WWI Digest 2490 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Polished Paint by BEN8800@aol.com 2) Re: Polished Paint by "Dale Beamish" 3) Re: the IPMS style by Albatrosdv@aol.com 4) Re: Candice Sopwith Pup Project by "Tom Solinski" 5) Re: Flat/gloss by Albatrosdv@aol.com 6) Re: That semi-gloss finish by Brent_A_Theobald@seagate.com 7) New Workbench Photo by "Leonard Endy" 8) Re: New Workbench Photo by Zulis@aol.com 9) Re: That semi-gloss finish by KarrArt@aol.com 10) Re: by KarrArt@aol.com 11) Re: by Otisgood@aol.com 12) Re: Leptien Albatros by Marc Flake 13) Re: the IPMS style by huggins1@swbell.net (John Huggins) 14) Albatros finish by "David Calhoun" 15) Re: the IPMS style by "P. Howard" 16) Re: New Workbench Photo by huggins1@swbell.net (John Huggins) 17) Re: the IPMS style by KarrArt@aol.com 18) Re: the IPMS style by KarrArt@aol.com 19) RE: by Shane Weier 20) Re: by "P. Howard" 21) RE: by Shane Weier 22) Re: by "P. Howard" 23) Re: the IPMS style by Albatrosdv@aol.com 24) Re: the IPMS style by Albatrosdv@aol.com 25) Re: Candice Sopwith Pup Project by Albatrosdv@aol.com 26) SV: by "Neil Crawford" 27) SV: Lone Star Nie.28 p/e by "Neil Crawford" 28) SV: Flat/gloss by "Neil Crawford" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:02:06 EDT From: BEN8800@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Polished Paint Message-ID: OK gang, now this can be an OT or an ot subject, so don't jump on me. What I would like to know is your experiences "polishing" paint, either sprayed or brushed. Let's assume we paint with Testors enamels. Now I have been a Floquil painter for years and usually flats, so polishing has not been required, or at least I did not think so. However, I am now considering the use of more glossy paints like Testor's. I feel, and based on what I have seen over the years, that these paints will be better if "polished". Something like the use of tooth paste or wet talcum powder to smooth the finish. I assume that if the paint is gloss, tooth paste will give it a semi gloss finish, but will tend to give it a smoother surface, reducing the "bulk" that seems to appear in glossy paints like Testor's. Any comments on this would be appreciated. Along this line, I think Scale Modeler Magazine will feature an article next month on this very subject. Ben ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 17:19:46 -0600 From: "Dale Beamish" To: Subject: Re: Polished Paint Message-ID: <008001bff758$19acc900$ea34b8a1@darcy> Ben Back in the days of my Auto modeling, (love drag racing! ), I used to use a "kiss" coat. After the final finish was done I would spray a thinner coat with a tiny amount of paint added. Mist coats only and carefully. Produced excellent results for me! Smoothes everything out. Dale ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Multiple recipients of list Sent: 26 July, 2000 5:11 PM Subject: Polished Paint > OK gang, now this can be an OT or an ot subject, so don't jump on me. What I > would like to know is your experiences "polishing" paint, either sprayed or > brushed. Let's assume we paint with Testors enamels. Now I have been a > Floquil painter for years and usually flats, so polishing has not been > required, or at least I did not think so. However, I am now considering the > use of more glossy paints like Testor's. I feel, and based on what I have > seen over the years, that these paints will be better if "polished". > Something like the use of tooth paste or wet talcum powder to smooth the > finish. I assume that if the paint is gloss, tooth paste will give it a semi > gloss finish, but will tend to give it a smoother surface, reducing the > "bulk" that seems to appear in glossy paints like Testor's. Any comments on > this would be appreciated. > > Along this line, I think Scale Modeler Magazine will feature an article next > month on this very subject. > > Ben > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:30:42 EDT From: Albatrosdv@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: the IPMS style Message-ID: All right, all right, everyone. Enough already!!!! There has been a lot of discussion of late at HyperScale about what many of us who have ever been around *real* airplanes call the "over-stylized" - and highly *un*realistic - manner of painting and finishing that seems to adorn the winning airplane model of every IPMS contest I have seen since 1994 (I would likely have seen it at the beginning of the cycle, but I wasn't going to contests prior to that other than ValleyCon). It gets more and more so every year. It is what some have called an "overslop" from the Armor guys