WWI Digest 2824 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re SE5/a questions by "Sandy Adam" 2) Re: Re SE5/a questions by "Bob Pearson" 3) RE: Re SE5/a questions by "dfernet0" 4) Re: DVa wing tip conflict by Mike Fletcher 5) RE: DVa wing tip conflict by Crawford Neil 6) Re: S.E.5 Questions by "Michael Kendix" 7) Sram Models by Allan Wright 8) Re: DVa wing tip conflict by Mark Miller 9) Re: DML Fokker D.VII - Ebay by GRBroman@aol.com 10) Re: DVa wing tip conflict by huggins1@swbell.net (John Huggins) 11) units of measure was RE: DVa wing tip conflict by Mark Miller 12) RE: units of measure was RE: DVa wing tip conflict by Crawford Neil 13) Inexpensive bokk: German Knights of the Air by "Michael Kendix" 14) RE: Degelow's Pfalz DIIIa by "Graham Hunter" 15) Re: DVa wing tip conflict by Mark Miller 16) Re: Sikorski S.XVI, was RE: Loose books, was RE: Underneath by "Lance Krieg" 17) Re: My Modeling Days are Over! by "Lance Krieg" 18) Re: Sikorski S.XVI, was RE: Loose books, was RE: Underneath by "Michael Kendix" 19) Schmupfstein Made Me Do It!!! by Sharon Henderson 20) =?big5?Q?=A8=C8=ACw=B3=CC=A4j=AA=BA=B9q=A4l/CAD/CAM/CAE/=B3n=C5=E9=BA=F4?= by cadsoft@mailcity.com 21) Re: S.E.5 Questions by "DAVID BURKE" 22) Re: S.E.5 Questions by "Bob Pearson" 23) another interesting fokker site by "dfernet0" 24) New S.16 images by "Matt Bittner" 25) Re: DVa wing tip conflict by Zulis@aol.com 26) Re: S.E.5 Questions by Lee Mensinger 27) Pegasus kit question by "ZELNICK, KENNETH T" 28) Re: S.E.5 Questions by Peter Leonard 29) Washout Was: DVa wing tip conflict by "Ken Acosta" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 11:32:25 -0000 From: "Sandy Adam" To: "AAA - WW1 Group" Subject: Re SE5/a questions Message-ID: <02c701c052e5$aa9d5540$19e8b094@sandyada> > I always thought McCudden flew the SE5a with red spinner. Decals for this > are available on Americals 56 squadron sheet. The Lindberg kit can be used > to make McCudden's aircraft with a little work. But the RFC decals in the Lindberg kit are for 85Sqdn - "Crieff No2" - a presentation aircraft from my home town! - That's one I'll be doing when I get round to the squadrons of this beautiful aeroplane I shall make when Eduard release their interpretation. I have searched the Se5 File, (a must if you want the low-down on the beast), high and low for any reference to a "Crieff No1" but I must assume that this was another type. I've searched various books on presentation aircraft too (Duval, Bruce etc) but no luck. Anybody ever seen it? Sandy ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 03:40:10 -0800 From: "Bob Pearson" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Re SE5/a questions Message-ID: <200011201251.EAA25181@mail.rapidnet.net> C&C(GB) should have it. Around volume 15 or so they did a special issue on presentation aircraft Bob ---------- >From: "Sandy Adam" >To: Multiple recipients of list >Subject: Re SE5/a questions >Date: Mon, Nov 20, 2000, 3:37 am > >> I always thought McCudden flew the SE5a with red spinner. Decals for this >> are available on Americals 56 squadron sheet. The Lindberg kit can be > used >> to make McCudden's aircraft with a little work. > > But the RFC decals in the Lindberg kit are for 85Sqdn - "Crieff No2" - a > presentation aircraft from my home town! - That's one I'll be doing when I > get round to the squadrons of this beautiful aeroplane I shall make when > Eduard release their interpretation. > > I have searched the Se5 File, (a must if you want the low-down on the > beast), high and low for any reference to a "Crieff No1" but I must assume > that this was another type. I've searched various books on presentation > aircraft too (Duval, Bruce etc) but no luck. Anybody ever seen it? > Sandy > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 08:40:03 -0300 From: "dfernet0" To: Subject: RE: Re SE5/a questions Message-ID: <044f01c052e6$a12228a0$4640a8c0@ssp.salud.rosario.gov.ar> I got one illustration in a book, I can't remember wich, but I recall of thinking of you as being from that place when I saw it. I'll look in my library for it and I'll send you a scan ASAP. Regards D. ----- Original Message ----- From: Sandy Adam To: Multiple recipients of list Sent: Monday, November 20, 