WWI Digest 2243 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) RE: New images by "dfernet0" 2) Re: Dufaux Fighter by Dennis Ugulano 3) Problem with the basics by "Matt Bailey" 4) Re: Problem with the basics by "Matthew Bittner" 5) Re: Problem with the basics by "Dale Beamish" 6) Re: German WW1 Purple/Mauve by "Carol & David Solosy" 7) RE: Wood Grain by peter crow 8) Re: Problem with the basics by "Matthew Bittner" 9) RE: Wood Grain by Shane Weier 10) RE: Wood Grain by Shane Weier 11) Re: Problem with the basics by Otisgood@aol.com 12) RE: April Internet Modeler by Shane Weier 13) Re: NASM by David Fleming 14) Re: Problem with the basics by David Fleming 15) IRAS Model Images by "Matthew Bittner" 16) Re: One MORE F I N A L Camel question by "DAVID BURKE" 17) Eduard 1/48 Hanriot HD1 by "laskodi" 18) Re: Wood Grain by smperry@mindspring.com 19) Re: NASM by Matthew Zivich 20) Re: Aurora Gotha by Brent_A_Theobald@notes.seagate.com 21) Re: NASM by "DAVID BURKE" 22) Re: NASM by KarrArt@aol.com 23) Re: Wood Grain by KarrArt@aol.com 24) Re: NASM by "Len Smith" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 07:40:14 -0300 From: "dfernet0" To: Subject: RE: New images Message-ID: <00e301bf9eeb$53a9bfc0$4640a8c0@ssp.salud.rosario.gov.ar> ----- Original Message ----- From: Matthew Bittner > For those who haven't checked yet, Allan has uploaded a bunch of new > images to the site. Incredible stuff. Bob L, I like your Albatros a lot, specially the wood colour. Nigel, your job on these models is stunning, but I'd like to know more (scale, kit brand, pilot's names etc.) and as far as I can discern from the pictures, a lot of work has been done in those cockpits, so why don't show it off? I was fortunate to see Alberto's SE5a pictures a bit earlier so no further comments... I can't explain why I still keep modelling. His first detailing effort, my goodness! Sergey's rendering (as Mark Miller's) are showing a new turn of wheel in modelling... maybe in the future there will be computer hardware capable to carve volumes to make pieces for a model in the same way a printer can produce artwork or decals. Think about it, we're on the 21st century after all... D. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 09:04:13 -0400 From: Dennis Ugulano To: "wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu" Subject: Re: Dufaux Fighter Message-ID: <200004050904_MC2-A007-220F@compuserve.com> sp, Somewhere, a long time ago, I had some reference material I used when I built my Dufaux. I think its in windsock but for the life of me I can't find it. The early Windsocks did not have an index so its a page by page search. There are a few photos I used. The Dufaux was an interesting plane. If I recall from the article, four of the planes actually were sent to a front line squadron for evaluation. I don't know about you, but I don't think I would have wanted to go into battle with the tail section of my plane being held on with only a four inch hollow propeller shaft. Another interesting point is the center line of the engine and the prop were not the in line. There was a four inch difference which means there was some kind of gearbox used. As SCALEPLANES said in the introduction, this was a bizarre plane. I will keep searching unless another list can find it. I think it was in a Windsock. Dennis Ugulano email: Uggies@compuserve.com http://members.xoom.com/Uggies/dju.htm Page Revised 2/6/00 "Every modeller will rise to his own level of masochism" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 05:38:58 -0800 From: "Matt Bailey" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Problem with the basics Message-ID: Hi folks - I'm having some trouble in getting rid of a fuselage seam on a more recent Eduard kit. I glued the fuselage together and applied some pressure so I could get a small bead of plastic running up and down the seam. After a few days, I sanded the area and noticed that the seam was still present. Twice I applied some putty (thinned with liquid cement) to the seam and sanded, but a primer coat still showed the presence of the seam. I then tried using super glue, but after sanding and priming twice, the @#%! seam is still there. Anyone have any suggestions or remedies besides starting a new kit? Thanks, Matt Bailey --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==-- Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 08:49:50 -0500 From: "Matthew Bittner" To: "wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu" Subject: Re: Problem with the basics Message-ID: <200004051349.IAA29233@mail1.neonramp.com> On Wed, 5 Apr 2000 09:45:51 -0400 (EDT), Matt Bailey wrote: > I'm having some trouble in getting rid of a fuselage seam on a more recent Eduard kit. I glued the fuselage together and applied some pressure so I could get a small bead of plastic running up and down the seam. After a few days, I sanded the area and noticed that the seam was still present. Twice I applied some putty (thinned with liquid cement) to the seam and sanded, but a primer coat still showed the presence of the seam. I then tried using super glue, but after sanding and priming twice, the @#%! seam is still there. Ah yes. That's probably a "flat" seam. Although hindsight and all that, you should have glued a piece of sheet plastic to the inside of the fuselage joint. I will do that from now on on all flat-seamed aircraft, and most of the others. What I have had to do in the past to eliminate this type of seam (the last time was on the Roland D.II) was cover the area in a piece of sheet plastic that extended from side to side - in essence, giving you another "floor". Sure, it may ruin the "accuracy" a little, but it's better than a seam. ;-) Since it's an Eduard kit, and you're using sheet plastic, be sure to use liquid cement, to "melt" the two together. Best of luck! Matt Bittner http://pease1.sr.unh.edu/misc/ww1fr.htm http://www.geocities.com/~ipmsfortcrook ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 07:51:21 -0600 From: "Dale Beamish" To: Subject: Re: Problem with the basics Message-ID: <003201bf9f06$24e26460$03000004@darcy> Matt At times when I run into a tough seam what I do is apply by brush a thick coat of what ever the color is and let dry. After that careful sanding should do the trick . Works for me Dale ----- Original Message ----- From: Matt Bailey To: Multiple recipients of list Sent: 05 April, 2000 7:46 AM Subject: Problem with the basics > Hi folks - > > I'm having some trouble in getting rid of a fuselage seam on a more recent Eduard kit. I glued the fuselage together and applied some pressure so I could get a small bead of plastic running up and down the seam. After a few days, I sanded the area and noticed that the seam was still present. Twice I applied some putty (thinned with liquid cement) to the seam and sanded, but a primer coat still showed the presence of the seam. I then tried using super glue, but after sanding and priming twice, the @#%! seam is still there. > > Anyone have any suggestions or remedies besides starting a new kit? > > Thanks, > > Matt Bailey > > > --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==-- > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 21:54:03 +0800 From: "Carol & David Solosy" To: "WW1 list" Subject: Re: German WW1 Purple/Mauve Message-ID: David I'm happy with mix of Gunze acrylics for this colour which I used recently on the 1/72 Eduard Albatros D.Va. It was a mixture of H42 blue gray and H3 red. Can't recall the exact proportions, but I think it was about 70% blue gray and 30% red. Obviously one needs to adjust the amount of red to taste (don't take that too literally! If the smell is anything to go by, the taste will be bloody awful). I'm also a believer in Dicta Ira. One of the good things about WW1 aircraft modelling is that there is enough uncertainty about colours to enable one to use a fair degree of discretion without fear of definitive correction (in most cases). Cheers David from Perth ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 06:58:18 -0700 (PDT) From: peter crow To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: RE: Wood Grain Message-ID: <20000405135818.16271.qmail@web705.mail.yahoo.com> --- Shane Weier wrote: > Chris offers > > Frankly, it's a matter of what you like. I'd prefer > to find 1:1 wood which > shows *no* grain but varies slightly in colour > across the piece. I don't > *want* to see grain, because in 1/48 you simply > don't - Coming out of lurk mode to agree with Shane.. :-) I'm working with lumber everyday, and I think hes on the money with this... you have to think that even a pencil line in 1/48 if blown up to 1:1 would give you grain lines thicker then your forearm... variations in degrees of shading IMO is more realistic... also if they were using a high quality ply (marine grade), you would see even less of any grain... but like anything else, just another point of view.. :-) P. Crow ===== Peter Crow __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 09:07:00 -0500 From: "Matthew Bittner" To: "wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu" Subject: Re: Problem with the basics Message-ID: <200004051407.JAA07977@mail2.neonramp.com> On Wed, 5 Apr 2000 09:57:01 -0400 (EDT), Dale Beamish wrote: > At times when I run into a tough seam what I do is apply by brush a thick > coat of what ever the color is and let dry. After that careful sanding > should do the trick . Works for me Great idea, but what I think is happening is everytime Matt applies pressure to the area - by sanding, etc. - it's opening up the seam again. Matt Bittner http://pease1.sr.unh.edu/misc/ww1fr.htm http://www.geocities.com/~ipmsfortcrook ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 00:12:00 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: Wood Grain Message-ID: <65C968E11318D311B0BD0060B06865CDBD1EDF@mimhexch.mim.com.au> RK, > > I don't know if I'm going to disagree entirely, > but..........I can see grain > in some plywood from 50 away In that case, you have the eyes of a hawk. By "grain" I mean the individual fibres in the wood - maybe I should say "micrograin". I'm betting that what you see is the striations caused by bands of different coloured grains produced in the different colours of layers of wood. I have no doubt whatever that you can see those - even with one working eye that requires a coke bottle spectacle and one with 25% vision I can. However - if you compare what you see at 50 with what you see at 1 - the former will have darker sworls and bands and (as far as you can tell) be comprised of several gradations of colour with little texture, and the later will be the same - but with an obvious micro-grain structure within each of the colour bands. > but- slight > graining (and the > occasional knot as shown in some Albatros photos)only adds to > the richness- > something that is revealed slowy as the viewer moves in > closer and closer. I actually agree here, but not because it mimics reality in correct scale. In many things we see what our brain tells us we should see. Panel lines are a classic example. I *know* that there are panels on an aircraft, and I *can* see them at distance. Now it can easily be argued that the panels lines on the model are overscale (they are) but my brain *expects* me to see them, and if I don't I get a peculiar "sumpin' ain't right" feeling which detracts from the model - it looks like a toy, not a miniature. Same applies to wood. I *expect* to see grain, but the actual grain in 1:1 wood doesn't look like 1/48 scale striations, or knots, or whatever. Incidentally, IMHO some types of wood - or some pieces of some types - have micrograin which looks a leeeetle like macrograin. All I need is enough pieces, enough time, and to borrow the skills needed to work it ! Shane (Incidentally, lest anyone suspect I'm trying to "win" an argument here, nothing is less true. IMHO one of the greatest strengths of the list is when we differ in opinions over modelling techniques or WW1 history because such discussions broaden the perspective, help refine ideas and sometimes shake loose something truly new to all of us. I'm not too proud to argue against something - then appropriate the idea when proven wrong ;-)) ************************************************************** 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, 6 Apr 2000 00:17:10 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: Wood Grain Message-ID: <65C968E11318D311B0BD0060B06865CDBD1EE0@mimhexch.mim.com.au> Peter, > > Coming out of lurk mode to agree with Shane.. :-) Why thank you - I feel positively mainstream with someone agreeing :-) > I'm working with lumber everyday, and I think hes on > the money with this... you have to think that even a > pencil line in 1/48 if blown up to 1:1 would give you > grain lines thicker then your forearm... variations in > degrees of shading IMO is more realistic... also if > they were using a high quality ply (marine grade), you > would see even less of any grain... but like anything > else, just another point of view.. :-) Mmmm. I had though about whether high grade ply would show much at all. The AWM Albatros shows regular macrograin and no knots (and unlike Stropp still has her original skin) but may not be typical. OTOH I suspect most machine have wood of high enough quality that grain is difficult to detect in photos even printed at 1/48 scale :-) BUT - I can also remember a fair share of exceptions. A little bit of this, a little bit of that..... Shane ************************************************************** 