using "the Verlinden Method" in their finishes. And judges *do* consider this the standard! In 1998, I spoke about this repeatedly over at the web publication I worked at before helping to start IM (I don't mention the name of its owner or itself), and several National IPMS judges rushed to their own defense (as they have here) in saying that this style "looked better" and was what should be done. I was unsurprised to look at the winners in Santa Clara after hearing from these folks. That year at OrangeCon I had a judge tell me my models would start winning awards if I would adopt "the style that wins." FWIW, I do use a modified (and very modest) pre-shading technique, particularly on fabric wings, to hint at the structure beneath, but I rely on such things as sun fading in my models (look at any of the color photos Jeff Ethell published in his various WW2 in color books to see this look on the 1:1s) to achieve a look of reality. So DON'T insult my intelligence and my experience by saying this doesn't go on when it does! And it *is* now "the norm." Tom Cleaver ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:32:19 -0500 From: "Tom Solinski" To: Subject: Re: Candice Sopwith Pup Project Message-ID: <021701bff759$bdc1adc0$12330e18@okc1.ok.home.com> Trouble is the Warner's are getting as scarce as the strutter. We used to own a Fairchild 24 that we gave up on restoring because of the 145 Warner and lack of parts thereof. However on the 1:1 front there is a company in Czechoslovakia that makes 4 cylinder air cooled inline engines that could easily pass for an OT engine in a replica. Speaking of which there was a blurb on the ANN today saying that the VIMY isn't going to make it to Oshkosh because of engine troubles. Too Bad. ----- Original Message ----- From: mdf To: Multiple recipients of list Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 12:13 AM Subject: Re: Candice Sopwith Pup Project > "David C. Fletcher" wrote: > > > , there is a full scale 1 1/2 Strutter for > > sale in Ontario that needs an engine to fly - then you can have the best > > of the WWI and the building worlds! Anyone have a Warner Scarab radial > > in the garage???... > > Never mind the Warner Scarab - I got an email from someone wanting to > know how much a mercedes 160hp and a clerget 130hp are worth...VBG (I'll > pass on any inquiries) > > > Mike Fletcher > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:35:26 EDT From: Albatrosdv@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Flat/gloss Message-ID: <36.932c400.26b0cfbe@aol.com> In a message dated 7/26/00 6:03:58 PM EST, sdw@qld.mim.com.au writes: << We all have a role. You've succeeded - I'm confused ! >> Well, I guess I am, too, because I was told by people who hang out with the 1:1s that it was the castor oil that shined up the finish. FWIW, this is also Chris Gannon's explanation in his discussion of finishes on his instruction sheets. I will say, having "degreased" my share of airplanes back in the military, that oily surfaces do tend to attract dirt, dust, etc., and hardly ever seemed shiny, which would certainly tend to support your points as to cause of the finishes. Ah well, at least we're arguing about *important* things like models, rather than the kind of barroom discussions that lead to trips outside for settlement. :-) TC ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 15:02:25 -0500 From: Brent_A_Theobald@seagate.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: That semi-gloss finish Message-ID: Hey Lance, I think we're getting into an area of Dicta Ira here. Just like camo, if it looks right, it is right. Later! Brent "Lance Krieg" @pease1.sr.unh.edu on 07/26/2000 09:45:56 AM Please respond to wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Sent by: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu To: Multiple recipients of list cc: Subject: Re: That semi-gloss finish The amount of gloss is an interesting problem, and I. too, would like to hear some opinions. Recalling that glossiness decreases with miniaturization, and that even minimal exposure to weather can take off sheen, I tend to flatten the finish more... perhaps TOO much. FWIW, the German Navy specified FLAT finishes in their directives of March/April 1917. Aything from the army? Lance ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 21:29:05 -0400 From: "Leonard Endy" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: New Workbench Photo Message-ID: Just wanted to let everyone know that a pic of Dennis U's workbench is now on line and can be found at http://www2.firstsaga.com/lfendy/fof_site.htm