WWI Digest 1911 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: First Vac by Mike Fletcher 2) Re: Zen and the Art of Vac Building by David & Carol Fletcher 3) RE: Zen and the Art of Vac Building by "Chris Banyai-Riepl" 4) Re: Zen and the Art of Vac Building by Albatrosdv@aol.com 5) another future ? was Re: Free Modeling!! by Ernest Thomas 6) Re: Vac kits comments by Ernest Thomas 7) PC-10 Opinions on Snipe by Brent & Tina Theobald 8) PC-10 Analysis ot by Brent & Tina Theobald 9) Re: PC-10 Opinions on Snipe by Ernest Thomas 10) Re: First Vac by "Bob Pearson" 11) Re: PC-10 Opinions on Snipe by "PETER LEONARD" 12) Re: Vac kits comments by Brent & Tina Theobald 13) Re: Zen and the Art of Vac Building by Brent & Tina Theobald 14) Re: PC-10 Analysis ot by KarrArt@aol.com 15) RE: PC-10 Opinions on Snipe by Shane Weier 16) Re: First Vac by Mike Fletcher 17) New weapon by smperry@mindspring.com 18) Re: New weapon by KarrArt@aol.com 19) Wings 48 Decals by "PETER LEONARD" 20) Wings 48 Decals by "PETER LEONARD" 21) Re: another future ? was Re: Free Modeling!! by Albatrosdv@aol.com 22) Re: another future ? was Re: Free Modeling!! by Ernest Thomas 23) Re: another future ? was Re: Free Modeling!! by "DAVID BURKE" 24) Gerry McO by Mick Fauchon 25) Re: New weapon by "Bob Pearson" 26) Re: Decal paper and frisk film by "Tom Werner Hansen" 27) Re:Vacs and the Koster Fokker DVIII by "Gerald P. McOSker" 28) Re: PC-10 Opinions on Snipe by bucky@ptdprolog.net 29) RE: Re:Vacs and the Koster Fokker DVIII by "dfernet0" 30) Vac kits comments VERSION 3.0 by "dfernet0" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 19:19:34 -0400 From: Mike Fletcher To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: First Vac Message-ID: <37FD2A86.4AEF5F84@home.com> Matthew E Bittner wrote: > ... > Oh, and hey Barry? Now that I have your attention, why not come out with > a Breguet 5 and a Nieuport 14? ;-) I can even supply a decent (imnsho) set of drawings for the 14... in exchange for a review sample of course -- Mike Fletcher ___ ., mdf@mars.ark.com |-\|^----! ; nieuport@home.com |--n--""*" mikef@sparc.nic.bc.ca @ icq=19554083 Black holes are where God divided by zero. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 16:08:41 -0700 From: David & Carol Fletcher To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Zen and the Art of Vac Building Message-ID: <37FD27F9.6FD@mars.ark.com> hanriot@my-deja.com wrote: "My vote for an ideal first vac kit would be (ot alert!) the Dynavector Wyvern. It's about the closest thing to a perfect kit (vac or injection) I've ever encountered." I second the motion - just don't try the ID Models Wyvern by mistake!!! The only disadvantage to Dynavector is the cost. Bang for the buck, I still recommend starting with an MPM vacform. If you want to be weaned gently into the esoteric art of vacformed kits, try the Aeroclub [another "ot" Alert!] D.H. Dragon Rapide. It has injection wings and tail and a vacform fuselage. The only real complication is making the %$#@*& cabin windows fit. My vote for a beginner OT vacform would be a Fokker DVIII, although I'm not familiar with the available kit(s). I am a confirmed vacform enthusiast, it's the perfect combination of modern medium and ancient skills. Dave Fletcher "Wars don't determine who is right, so much as who is left" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 17:49:21 -0700 From: "Chris Banyai-Riepl" To: Subject: RE: Zen and the Art of Vac Building Message-ID: <000f01bf1126$f59d4f20$5f5a33d1@chris> > My vote for an ideal first vac kit would be (ot alert!) > the Dynavector Wyvern. It's about the closest thing to > a perfect kit (vac or injection) I've ever encountered. > HTH, > For a first vac kit, I've heard that the Wyvern is an excellent choice, but if you're just getting into vacs, I would recommend starting off with a conversion for an injection kit first. Here you have all the "fears" of a full kit, but a lot less out of pocket expense. There probably isn't very much in the way of WWI vac conversions, but there are plenty in the off-topic world. My first vac was a -3N conversion nose for the old Monogram F7F Tigercat to turn it into a night fighter. In working with this small vac conversion, I was able to get away from the fear of vacuforms and went on to do several full kits. Then I graduated high school, went to college, got married, and haven't touched a vac since. Gotta change that soon.... Chris Banyai-Riepl Publisher/Editor Internet Modeler http://www.internetmodeler.