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: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 10:16:59 EDT From: Otisgood@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Problem with the basics Message-ID: In a message dated 4/5/00 8:45:31 AM Central Daylight Time, mgbailey@my-deja.com writes: > Subj: Problem with the basics > Date: 4/5/00 8:45:31 AM Central Daylight Time > From: mgbailey@my-deja.com (Matt Bailey) > Sender: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu > Reply-to: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu > To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu (Multiple recipients of list) > > Hi folks - > > I'm having some trouble in getting rid of a fuselage seam on a more recent > Eduard kit. I glued the fuselage together and applied some pressure so I > could get a small bead of plastic running up and down the seam. After a few > days, I sanded the area and noticed that the seam was still present. Twice I > applied some putty (thinned with liquid cement) to the seam and sanded, but a > primer coat still showed the presence of the seam. I then tried using super > glue, but after sanding and priming twice, the @#%! seam is still there. > > Anyone have any suggestions or remedies besides starting a new kit? > > Thanks, > > Matt Bailey > > > --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==-- > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. > > > ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- > Return-Path: > Received: from rly-zc03.mx.aol.com (rly-zc03.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.3]) by > air-zc03.mail.aol.com (v70.20) with ESMTP; Wed, 05 Apr 2000 09:45:31 -0400 > Received: from pease1.sr.unh.edu (pease1.sr.unh.edu [132.177.241.20]) by > rly-zc03.mx.aol.com (v71.10) with ESMTP; Wed, 05 Apr 2000 09:45:10 2000 > Received: from pease1.sr.unh.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) > by pease1.sr.unh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA11727; > Wed, 5 Apr 2000 09:45:51 -0400 (EDT) > Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 09:45:51 -0400 (EDT) > Message-Id: > Errors-To: aew@pease1.sr.unh.edu > Reply-To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu > Originator: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu > Sender: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu > Precedence: bulk > From: "Matt Bailey" > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Problem with the basics > X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas > X-Comment: WWI Modeling Discussion List > X-Mailer: MailCity Service > > You might try using liquid cement to glue a thin piece of plastic strip (eg Evergreen strip styrene) on top of the seam and then sanding this down once it is dry. Comes in different sizes. This gives a quicker "fill" than other methods, although will require a fair amount of sanding to smooth in. I have the same problem with some of mine. Frustrating!! Otis ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 00:21:24 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: April Internet Modeler Message-ID: <65C968E11318D311B0BD0060B06865CDBD1EE1@mimhexch.mim.com.au> RK > << Shane the Younger - who's driving to the restraunt tomorrow night & > can't imbibe :-((( >> > > "restraunt"?..... getting the imbibing out of the way today? (sorry) On the door it said "Hungarian Restaurant" Apparently they spell it differently in Hungarian ! Shane (off to bed with a belly full of Brassoi and Bulls Blood - burp - and a mind full of list and modelling conversation. To all list members, I *highly* recommend taking the chance anytime it's offered to meet with another listee, they're fun) ************************************************************** 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: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 10:24:18 +0100 From: David Fleming To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: NASM Message-ID: <38EB0641.C510D512@dial.pipex.com> It's not just NASM that do this - if anyone has visited the Science Museum in London, they do the same 'giant Airfix kit' thing. Added to that, the hall is painted dark blue, just to make it really easy to see ! So you can only see the underside of the (fabric-less) Fokker E111 + all the rest. That said, the aviation gallery is worth a visit, not least for the superb engine collection. And it's free if you go after 4pm ! Funny thing, one of the best WW1 galleries is at Yeovilton, and they are (almost?) all replicas !! David #15 (Apparently !:¬) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 15:29:54 +0100 From: David Fleming To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Problem with the basics Message-ID: <38EB4DE1.4B7DCDF1@dial.pipex.com> > > mgbailey@my-deja.com writes: > > > Subj: Problem with the basics > > Date: 4/5/00 8:45:31 AM Central Daylight Time > > From: mgbailey@my-deja.com (Matt Bailey) > > Sender: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu > > Reply-to: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu > > To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu (Multiple recipients of list) > > > > Hi folks - > > > > I'm having some trouble in getting rid of a fuselage seam on a more recent > > Eduard kit. I glued the fuselage together and applied some pressure so I > > could get a small bead of plastic running up and down the seam. After a > few > > days, I sanded the area and noticed that the seam was still present. Twice > I > > applied some putty (thinned with liquid cement) to the seam and sanded, but > a > > primer coat still showed the presence of the seam. I then tried using > super > > glue, but after sanding and priming twice, the @#%! seam is still there. > > > > Anyone have any suggestions or remedies besides starting a new kit? > > Have you tried typist's correction fluid ? Apply a thin coat, then GENTLY wet sand the area. I usually find this removes visible seams that other methods don't. (It's to do with the filling material 'grabbing' the plastic) The same trick with thick paint can also work David Dunfermline, Ecosse ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 09:40:04 -0500 From: "Matthew Bittner" To: "wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu" Subject: IRAS Model Images Message-ID: <200004051440.JAA08553@mail2.neonramp.com> In working my "VVS Side", I stumbled across the following with on topic models: http://www.airforce.ru/models/gallery/baranov/baranov1.htm Matt Bittner http://pease1.sr.unh.edu/misc/ww1fr.htm http://www.geocities.com/~ipmsfortcrook ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 09:52:52 -0500 From: "DAVID BURKE" To: Subject: Re: One MORE F I N A L Camel question Message-ID: <005301bf9f0f$548cc260$bc84aec7@dora9sprynet.com> Well, how about the color of the wires on a normal A/C? Jeez, I shoulda known better than to be a smart-ass with THIS bunch! DB -----Original Message----- From: Mike Franklin To: Multiple recipients of list Date: Wednesday, April 05, 2000 3:42 AM Subject: Re: One MORE F I N A L Camel question > >----- Original Message ----- >From: DAVID BURKE >To: Multiple recipients of list >Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2000 8:19 PM >Subject: One MORE F I N A L Camel question > > >> ... and ANOTHER one, >> >> What color would the airfoil-shaped flying wires be, Flourescent >orange? >> >> DB >> >Yes, definately that one, and I can prove it. ;^) > >Mike Franklin >Bellingham, WA >"No man is so hated as he who will drive the speed limit" > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 09:22:20 -0700 From: "laskodi" To: "Post WW1 List" Subject: Eduard 1/48 Hanriot HD1 Message-ID: <001c01bf9f1b$1e785840$343819d0@laskodi> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01BF9EE0.71593D80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Got my long awaited order from VAMP yesterday, so it's back to modeling = real planes after a brief foray into WW2. First up is the Hanriot which = I will do as the OOB option of Coppens crate. Any tips on building this = puppy? Otis, I too noticed the difference in the interplane struts and = the incorrect instructions. Which one goes in the back, the "fat" or = "tapered" one? Also the box top shows an open inspection panel above the = tail skid but it's not on the model. Any other changes needed? TIA ---Bob Laskodi ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01BF9EE0.71593D80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Got my long awaited order from VAMP yesterday, so = it's back to=20 modeling real planes after a brief foray into WW2. First up is the = Hanriot which=20 I will do as the OOB option of Coppens crate. Any tips on building this = puppy?=20 Otis, I too noticed the difference in the interplane struts and the = incorrect=20 instructions. Which one goes in the back, the "fat" or "tapered" one? = Also the=20 box top shows an open inspection panel above the tail skid but it's not = on the=20 model. Any other changes needed?
TIA
---Bob Laskodi