Hopefully, tomorrow I'll have some more in-progress shots of my Albatros and some of my grandson who just turned two. Len ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 21:48:16 EDT From: Zulis@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: New Workbench Photo Message-ID: <9f.8aa713e.26b0eee0@aol.com> In a message dated 00-07-26 21:32:05 EDT, you write: << Just wanted to let everyone know that a pic of Dennis U's workbench is now on line and can be found at http://www2.firstsaga.com/lfendy/fof_site.htm Hopefully, tomorrow I'll have some more in-progress shots of my Albatros and some of my grandson who just turned two. >> Dennis' workbench is about what I expected.... neat, tidy, orderly.... just like his work. John Huggins' bench, however, scares the hell out of me. Even more disturbing, there is a large roll of toilet paper in the foreground. Could there possibly be a toilet bowl under all that clutter? :-) Dave Z ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:05:14 EDT From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: That semi-gloss finish Message-ID: In a message dated 7/26/00 7:43:26 AM Pacific Daylight Time, lance.krieg@amerus.com writes: << The amount of gloss is an interesting problem, and I. too, would like to hear some opinions. Recalling that glossiness decreases with miniaturization, and that even minimal exposure to weather can take off sheen, I tend to flatten the finish more... perhaps TOO much. >> There is some film footage of new Albatros fuselages being wheeled through the factory and these things are absolutley mirror-slick. RK ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:05:13 EDT From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Message-ID: <64.502f26a.26b0f2d9@aol.com> In a message dated 7/26/00 9:07:46 AM Pacific Daylight Time, pfed@saladin.wustl.edu writes: << I remember being told (quite pointedly) that there was no varnish but gloss before the 30's and that dope was also very glossy during and after WWI. Dull or semigloss finishes could not have existed in new aircraft in WWI. >> Very strange- wax and talc have been used as dulling agents in paints and varnishes for centuries- you can still get wax based dulling stuff for artists oils. (those years of reading art history and chemistry books left a little residue in my brain!) RK ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:37:18 EDT From: Otisgood@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Message-ID: <25.8a123e1.26b0fa5e@aol.com> In a message dated 7/26/00 9:07:16 PM Central Daylight Time, KarrArt@aol.com writes: > I remember being told (quite pointedly) that there was no varnish but > gloss before the 30's and that dope was also very glossy during and after > WWI. Dull or semigloss finishes could not have existed in new aircraft > in WWI. >> By directive, all German lozenge covered aircraft received a final coat of flat lacquer, so flat or semigloss finishes did exist. Otis ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 21:33:31 -0500 From: Marc Flake To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Leptien Albatros Message-ID: <397F9F7B.7472@airmail.net> Gabe: The web address for the UTD World of Aviation Collection is: http://www.utdallas.edu/library/special/ww1col.html It may help if you give them the Jasta number. If you surf the site, you will notice how they have things organized. The photo may be in one of the Albatros boxes, or it may be in a Jasta box. You may also want to surf through the albums in The Ferko Collection Part 2 to see if a photo may be in there. They also have an extensive collection of books. If you konw the photo is in a spcific book, that would help, too. You'll find that most of the wait will be for the photographer to take the picture. Marc ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 21:50:59 -0500 From: huggins1@swbell.net (John Huggins) To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: the IPMS style Message-ID: >All right, all right, everyone. Enough already!!!! > Tom, Until you get off your high horse and actually join the judging teams and learn what is actually going on instead of what you have heard second hand or what you think is the norm you have no real basis to comment. Like I have always been told, until you have been there and done that, you do not know what the real story is. As far as finish goes, as a judge, it does not make any difference how glossy or flat it is to start with. What does make the cut is how well it was applied. If you have a very high gloss finish that is applied poorly (runs, orange peal, sags etc) you won't