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 20:49:32 EDT From: Albatrosdv@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Zen and the Art of Vac Building Message-ID: <0.fb8973bd.252e999c@aol.com> In a message dated 99-10-07 20:29:13 EDT, you write: << The only disadvantage to Dynavector is the cost. Bang for the buck, I still recommend starting with an MPM vacform. Idon't know where the MPMs are these days, but as someone who has done vacs since 1971, I would not call them simple. If you want to be weaned gently into the esoteric art of vacformed kits, try the Aeroclub [another "ot" Alert!] D.H. Dragon Rapide. It has injection wings and tail and a vacform fuselage. The only real complication is making the %$#@*& cabin windows fit. Weaned? Gently? With this??? No way!!! I have done two of them and they exercised every ounce of advanced skill I could bring to the project!!! My vote for a beginner OT vacform would be a Fokker DVIII, although I'm not familiar with the available kit(s). >> Bill Koster's Fokker D.VIII is the way to go. Tom ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 20:19:19 -0500 From: Ernest Thomas To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: another future ? was Re: Free Modeling!! Message-ID: <37FD4697.BAC@bellsouth.net> Albatrosdv@aol.com wrote: > > Guys: > > Just wanted to let you know that there is an opportunity for you to do some > "free" modeling, in either OT or "ot" topics - a chance to increase the stash > without having the wife complain about where the money went! > Oh, if only I were able to commit to having something finished in two months. Hell, if I could commit to having something started in two months. So now that I've let this Future dry overnight, I'm gonna apply the decals. What will happen if I then spray Testors Dullcoat, or Humbrol Satin, or Pactra Clear Flat Acrylic over the Future? What would be the best, as far as not ending up an unmitigated disaster? E. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 20:21:11 -0500 From: Ernest Thomas To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Vac kits comments Message-ID: <37FD4707.77D5@bellsouth.net> Courtney Allen wrote: > > I have found that filling sections with milliput epoxy putty works very > will. R, This is what I had in mind this morning, only instead of filling, I was thinking more along the lines of making formers from epoxy putty worms. E. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 20:19:58 -0700 From: Brent & Tina Theobald To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: PC-10 Opinions on Snipe Message-ID: <37FD62DD.1B6A72A3@airmail.net> I posted a picture of my Snipes under construction at: http://web2.airmail.net/theobat1/snipe.jpg I am interested in what ya'll think of the PC-10. I have never tried to get "accurate" PC-10 before, but I think it ought to be more brown. What do you think? Brent -- ************************************* They’ve got us surrounded, the poor bastards! ************************************* ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 20:22:25 -0700 From: Brent & Tina Theobald To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: PC-10 Analysis ot Message-ID: <37FD6371.8E360FCA@airmail.net> In case anyone is interested in what is under the green folder in the picture... It is a '92 25th Anniversary Z28 convertable. (I know. Who cares?) Brent -- ************************************* They’ve got us surrounded, the poor bastards! ************************************* ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 20:29:43 -0500 From: Ernest Thomas To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: PC-10 Opinions on Snipe Message-ID: <37FD4907.1A5A@bellsouth.net> Brent & Tina Theobald wrote: > What do you think? Not that my opinion matters, but I think it needs to be darker. E. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 18:27:06 -0700 From: "Bob Pearson" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: First Vac Message-ID: <199910080142.SAA25910@mail.rapidnet.net> The Nieuport Twins said . . .. >> Oh, and hey Barry? Now that I have your attention, why not come out with >> a Breguet 5 and a Nieuport 14? ;-) > I can even supply a decent (imnsho) set of drawings for the 14... > in exchange for a review sample of course And I know where some Breguet V markings can be found Bob ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 18:36:19 PDT From: "PETER LEONARD" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: PC-10 Opinions on Snipe Message-ID: <19991008013619.12000.qmail@hotmail.com> Brent, though I favour a darker shade myself I have a story I always trot out whenever anyone gets a little too "anal" about colours (I love that word, I hope it's a fair trade for "bollocks") In 1980 I was serving at Royal Air Force Akrotiri in Cyprus when 56 sqn came out for armament practice. They brought with them the first of the RAF's very ot F4 Phantoms to be painted in the then new grey scheme. Walking down the flight line it was noticable that no two of these freshly painted aeroplanes were the same colour. Your PC10 looks fine to me. Peter NB Wings 48 S2A2 ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 20:50:11 -0700 From: Brent & Tina Theobald To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Vac kits comments Message-ID: <37FD69F3.DC38D53F@airmail.net> Len Smith wrote: > Brent, you wrote > > > Scaleplanes: I consider these kits to vary from extremely difficult to > nearly > > impossible. > > Interesting. I have built many of these with no problems, I should be > pleased to learn which are the nearly impossible. I may be confusing them with Rareplanes. Every one I have seen is REALLY bad. They are what I consider a box o' pain. Brent -- ************************************* They’ve got us surrounded, the poor bastards! ************************************* ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 20:55:45 -0700 From: Brent & Tina Theobald To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Zen and the Art of Vac Building Message-ID: <37FD6B41.E755170D@airmail.net> Howdy! hanriot@my-deja.com wrote: > For anyone > contemplating taking the advice to do an ID or Combat > Go-229 as a first vac, unless it's your favorite > airplane in the whole world, and you absolutely need it > in 1/32, DON'T DO IT!!! I know I mentioned it in the same message, but I meant the AirModel kit. Truly simple and good fit. Everyone should approach an ID/Combat kit carefully. In fact, be sure you sneak up on it. Later! Brent ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 22:29:45 EDT From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: PC-10 Analysis ot Message-ID: <0.5b1c3e76.252eb119@aol.com> In a message dated 10/7/99 6:29:27 PM Pacific Daylight Time, theobat1@airmail.net writes: << In case anyone is interested in what is under the green folder in the picture... It is a '92 25th Anniversary Z28 convertable. (I know. Who cares?) Brent >> Well...not to be insane about it or anything, but, yeah, maybe a bit browner might get it...BUT......maybe it IS anyway- can't be certain how we're seeing it out here in electro-land Your next project ought to be a model of the Z28 with a models of models of unfinished Snipes sitting on it! RK ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 12:56:10 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: PC-10 Opinions on Snipe Message-ID: <65C968E11318D311B0BD0060B06865CD475BEE@mimhexch.mim.com.au> Brent, > I am interested in what ya'll think of the PC-10. I have > never tried to get "accurate" PC-10 before, but I think > it ought to be more brown. > > What do you think? How close to the actual models do these photos look on *your* screen. Lighting at the time you photograph and the colour balance at processing (if scanned from photos) might well change the look significantly. OTOH the colours look "within the range" to me - as I see it on my laptop. I might paint a trifle darker and browner but that's *only* my preference, not an academic opinion, and a lighter colour will probably look better on a dinky scale model anyway. Don't get too worried about the precise colour, since it's known to have varied by time of manufacture, and quite possibly by place of manufacture, length of service, or pilots girlfriends name. Shane (Models looking good so far BTW) ************************************************************** The information contained in this E-Mail is confidential and is intended only for the use of the addressee(s). If you receive this E-Mail in error, any use, distribution or copying of this E-Mail is not permitted. You are requested to forward unwanted E-Mail and address any problems to the MIM Holdings Limited Help Desk. E-Mail: helpdesk@mim.com.au or phone: Australia 07 3833 8042. ************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 23:06:51 -0400 From: Mike Fletcher To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: First Vac Message-ID: <37FD5FCB.5A79F736@home.com> Not to mention squadron markings for the 14... Bob Pearson wrote: > > The Nieuport Twins said . . .. > > >> Oh, and hey Barry? Now that I have your attention, why not come out with > >> a Breguet 5 and a Nieuport 14? ;-) > > I can even supply a decent (imnsho) set of drawings for the 14... > > in exchange for a review sample of course > > And I know where some Breguet V markings can be found > > Bob -- Mike Fletcher ___ ., mdf@mars.ark.com |-\|^----! ; nieuport@home.com |--n--""*" mikef@sparc.nic.bc.ca @ icq=19554083 Black holes are where God divided by zero. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 23:15:44 -0400 From: smperry@mindspring.com To: "Multiple recipients of list" Subject: New weapon Message-ID: <004801bf113b$694f2380$c52c45cf@default> I've been playing with some acrylic artists paints thinned with future and I'm having some promising results. I put the II'lya away for another short break and decided to build the Toko Berg D.1 straight out of the box. I painted the wood interior and the wood bottom with a mix of unbleached titanium, raw & burnt siena. I was able to brush paint a very nice wood surface with only a little practice. I will try to mix a CDL and airbrush it on the lower surfaces of the wings & stab tomorrow. I'll either report or whine, stay tuned ;-) sp E-mail smperry@mindspring.com Web Site http://smperry.home.mindspring.com/PWWIP.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 23:33:19 EDT From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: New weapon Message-ID: <0.46c96e0f.252ebfff@aol.com> In a message dated 10/7/99 8:16:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time, smperry@mindspring.com writes: << I've been playing with some acrylic artists paints thinned with future and I'm having some promising results. >> I've been doing this for awhile for both paintings and models. Future behaves with acrylics just like classic glazing media does with oils. For translucent overlays, it works with hand brush and airbrush. A miracle product! RK ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 20:39:39 PDT From: "PETER LEONARD" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Wings 48 Decals Message-ID: <19991008033940.44720.qmail@hotmail.com> ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 20:44:11 PDT From: "PETER LEONARD" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Wings 48 Decals Message-ID: <19991008034411.47453.qmail@hotmail.com> Can anyone comment on the accuracy of the decals for the Wings 48 Salmson S2A2. In particular the 88 and 99 Aero insignia which are presented in various shades of pink. Does anyone else have this kit and have I just got a bad sheet? Peter Leonard ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 00:28:40 EDT From: Albatrosdv@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: another future ? was Re: Free Modeling!! Message-ID: <0.4da910e9.252eccf8@aol.com> In a message dated 99-10-07 21:22:43 EDT, you write: << So now that I've let this Future dry overnight, I'm