2000 8:37 AM Subject: Re SE5/a questions > > I always thought McCudden flew the SE5a with red spinner. Decals for this > > are available on Americals 56 squadron sheet. The Lindberg kit can be > used > > to make McCudden's aircraft with a little work. > > But the RFC decals in the Lindberg kit are for 85Sqdn - "Crieff No2" - a > presentation aircraft from my home town! - That's one I'll be doing when I > get round to the squadrons of this beautiful aeroplane I shall make when > Eduard release their interpretation. > > I have searched the Se5 File, (a must if you want the low-down on the > beast), high and low for any reference to a "Crieff No1" but I must assume > that this was another type. I've searched various books on presentation > aircraft too (Duval, Bruce etc) but no luck. Anybody ever seen it? > Sandy > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 08:04:23 -0500 From: Mike Fletcher To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: DVa wing tip conflict Message-ID: <3A192157.243B2398@mars.ark.com> Dihedral would make the discrepancy worse - the special at least has views of flat *components* and lack curvature in the ribs which should be present if they showed dihedral. My measurements still find the span 1/32" short, but it is within the range of distortion caused by the printing equipment and of expected changes that most papers experience from environmental factors such as heat and humidity. My guess is that they fixed the drawing. The dimension marked on the drawing for span is almost exactly 26' 6" ... It does strikes me as odd that a British drawing of a British aircraft in a British publication is dimensioned in metric though. Just goes to show that no matter how well prepared a drawing is it still cannot be trusted 100%. Mike Fletcher Bob Pearson wrote: > > > The biggest Datafile whopper I've studied was #2 Sopwith Pup. Most sources > > give the span as 26' 6" . This would be 6 5/8" in 1/48. The drawings measure > > out at 6 11/64". Almost 5/16" to short! That's just shy of a scale foot and > > half, which is considerable.( maybe the reprint has this corrected?) > > RK > > Does this take into consideration the dihedral? That could shorten the > apparent length > > Bob ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 14:16:48 +0100 From: Crawford Neil To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: DVa wing tip conflict Message-ID: Mike wrote: The dimension marked on the drawing for span is almost exactly 26' 6" .. It does strikes me as odd that a British drawing of a British aircraft in a British publication is dimensioned in metric though. I think the British are gradually going over the metric system, I think I've heard my cousin (in England) complaining that he can't understand his children any longer. Not for the usual reasons, but because they talk metric measurements. Just as a curiosity, in Sweden which is one of the most metric countries in the world, we still use inches for plank dimensions, and a swedish inch is slightly different from a british inch! /Neil ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 13:20:31 GMT From: "Michael Kendix" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: S.E.5 Questions Message-ID: I clearly missed something here. The 1/72nd scale Revell kit came with what looked liked US decals. They had a load of "19" 's in them and a little person with a chopper in his hand. I built this kit with those decals, so is this not a WW1 scheme? Michael >--- DAVID BURKE wrote: > > Hi Guys, > > > > When I got the Lindberg S.E.5a kit, it came with > > U.S. markings. Did the > > USAS use them in combat? How many? _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 08:53:08 -0500 (EST) From: Allan Wright To: wwi Subject: Sram Models Message-ID: <200011201353.IAA19453@pease1.sr.unh.edu> I have heard from SRAM models again, they announced that they now have the following models in 1/144 scale: Halberstadt Cl.IV B.E. 2e -Allan =============================================================================== Allan Wright Jr. | "I Played the Fool" - Southside Johnny University of New Hampshire +-------------------------------------------------- Research Computing Center | WWI Modeling mailing