make the cut. By thew same token, if you have a dead flat finish that has flaws in it, it won't make the cut either. You have gone out of your way to insult and degrade a number of people in the past few days. If you don't like the way contests are judged, join the ranks of judges, learn what they are doing and present your opinions to the head judge and the judging committee. If it has merit, it will be adopted and the change will be made. I guess in your eyes, as a judge, I am a washed up old fart who can't see, doesn't know wow to build a model and is just a plastic parts assembler. You are also putting several other members of this list in that category also. Being as you won't enter any contests and won't judge, you feel we should lower ourselves to your level and be content to not try to learn anything new about the hobby or about model building. Did the owner of the model you feel was slighted ask the judges why they made their decision the way they did. In case you didn't know, every category was first judged by the primary judging team (3 members min), then it was checked by a check team, and if there were any questions, the category head judge was brought into the picture and the original judges had to justify their decision. If they were wrong, the change was made. It did happen in several categories, and the changes were made where they had to be. I feel you owe a number of the list members an open apology. We have done our best to provide a fair event, and aside from you, I have heard nothing derogatory about this years judging. John ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 23:04:44 -0700 From: "David Calhoun" To: "Multiple recipients of list" Subject: Albatros finish Message-ID: <001d01bff790$914f2e20$56e23ccc@oemcomputer> Hi All, Here's a question concerning the aluminum finish on Albatros D.V's. The Windsock Albatros special mentions reports of some aluminum finished aircraft, and I saw Dan San Abbot's drawing of Udet's aluminum D.V. I haven't seen any profiles of aluminum painted albatroses, and am wondering how common this aluminum was. Since many of the Marine Jastas appear aluminum stippled over with dark green, was this a naval idea to use the aluminum for waterproofing? Also, was it an aluminum dope like the Nieuports used, or a silver-gray such as Pfalz used? and last but not least, on an overall aluminum Albatros, would all insignia be outlined in white or just black crosses as on Pfalz aircraft? Also, was it a flat or gloss painted aluminum, or was clear dope painted over it? Dave Calhoun ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:10:18 -0500 From: "P. Howard" To: Subject: Re: the IPMS style Message-ID: <002401bff778$32df62a0$88928ece@phoward> Tom, Please move on to a different subject, as we all know that you think IPMS is the scourge of modeling. You obviously have IPMS issues that are unresolved and should probably seek counseling so that those wounds will heal. Paul H A wittless puppet of the IPMS propaganda machine. -----Original Message----- From: Albatrosdv@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Date: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 6:35 PM Subject: Re: the IPMS style >All right, all right, everyone. Enough already!!!! > >There has been a lot of discussion of late at HyperScale about what many of >us who have ever been around *real* airplanes call the "over-stylized" - and >highly *un*realistic - manner of painting and finishing that seems to adorn >the winning airplane model of every IPMS contest I have seen since 1994 (I >would likely have seen it at the beginning of the cycle, but I wasn't going >to contests prior to that other than ValleyCon). It gets more and more so >every year. It is what some have called an "overslop" from the Armor guys >using "the Verlinden Method" in their finishes. And judges *do* consider this >the standard! In 1998, I spoke about this repeatedly over at the web >publication I worked at before helping to start IM (I don't mention the name >of its owner or itself), and several National IPMS judges rushed to their own >defense (as they have here) in saying that this style "looked better" and was >what should be done. I was unsurprised to look at the winners in Santa Clara >after hearing from these folks. That year at OrangeCon I had a judge tell me >my models would start winning awards if I would adopt "the style that wins." > >FWIW, I do use a modified (and very modest) pre-shading technique, >particularly on fabric wings, to hint at the structure beneath, but I rely on >such things as sun fading in my models (look at any of the