gonna apply the decals. What will happen if I then spray Testors Dullcoat, or Humbrol Satin, or Pactra Clear Flat Acrylic over the Future? What would be the best, as far as not ending up an unmitigated disaster? E. >> You can do Testor's Dullcote and Humbrol Sating for sure. I would stay clear of the Pactra, as I have heard of some people having problems. It could be they don't know what they're doing, it could be a chemical reaction. Best not to tempt fate. Tom Cleaver ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 23:53:26 -0500 From: Ernest Thomas To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: another future ? was Re: Free Modeling!! Message-ID: <37FD78C5.1A7E@bellsouth.net> Albatrosdv@aol.com wrote: > You can do Testor's Dullcote and Humbrol Sating for sure. I would stay clear > of the Pactra, as I have heard of some people having problems. It could be > they don't know what they're doing, it could be a chemical reaction. Best > not to tempt fate. Thanks for the reply. I was beginning to think no one liked me.(yeah yeah, I know YOU don't like me Dave) BUt this is rather peculiar. I would think that of the three, the Pactra Acryilc would be the safest bet. What kind of problems have you heard about? I guess before long, I'll be forced to stick these top wings on. And then rigging. And then, run around the house with model N.28 making rnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrn sounds. And then post pictures on WWI newsgroup web site. And then,more rnrnrnrnrnrnrnn... And,(ot alert), I was just on the Polar Lights home page. They have a picture of their new 'Legend of Sleepy Hollow' model. Looks like something cool for halloween. And best of all, it's probably affordable. Hear that Lorna? Something cool and cheap. wahoo!!! E. I am. I think. I will. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 00:57:47 -0500 From: "DAVID BURKE" To: Subject: Re: another future ? was Re: Free Modeling!! Message-ID: <001e01bf1152$0e8ee720$7082aec7@dora9sprynet.com> >So now that I've let this Future dry overnight, I'm gonna apply the >decals. What will happen if I then spray Testors Dullcoat, or Humbrol >Satin, or Pactra Clear Flat Acrylic over the Future? What would be the >best, as far as not ending up an unmitigated disaster? >E. Hey Ernie, I use Floquil acrylic flat-coat. It dulls the gloss immediately, and, uh, er, uh, that's right, you need to spray it. I would suggest this: spray a test model with Future, let dry overnight, and test the Dullcote on it. That way you are more guaranteed not to foul it up. OTOH, if you keep the coats EXTREMELY light, and do it when it's dry outside (humidity affects Dullcote), it might be O.K. I know, 'low humidity in New Orleans?'..... Dave ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 16:35:54 +1000 (EST) From: Mick Fauchon To: WW1Av Subject: Gerry McO Message-ID: HI, guys! Anybody got a working e-mail address for Gerry McOsker? I'm trying to get in touch with him, obviously on an old address. TIA, Mick. -- -- Mick Fauchon | Internet: ulmjf@dewey.newcastle.edu.au Client Services,IESD, Auchmuty Library| Ph. (intl+61+49) 218622 University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA | Fax (intl+61+49) 215833 MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM M M M Tasmanian Devil: "#@%!&^*%%...!#@!&**%^@@#$#-+*+*&##@...!!" M M M M Yosemite Sam : "Cut out that Army talk!..Yer in the Navy now!" M M M MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 23:33:41 -0700 From: "Bob Pearson" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: New weapon Message-ID: <199910080644.XAA03482@mail.rapidnet.net> As we have SFA for paint selection here any longer, I have been using these types of paints as well as the remnants of my tamiya acrylics on my last 8 models .. I've just been thinning with water, will have to try future sooner or later. Bob nb: a cute little Italian WW2 destroyer . ... oh wait isn't this the SMML .. uh .. a 1/32 Sopwith triplane. . yeah, that's what I'm building ---------- >From: smperry@mindspring.com >To: Multiple recipients of list >Subject: New weapon >Date: Thu, Oct 7, 1999, 