------=_NextPart_000_0019_01BF9EE0.71593D80-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 12:39:42 -0400 From: smperry@mindspring.com To: Subject: Re: Wood Grain Message-ID: <001701bf9f1d$8c333f60$350b56d1@default> > Coming out of lurk mode to agree with Shane.. :-) > I'm working with lumber everyday, and I think hes on > the money with this... you have to think that even a > pencil line in 1/48 if blown up to 1:1 would give you > grain lines thicker then your forearm... variations in > degrees of shading IMO is more realistic... also if > they were using a high quality ply (marine grade), you > would see even less of any grain... but like anything > else, just another point of view.. :-) > > P. Crow Using Acrylic paints thinned with Future you can blend the tones and achieve the tonal variations without actual grain. I discovered this on my Toko Berg D.1. sp ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 12:57:37 -0400 From: Matthew Zivich To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: NASM Message-ID: <38EB7081.FE70E63E@svsu.edu> DAVID BURKE wrote: > Hey Guys, > > I'm a member of the museum, and when I went to the Garber facility, it > was explained to me that the stuff planned to be at Dulles are things like > the Go-229 jet flying wing, the Do-335, Columbine II (Eisenhower's Connie), > Enola Gay, and some really big stuff. I do kind of wish that they would > change the WWI air display though, as they aren't easy to see, and the > lighting isn't good - it's too dark in there! I hate to admit that at the > time, I wasn't into OT aircraft, and was more of a Luftwaffe (I know it > hurts you as much to read it as it does me to type it) buff, so I didn't > give the good stuff the proper attention - but be assured that NEXT TIME.... > > DB > -----Original Message----- > From: cfrieden@calpoly.edu > To: Multiple recipients of list > Date: Tuesday, April 04, 2000 8:07 PM > Subject: NASM > > >It is my understanding from reading the updates in Air & Space that the > >building on the Mall is going to stay pretty much as it is today. Because > the > >WWI exhibit is a permanent exhibit, I would assume that they will not be > >changing the way the aircraft are displayed. The Dulles center will > display > >everything that is not at the main building. For more info, check out this > >page: > > > >http://www.nasm.edu/nasm/ext/dulles.htm > > > >There is a page where they specifically address hanging aircraft, and > another > >page that lists the aircraft they will display (several are OT). HTH, > > > >Chris Friedenbach > > > > > >> Had business meetings in Washington, DC this week so flew into National > >> Airport on Saturday to save on costs. Hiked over to the NASM on Sunday > and > >> was displeased with how the OT aircraft were hung from the ceiling not > >> unlike a bedroom in my younger days. One would have to be 15' tall to > see > >> the details on the Voisin, Albatros DVa, or the Sopwith Snipe other than > the > >> undersides. The SPAD XIII and Fokker DVII were both displayed on floor > >> level. With the building of the new remove NASM displays at Dallas > (sp??) > >> are there plans to improve the displaying of these planes as done with > the > >> other exhibits. The Bleriot exhibit was great - including the models. > >> Charlie > >> > > While you're at it have the designers at NASM get some more realistic mannequins for the wwi displays. They look like a bunch of zombies! Matt Z ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 11:57:15 -0500 From: Brent_A_Theobald@notes.seagate.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Aurora Gotha Message-ID: Howdy, >>Our good german friend Thomas Genth (of famed Gotha website) has bought for his enjoyment a rare Aurora Gotha model. I know that some of you guys have built this Gotha and expressed some feelings about it before, but I'd like to hear what do you think and what you've done to this kit again so I can forward these messages to Herr Genth, who lives outside listworld. We have to keep on his good side, so he can post more interesting pictures on his website!>> I can mail a copy of the article from Fine Scale Modeler if you like. It seems very comprehensive. In fact I think the guy who wrote it went over the top with the anal retentiveness. Please send me his mailing address and I will get it into the mail. Have a good one! Brent (No. 1?) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 12:04:16 -0500 From: "DAVID BURKE" To: Subject: Re: NASM Message-ID: <001b01bf9f21$05e823e0$9e98aec7@dora9sprynet.com> >While you're at it have the designers at NASM get some more realistic mannequins >for the wwi displays. They look like a bunch of zombies! > >Matt Z > Naw, those are just the guys who work there! DB ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 13:11:31 EDT From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: NASM Message-ID: <3b.31edd1d.261ccdc3@aol.com> In a message dated 4/5/00 7:26:21 AM Pacific Daylight Time, xtv16@dial.pipex.com writes: << It's not just NASM that do this - if anyone has visited the Science Museum in London, they do the same 'giant Airfix kit' thing. >> The SanDiego Aerospace Museum displays some of its airplanes on the floor and some suspended- but there's "viewing towers" one can ascend which brings the eyes level with whatever happens to be hanging that day- and the SDAM has quite a few replica and genuine machines. The lighting is not the best, but it'll do, and it sounds better than some other museums. RK ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 13:11:33 EDT From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Wood Grain Message-ID: <36.42af71d.261ccdc5@aol.com> In a message dated 4/5/00 7:12:28 AM Pacific Daylight Time, sdw@qld.mim.com.au writes: << By "grain" I mean the individual fibres in the wood - maybe I should say "micrograin". I'm betting that what you see is the striations caused by bands of different coloured grains produced in the different colours of layers of wood. .......darker sworls and bands and (as far as you can tell) be comprised of several gradations of colour with little texture, and the later will be the same - but with an obvious micro-grain structure within each of the colour bands.>> Most likely- stare deep enough into the translucent layers of wood, and more and more patterns start to form before the eyes. I think we may agree here- "striations" is an allround better word that "grain" << I actually agree here, but not because it mimics reality in correct scale. In many things we see what our brain tells us we should see. Panel lines are a classic example. I *know* that there are panels on an aircraft, and I *can* see them at distance. Now it can easily be argued that the panels lines on the model are overscale (they are) but my brain *expects* me to see them, and if I don't I get a peculiar "sumpin' ain't right" feeling which detracts from the model - it looks like a toy, not a miniature.>> Another good point- now we're getting into all those theories of perception, and what we see and what we think we see, and is there any difference (DON'T get me started on panel lines........!) <<(Incidentally, lest anyone suspect I'm trying to "win" an argument here, nothing is less true. IMHO one of the greatest strengths of the list is when we differ in opinions over modelling techniques or WW1 history because such discussions broaden the perspective, help refine ideas and sometimes shake loose something truly new to all of us. I'm not too proud to argue against something - then appropriate the idea when proven wrong ;-)) >> Absolutely!This list is "brain storming" on a large level....it's why I seldom join in the "scale wars" (ok ok- I HAVE been known to make the occasional crack....) ANYWAY..... For the issue at hand, I prefer to see more "striations"- or call it "micro-banding"- something that will blend in the eye to essentialy the same color from a distance, but continues to differentiate until one's eyeball is pressed against whatever part is being represented. RK ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 18:00:02 +0100 From: "Len Smith" To: Subject: Re: NASM Message-ID: <000001bf9f22$530368a0$31867ed4@mesh> MZ > Maybe a good architect like I.M. Pei can come up with a grand design with > split levels so the aircraft can be seen from all directions. Either that > or a magician with lots of mirrors. Or maybe someone from NASM should visit THE Museum at Le Bourget to see how they managed. Some aircraft are on the ground and some suspended from the ceiling, but then they provided some open frame steel circular stairs and connected them with flying walkways level with the hanging a/c and a balcony all around one end of the (large) hall. Thus you get good views of most of the a/c from either alongside, above and/or below. This is the Grand Gallery, of course, with all of the pre 1918 a/c on display. I don't know about the rest of the Museum, one day I must check the un-interesting (to me) modern halls. Regards Len. lensmith@clara.net http://home.clara.net/lensmith ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 2243 **********************