color photos Jeff >Ethell published in his various WW2 in color books to see this look on the >1:1s) to achieve a look of reality. > >So DON'T insult my intelligence and my experience by saying this doesn't go >on when it does! And it *is* now "the norm." > >Tom Cleaver > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 21:59:25 -0500 From: huggins1@swbell.net (John Huggins) To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: New Workbench Photo Message-ID: >In a message dated 00-07-26 21:32:05 EDT, you write: > ><< Just wanted to let everyone know that a pic of Dennis U's workbench is > now on line and can be found at > > http://www2.firstsaga.com/lfendy/fof_site.htm > > Hopefully, tomorrow I'll have some more in-progress shots of my > Albatros and some of my grandson who just turned two. >> > >Dennis' workbench is about what I expected.... neat, tidy, orderly.... just >like his work. John Huggins' bench, however, scares the hell out of me. >Even more disturbing, there is a large roll of toilet paper in the >foreground. Could there possibly be a toilet bowl under all that clutter? >:-) > Rest easy, the paper is for cleaning the airbrush and paint brushes. In all honesty, the work table looks like that because there has been very little work done in there for the past three years. There has been a lot of stacking (random placement) of kits, parts, supplies and other things during that time. In fact, I can't even get to the work table now. I will be doing a complete rework of the area later, but till then, I do my building on a TV tray and out of boxes that get moved from place to place. The picture was good for a few laughs and can go towards letting a new room mate know what to look forward to when we really get wrapped up in the hobby both as a hobbyist and a profession, then take on a National Convention and a new career at the same time. John ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 23:13:39 EDT From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: the IPMS style Message-ID: In a message dated 7/26/00 4:35:45 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Albatrosdv@aol.com writes: << It is what some have called an "overslop" from the Armor guys using "the Verlinden Method" in their finishes. And judges *do* consider this the standard! >> That Verlinden "look", that Verlinden "style", has turned me off the entire military miniature world. One figure after another, over-highlighted and over-shadowed with monstrous orangy flesh tones carefully applied to a hideously deformed long-necked wretch with mismatched arm lengths. RK ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 23:13:37 EDT From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: the IPMS style Message-ID: <94.7b38007.26b102e1@aol.com> In a message dated 7/26/00 7:57:51 PM Pacific Daylight Time, huggins1@swbell.net writes: << Tom, Until you get off your high horse and actually join the judging teams and learn what is actually going on instead of what you have heard second hand or what you think is the norm you have no real basis to comment. Like I have always been told, until you have been there and done that, you do not know what the real story is. >> Tom HAS judged- I've seen him in action and he scares me! He'll also report on the whys and wherefores to any contestant who wonders how a given decision was arrived at. RK ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:21:02 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: Message-ID: <7186131CB805D411A60E0090272F7C7115D439@mimhexch1.mim.com.au> Otis says: > > By directive, all German lozenge covered aircraft received a > final coat of > flat lacquer, so flat or semigloss finishes did exist. Either this applied only to Naval aircraft (as suggested by RLR in various datafiles) or the various manufacturers did a lousy job of dulling the dope. 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 Support Centre. E-Mail: supportcentre@mim.com.au or phone: Australia 07 3833 8042. ************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 23:45:54 -0500 From: "P. Howard" To: Subject: Re: Message-ID: <003901bff785$8f3094e0$88928ece@phoward> -> By directive, all German lozenge covered aircraft received a >> final coat of >> flat lacquer, so flat or semigloss finishes did exist. > >Either this applied only to Naval aircraft (as suggested by RLR in various >datafiles) or the various manufacturers did a lousy job of dulling the dope. > >Shane The lozenge sample I've actually had my hands on had a slightly milky appearance in the dope/lacquer finish. Its posible this was caused by the