8:14 PM > > I've been playing with some acrylic artists paints thinned with future and > I'm having some promising results. I put the II'lya away for another short > break and decided to build the Toko Berg D.1 straight out of the box. I > painted the wood interior and the wood bottom with a mix of unbleached > titanium, raw & burnt siena. I was able to brush paint a very nice wood > surface with only a little practice. > > I will try to mix a CDL and airbrush it on the lower surfaces of the wings & > stab tomorrow. I'll either report or whine, stay tuned ;-) > sp > > E-mail smperry@mindspring.com > Web Site http://smperry.home.mindspring.com/PWWIP.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 22:59:19 +0100 From: "Tom Werner Hansen" To: Subject: Re: Decal paper and frisk film Message-ID: <199910080920.LAA24804@golf.dax.net> Dave. Thanks (likewise to everybody who has answered my question). I have frisk film both on a roll and flat sheets, so I'll try both. I must admit that lozenge was one of the applications I had in mind. Tom W ---------- > From: David & Carol Fletcher > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: Decal paper > Date: 07. oktober 1999 19:11 > > Tom Werner Hansen wrote: > > "You ran the frisk film through the laser printer? That must be an > excellent way of making masks for complex shapes." > > You may have to experiment first. Some frisk films have different glue > compositions and the heat may set them. Try it with a small piece taped > (from the back of course!) to a similar sized hole in a sheet of bond > paper. If I ever get around to taking a photo of the ["ot" Alert!] > Do17V1 "technology demonstrator", you can see that it works. I have > three different kinds of frisk film and I can't remember which one I > used. I think it may have been the Badger film, though. The frisk that > came on a flat sheet (as opposed to a roll) is terrible even without > heat setting - it sets up permanently in an hour or so - I know it > wasn't that one! > > Are you going to do lozenge patterns??? > > Dave Fletcher ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 05:53:31 -0400 From: "Gerald P. McOSker" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re:Vacs and the Koster Fokker DVIII Message-ID: >Tom said >My vote for a beginner OT vacform would be a > Fokker DVIII, although I'm not familiar with the available kit(s). > >> > >Bill Koster's Fokker D.VIII is the way to go. I HAVE A DVIII which was wet a bit in my flood last year but is quite intact. If anyone is interested please contact me off list. I also have a pile or so of the old Cramer vacs which I will give away [I only ask for postage] to those wanting to try a vac without mangling a Roseplane, Sierra or a Blue Rider. Cheese Gerry ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 07:35:33 -0400 From: bucky@ptdprolog.net To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: PC-10 Opinions on Snipe Message-ID: <37FDD705.6A1C9C29@ptdprolog.net> Who the heck knows for sure, but I agree with the more brown thought! Mike Muth Brent & Tina Theobald wrote: > I posted a picture of my Snipes under construction at: > > http://web2.airmail.net/theobat1/snipe.jpg > > I am interested in what ya'll think of the PC-10. I have never tried to > get "accurate" PC-10 before, but I think it ought to be more brown. > > What do you think? > > Brent > > -- > ************************************* > They’ve got us surrounded, the poor bastards! > ************************************* ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 09:26:01 -0300 From: "dfernet0" To: Subject: RE: Re:Vacs and the Koster Fokker DVIII Message-ID: <013301bf1188$48c110e0$4640a8c0@ssp.salud.rosario.gov.ar> Gerry Would you care telling me which models Cramer did apart from the Pfalz and the Roland? is for the Vac comments that we'll post on the website. D. ----- Original Message ----- From: Gerald P. McOSker To: Multiple recipients of list Sent: Friday, October 08, 1999 6:52 AM Subject: Re:Vacs and the Koster Fokker DVIII > >Tom said > >My vote for a beginner OT vacform would be a > > Fokker DVIII, although I'm not familiar