hour combined on the Spanish version than other group of the same size and they say that the a/c is just waiting to do you in. The a/c is no Spitfire, Hurricane or jet. We talk of static display. How about the museums in San Diego, Connecticut, Kermit Weeks collection? I also remembe the fire at Hamilton that destroyed the CWH's Hurricane and the CAF's Spitfire Mk XI. I was fortunate to spend several years with the Spitfire and it's was a great personal blow. Just a puddle of aluminum. Cole Palen, in his lifetime, did much for us. If you haven't been to Rhinebeck, make it a point to go soon. Each a/c that goes down brings the same wails and moans. Soap box off. Cheers, Bill B. Would that be Black 6 of Duxford? > > Cheers! > > Scott M. Head > IPMS/Houston > IPMS/USA 32841 > smh@iapc.net > > IPMS/Houston Scale Model Forum: http://web-hou.iapc.net/~smh ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 15:44:07 +1000 (EST) From: Mick Fauchon To: wwi Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Internal ply panels Message-ID: David, > Do you do Napoleonic period 74's Cutters and the like - Do I what!? But not 74s........they,re too bloody big and take too much time. I have to admit that my preference is for *real* ships, i.e. sail, but I really don't have time to give them as much attention as I'd like. Ah, so many ships....so little time 80( Cheers, Mick. -- -- Mick Fauchon | Internet: ulmjf@dewey.newcastle.edu.au Reference Section, Auchmuty Library | Ph (intl+61+49) 215861 University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA | Fax (intl+61+49) 215833 MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM M M M Tasmanian Devil: "#@%!&^*%%...!#@!&**%^@@#$#-+*+*&##@...!!" M M M M Yosemite Sam : "Cut out that Army talk!..Yer in the Navy now!" M M M MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 15:52:59 +1000 (EST) From: Mick Fauchon To: wwi Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Internal ply panels Message-ID: OK, Tim, > I have used this method and it works very well! We'll bite: which method was it? Mick. Mick Fauchon | Internet: ulmjf@dewey.newcastle.edu.au Reference Section, Auchmuty Library | Ph (intl+61+49) 215861 University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA | Fax (intl+61+49) 215833 MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM M M M Tasmanian Devil: "#@%!&^*%%...!#@!&**%^@@#$#-+*+*&##@...!!" M M M M Yosemite Sam : "Cut out that Army talk!..Yer in the Navy now!" M M M MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 15:08:53 +0900 From: Hirohisa Ozaki To: wwi Subject: Re: Off topic: Carlos's taboo topic Message-ID: <199710140608.PAA02791@zoo.miln.mei.co.jp> What is "soap box time"? Hiro. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 23:24:10 -0700 (PDT) From: lothar@televar.com (mark) To: wwi Subject: Help! Message-ID: <199710140624.XAA21696@concord.televar.com> Gentlemen - Was wondering if any of you out there might have some spare Superscale (or equivalent) black decal film that you'd be willing to part with for a reasonable price. When I went in to the local (100 miles away) hobby shop today, the clerk told me Superscale had discontinued production of decal film, and he doubted he could get any more from his wholesaler. My current project won't grind to a halt completely because of this, but it will slow things down considerably. So any assistance would be greatly appreciated. And Barry - if Rosemont has some of this, let me know and I'll order a few sheets. TIA, Mark ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 23:20:58 -0700 From: bshatzer@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) To: wwi Subject: Re: Off topic: Carlos's taboo topic Message-ID: <199710140620.AA14427@ednet1.orednet.org> Hiro spake: >What is "soap box time"? Ah, the idioms of the English language. It refers to expounding long and hard on one's own personal opinions. The phrase originates with the supposed propensity of early public speakers to stand upon a soap box (a wooden crate for shipping soap) while addressing the assembled crowd. Thus, "soap box time" would mean "time for me to climb on my soap box and express my personal opinions to the assembled multitude." (Boy! Is THIS off topic!) Cheers and all that, -- Bill Shatzer - bshatzer@orednet.org "All generalizations are dangerous, even this one." Alexandre Dumas ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 16:34:07 +1000 From: Peter Mitchell To: wwi Subject: Re: Off topic: Carlos's taboo topic -Reply Message-ID: >>> Hirohisa Ozaki 14/October/1997 04:15pm >>> What is "soap box time"? Hiro, soap box refers to just that, a box that soap was supplied in. In years gone by, soap came in large wooden boxes and people who wanted to express their views publically would often stand on them in public places as sort of a platform from which to speak. "soap box time" basically refers to someone expressing their opinion, possbly in difference to what others hold to be true. Pete. :-) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 00:18:53 -0700 From: bshatzer@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) To: wwi Subject: RE: JEAN NAVARRE Message-ID: <199710140718.AA26193@ednet1.orednet.org> Jim Mordal, if that is his real name, writes: > >Hi all, >In your vast libraries do any of you have any good books that mention >the French Ace Jean Navarre. I have several already but would like >whatever is out there and would rather not not have to play hit or >miss. Any info at all would be greatly appreciated. The old Harleyford book, "Air Aces of the 1914-1918 War" has a two page biography of Navarre which is basically accurate as near as I can determine. Poor fellow - ended up absolutely, positively ga-ga and, ultimately, every bit as much a KIA as if he had been shot down in flames over Verdun. Cheers and all that, -- Bill Shatzer - bshatzer@orednet.org "All generalizations are dangerous, even this one." Alexandre Dumas ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 18:12:54 +1000 (EST) From: Mick Fauchon To: wwi Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Off topic: Carlos's taboo topic Message-ID: Bill, > Thus, "soap box time" would mean "time for me to climb on > my soap box and express my personal opinions to the assembled > multitude." > > (Boy! Is THIS off topic!) Not really. I'm sure each one of us is equipped with his own soap-box 80) Cheers, Mick. -- -- Mick Fauchon | Internet: ulmjf@dewey.newcastle.edu.au Reference Section, Auchmuty Library | Ph (intl+61+49) 215861 University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA | Fax (intl+61+49) 215833 MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM M M M Tasmanian Devil: "#@%!&^*%%...!#@!&**%^@@#$#-+*+*&##@...!!" M M M M Yosemite Sam : "Cut out that Army talk!..Yer in the Navy now!" M M M MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 708 *********************