use of the specified flattening agent. The overall sheen of the sample was a semi gloss. Up close it was not terribly glossy, but on a large area such wing surfaces, there would be plenty of shine. Just my $.02 worth, Paul H ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:06:51 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: Message-ID: <7186131CB805D411A60E0090272F7C7115D43A@mimhexch1.mim.com.au> Paul says: > The lozenge sample I've actually had my hands on had a slightly milky > appearance in the dope/lacquer finish. Its posible this was > caused by the > use of the specified flattening agent. The overall sheen of > the sample was > a semi gloss. Up close it was not terribly glossy, but on a > large area such > wing surfaces, there would be plenty of shine. A couple of years ago I visited the AWM and was fortunate enough to take lots of close up photos of their WW1 collection - and to be escorted for part of the second day by their curator of aircraft. We discussed the then imminent removal of the AWM Albatros for a complete refurbishment and he was kind enough to show me their laboratory where analysis (everything from microscopic through spectrographic to X-ray) of materials was conducted. One of the items I was most interested in was a piece of the original fabric from D.5390 which they were stripping back, layer by layer - so the surface finish was already gone. *However* he told me that they'd decided that the entirely matt appearance of the sample when they started was due to microcracking - doped fabric is stiff and hard, you can roll it like a sheet of card, but this stresses the surface of the dope and repeated rolling and 80+years quite took the shine off it. FWIW when she's finished, she'll be glossier than she appeared at my last visit. HOW much glossier, I guess I'll have to wait and see. Not intended as an argument - just an anecdote 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 Support Centre. E-Mail: supportcentre@mim.com.au or phone: Australia 07 3833 8042. ************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:20:40 -0500 From: "P. Howard" To: Subject: Re: Message-ID: <004001bff78a$68b800a0$88928ece@phoward> Its entirely possible that the microcracking he mentioned is what had happened to the piece of lozenge I looked at. It had been stored in a rolled up condition for who knows how long. As an aside, it was a piece of undersurface 5 color lozenge. The colors where strikingly close to those on the color chips I had made up for me by DS Abbott. Just some gee wiz information... Cheers, Paul H -----Original Message----- From: Shane Weier To: Multiple recipients of list Date: Thursday, July 27, 2000 12:09 AM Subject: RE: >Paul says: > >> The lozenge sample I've actually had my hands on had a slightly milky >> appearance in the dope/lacquer finish. Its posible this was >> caused by the >> use of the specified flattening agent. The overall sheen of >> the sample was >> a semi gloss. Up close it was not terribly glossy, but on a >> large area such >> wing surfaces, there would be plenty of shine. > >A couple of years ago I visited the AWM and was fortunate enough to take >lots of close up photos of their WW1 collection - and to be escorted for >part of the second day by their curator of aircraft. We discussed the then >imminent removal of the AWM Albatros for a complete refurbishment and he was >kind enough to show me their laboratory where analysis (everything from >microscopic through spectrographic to X-ray) of materials was conducted. One >of the items I was most interested in was a piece of the original fabric >from D.5390 which they were stripping back, layer by layer - so the surface >finish was already gone. *However* he told me that they'd decided that the >entirely matt appearance of the sample when they started was due to >microcracking - doped fabric is stiff and hard, you can roll it like a sheet >of card, but this stresses the surface of the dope and repeated rolling and >80+years quite took the shine off it. > >FWIW when she's finished, she'll be glossier than she appeared at my last >visit. HOW much glossier, I guess I'll have to wait and see. > >Not intended as an argument - just an anecdote > >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 Support Centre. >E-Mail: supportcentre@mim.com.au or phone: Australia 07 3833 8042. >************************************************************** > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 02:21:50 EDT From: Albatrosdv@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: the IPMS style Message-ID: <6c.18571ee.26b12efe@aol.com> In