with the available kit(s). > > >> > > > >Bill Koster's Fokker D.VIII is the way to go. > > I HAVE A DVIII which was wet a bit in my flood last year but is quite > intact. If anyone is interested please contact me off list. I also > have a pile or so of the old Cramer vacs which I will give away [I > only ask for postage] to those wanting to try a vac without mangling > a Roseplane, Sierra or a Blue Rider. > > > > Cheese > > Gerry > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 09:29:38 -0300 From: "dfernet0" To: "WW1 modeling Mail List" Subject: Vac kits comments VERSION 3.0 Message-ID: <013d01bf1188$c9a4abe0$4640a8c0@ssp.salud.rosario.gov.ar> Hi friends! Thanks for the input. Warning, it's a looooong message, but I think that is worth for the information to anyt modeller tempted to attempt a vac for the first time. Here you have version 3: - Aeroclub: Vacuforms. Excellent quality. Only a couple of OT vacs issued so far, quality reasonable for a first attempt. No decals, but their white metal is the best. The Sopwith Pup may be a good choice for a novice in vacs. - Airframe: Vacuforms. 1/72 scale. I don't know if they're still on production. Thin plastic over male molds. Little (if any) surface detail. Wings typically upper and lower surface. They had a Ansaldo S.V.A.5, Short 184 and a Rumpler Taube in 1/72. I have the Taube and it is a very basic starting point for a model. If you don't mind a lot of scratchbuilding, they can still be a source of modeling enjoyment. - Blue Rider: Vacuforms. Decent quality. The Oeffag vac fuselage conversion does take some work. However, the "older", full kits seem nice, like the Camel Comic, Vickers Gun Busses FB5 and FB9, but the ones that made their name were the Farman MF11 with PE booms and landing gear and the Bleriot XI with PE fuselage and landing gear. - C. A. Atkins: Vacuforms. 1/48 and 1/72 scales. Middling to good quality. They had a Camel comic, a Pfalz D.III, Sopwith Snipe, and Fokker Dr1 which is very nice vac kit with PE and WM bits. - Classic Plane: Vacuforms. Very accurate, but the older ones are pretty crude. No decals, some of the later ones have resin parts. Only marginally inferior to Roseplane and Sierra Scale. Well priced, and most are available through Roll Models http://www.rollmodels.com/ Get yours, possibly out of bussiness.The Floh and the Albatros D1 were both very good. However his Berg D1, the DH1a and 1-1/2 Strutter aren't the same. - Kramer: Vacuforms. On the lower end of quality. One is supposedly a Roland D II, and the other a Pfalz D XII. - D & M Dane Plane: Just the one issued, unusual danish type. Quite well done. -Eastern Models: Vacuforms.The MoS Type BB and DH.10, the BB, it's a very nice vac with metal detail bits. -Eagles Talon: They make a Hansa Brandenburg UFAG & C.I. The C.I seems buildable. No decals or resin/metal parts. Nice references though. - Falcon: Vacuform. Their 1/32 Fokker DVIII is very good. The lozenge does cause problems. A good candidate for Osterkampf's "bumble bee" or the "checkerboard." Falcon's B.E.2c is the worst of their vacs, very early. *Lots* of work to get something only moderately acceptable. - Formaplane: Some excellent and some really poor. The 1/72 Fe2b is probably one of the best vacs, however their Be2c and the Albatros B1 was a great disappointment. - ID Models: Alb DV (Out Of Production) Imagine if you will an Aurora Albatros somehow grown to 1/32, basic and not very accurate. - Joystick: Vacuforms. Some molds be prepared to spend a lot of work on. A lot of the detail is very soft, and a couple of the kits I have are littered with "pip" marks. Can be worked up to reasonable models of out of the way subjects. With decals. The Albatros C1 and the C111 were straight forward no nuts vacs. But the Rumpler and a few others have very clean mouldings. No info about current availability nor price. - Koster Aero Enterprises: Vacuforms. Great kits that usually consist of vacuform, resin, white metal, photo-etch and provides nice decals too. If Aeroclub is the Rolls-Royce of vacs, and Falcon is the Bentley, KAE is the restored Duesenberg-J of vacuforms, at least