a message dated 7/26/00 9:57:51 PM EST, huggins1@swbell.net writes: << Tom, Until you get off your high horse and actually join the judging teams and learn what is actually going on instead of what you have heard second hand or what you think is the norm you have no real basis to comment. Like I have always been told, until you have been there and done that, you do not know what the real story is. >> I've been a judge. Frequently. Until I got tired of dealing with the rest of the "team." Tom ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 02:27:23 EDT From: Albatrosdv@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: the IPMS style Message-ID: <9a.79bb386.26b1304b@aol.com> In a message dated 7/26/00 10:12:35 PM EST, phoward@abilene.com writes: << You obviously have IPMS issues that are unresolved and should probably seek counseling so that those wounds will heal. >> I have as low a tolerance for stupidity in my hobby as I do in my day job. And I hold myself to the standards I speak of. I think my work in this hobby will bear that out to anyone who cares to investigate. TC ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 02:44:41 EDT From: Albatrosdv@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Candice Sopwith Pup Project Message-ID: <36.9333770.26b13459@aol.com> In a message dated 7/26/00 6:40:30 PM EST, tskio4@home.com writes: << However on the 1:1 front there is a company in Czechoslovakia that makes 4 cylinder air cooled inline engines that could easily pass for an OT engine in a replica. >> There are also some nice small radials still made in the former Evil Empire. Not to mention vacuum tubes (how's *that* for ot?). I have a friend who makes great stereo recording equipment using vacuum tube technology (creates better sound, and what I have heard from him leads me to agree) and he prays to Moscow every day that they keept those things in production. TC ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:16:43 +0200 From: "Neil Crawford" To: Subject: SV: Message-ID: <200007271103.NAA03780@mb03.swip.net> You wrote: Better to have your models look like what the judges expect than to have > them look like the real aircraft! Stuff the judges, let them learn how real aircraft look, eventually they will. Best regards Neil ---------- > Från: fedders > Till: Multiple recipients of list > Ämne: > Datum: den 26 juli 2000 18:10 > > > I remember being told (quite pointedly) that there was no varnish but > gloss before the 30's and that dope was also very glossy during and after > WWI. Dull or semigloss finishes could not have existed in new aircraft > in WWI. > > That is not to say that the glossy finish could not weather to a duller > finish and this undoubtedly did happen. > > However, your models will "look better" if they are not too glossy > (except for the wood). > > Better to have your models look like what the judges expect than to have > them look like the real aircraft! > > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:23:42 +0200 From: "Neil Crawford" To: Subject: SV: Lone Star Nie.28 p/e Message-ID: <200007271103.NAA03816@mb03.swip.net> Pity I've just finished the cockpit of my Ni28 without this, incidentally I've just been looking at the 160hp Monosoupape, it doesn't seem to have any exhaust pipes!? How does that work? /Neil ---------- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:37:55 +0200 From: "Neil Crawford" To: Subject: SV: Flat/gloss Message-ID: <200007271104.NAA03884@mb03.swip.net> My japanese motorbike thinks its english and leaks oil, it isn't shiny, just dirty (and half-matt) FWIW/Neil ---------- > Från: Albatrosdv@aol.com > Till: Multiple recipients of list > Ämne: Re: Flat/gloss > Datum: den 27 juli 2000 01:42 > > In a message dated 7/26/00 6:03:58 PM EST, sdw@qld.mim.com.au writes: > > << We all have a role. You've succeeded - I'm confused ! >> > > Well, I guess I am, too, because I was told by people who hang out with the > 1:1s that it was the castor oil that shined up the finish. FWIW, this is also > Chris Gannon's explanation in his discussion of finishes on his instruction > sheets. I will say, having "degreased" my share of airplanes back in the > military, that oily surfaces do tend to attract dirt, dust, etc., and hardly > ever seemed shiny, which would certainly tend to support your points as to > cause of the finishes. > > Ah well, at least we're arguing about *important* things like models, rather > than the kind of barroom discussions that lead to trips outside for > settlement. :-) > > TC ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 2490 **********************