for the stuff from the last 10 years. The Triplane is average, but the Hannover is great. Their SSW D.III or D.IV kits, Hanover Cl.III or Fokker D.VIII's are good choices to start on vacs. GreatModels Webstore has started carrying his stuff http://www.greatmodels.com/ -Libramodels: Vacuforms. Superb, sharply formed little vacs on quite thick sheet and accurately mastered (mostly) by the late Joe Chubbock. Their DH5 is decent enough. All included metal (Aeroclub) details, strut materials and decals. I believe the kits released were DH.5, FE8, Machhi M.7, Dufaux (something), Sopwith Cuckoo, BAT Bantam, Bristol Scout D Pfalz E.II, and a Brisfit. The latter features alternative engine cowlings in the manner of the more recent BM braille scale F2B, and may have been a civilian option too. - Lonestar: Vacuform. Resin components. These range from "improvement needed" to "acceptable". His stuff is worth checking out. A SSW D.1, (the Nieuport clone) is reported. - Marco Miniatures: Vacuforms in 1/24 scale. The Pfalz D.III vac-the-box looks great, and aside from the rear fuselage section being MAYBE a little too short, resin details, large decal sheet, PE, veneer for making one's own prop should one choose not to use the resin one provided- it could provide hundreds of hours of frustrating fun. They also have Albatros DVa, LFG Roland D.VIb and Nieuport 28. - Phoenix: Vacuforms. Minor "pips" that cleaned up easily, decent decals and reasonable surface detail. Issued twice, once without and once with metal parts. The 1/72 BE2a is a nice kit, white metal engine, wheels & tail skid. - Roseplane: Vacuforms. Very good/excellent quality. They supply a lot of the smaller parts in resin. They can be bought from the manufacturer (list member Barry Stettler) at Rosemont Hobby Shop http://www.swiftsite.com/rosemonthobby/ - Rareplane: Vacuforms. Reasonable quality, their Gotha is very good. Now out of production. Their Junkers D.1 is fairly easy because it has only one wing and no rigging. It was the first vac of Dennis Ugulano, http://members.xoom.com/Uggies/dju.htm )see how you can finish! - Sanger (ex Contrail): Vacuforms in 1/24 scale. The Nieuport was really very good, the SE5a mediocre and the Albatros pretty poor. Contrail. Did three On Topic, Blackburn GP Seaplane, Kangaroo and civil version. Need a lot of building, double surface wings and tailplanes and the tops don't match the bottoms. - Scaleplanes: Vacuforms. These kits to vary from extremely difficult to nearly impossible. Re-issued ex Libramodels Bantam, Bristol Scout and DH.5 - Sierra Scale: Vacuforms. Good quality. The surface detail on Sierra vacs is well executed. Construction shouldn't be hard because the plastic they're made from is pretty thick, therefore good as a start point for a vac-builder. Sierra's vac parts include bulkheads and formers. The struts are also on the vac sheet. The Aeroclub white metal detail bits are nice, but the Sierra injected bits look crude. It seems that the semi opaque plastic makes the pieces look bad, but they're OK. - Tom Modelworks: I remember that someone once said that were quite good, but they have declined. - Veterans 72: Issued several vacforms before going on to resin. Mostly French a/c and fairly basic, their metal bits are bad. Slightly off topic but interesting is their Ader's Eole from 1890something. - V.L.E. Models: Vacuforms, 1/72 scale. High quality vacs with metal parts, but not recommended for beginners to vacforms, very complex subjects. Early aircraft (only two kits to date), they have DFW "Mars" and Fokker "Spinne". - Warbirds: Vacuforms. Another now out of production, reasonable. The Tommy and the Snipe were very dainty. - Wings 72: Very soft detail that will take some work. But their HB W-12 is a good starter to vac building. -Wings 48: Vacuforms. Very good quality in their Salmson and S4C. - Xtravac: Vacuforms. Very nice quality. They only came out with few vacs, all Albatros: C.IX, C.XV, D.III, and J.II. Excellent detail with separate resin bits (resin bits are now available through Paragon). ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 1911 **********************