list: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Internet: aew@unh.edu | WWI Modeling WWW Page: http://pease1.sr.unh.edu =============================================================================== ------------------------------ Date: 20 Nov 2000 06:24:54 -0800 From: Mark Miller To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: DVa wing tip conflict Message-ID: <20001120142454.21121.cpmta@c012.sfo.cp.net> Hi all I brought the wings to work where I have a decent metric ruler. So if my measurements and calculations are right .... The B. Waugh plans give the span for the upper wing of the Albatrod DVa as 9004 mm, which concures with the data on the cookup page (9000mm) this translates to 187.6 mm in 1/48 scale. the 1/48 Glencoe wing measures out to 188 mm = 9024 at 1:1 - a scale 20mm to long all things considered I would call that "dead" on The 1/48 Eduard DV wing measures out to 184 mm = 8832 at 1:1 - a scale 172 mm to short mutiply by 25.5 makes that a scale 6.7 inches to short !! btw foreshortening can be difficult to deal with - luckily there is no dihedral on this wing - but the 5 degree angle of incidence has caused me some heartache on the virtual Dva wing Mark _______________________________________________________________________ Free Unlimited Internet Access! Try it now! http://www.zdnet.com/downloads/altavista/index.html _______________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 09:59:32 EST From: GRBroman@aol.com To: Subject: Re: DML Fokker D.VII - Ebay Message-ID: <90.c52391a.274a9654@aol.com> Charles Duckworth, could you please contact me off list at grbroman@aol.com? Thanks, Glen ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 08:40:20 -0600 From: huggins1@swbell.net (John Huggins) To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: DVa wing tip conflict Message-ID: >snipThe 1/48 Eduard DV wing measures out to 184 mm = 8832 at 1:1 - >a scale 172 mm to short >mutiply by 25.5 makes that a scale 6.7 inches to short !! snip In other words, the wing is just a pencil line width over 1/8 of an inch short? ------------------------------ Date: 20 Nov 2000 07:02:57 -0800 From: Mark Miller To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: units of measure was RE: DVa wing tip conflict Message-ID: <20001120150257.28194.cpmta@c012.sfo.cp.net> On Mon, 20 November 2000, Crawford Neil wrote: > > Mike wrote: The dimension marked on the drawing for span is almost exactly > 26' 6" > . It does strikes me as odd that a British drawing of a British > aircraft in a British publication is dimensioned in metric though. > > > I think the British are gradually going over the metric system, I think > I've heard my cousin (in England) complaining that he can't understand > his children any longer. Not for the usual reasons, but because they talk > metric measurements. Just as a curiosity, in Sweden which is one of the most > > metric countries in the world, we still use inches for plank dimensions, > and a swedish inch is slightly different from a british inch! > /Neil I heard somewhere that one of those failed NASA Mars missions was caused by the use of the wrong unit of measure - pretty embarassing way to blow millions of dollars Personaly - I wish everyone would just pick one and be done with it I'll vote metric because it makes more sense - even though I still "think" in inches although I think by now I have all the decimal equivalents of the major fractions memorised Mark _______________________________________________________________________ Free Unlimited Internet Access! Try it now! http://www.zdnet.com/downloads/altavista/index.html _______________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 16:40:14 +0100 From: Crawford Neil To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: units of measure was RE: DVa wing tip conflict Message-ID: I have to make a small correction, a swedish inch is 24.7 mm, compared to a proper inch 25.4mm, but we don't use them any more. For planks and wood-screws we use British inches. /Neil -----Original Message----- From: Mark Miller [mailto:albatros1212@altavista.com] Sent: den 20 november 2000 16:08 To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: units of measure was RE: DVa wing tip conflict On Mon, 20 November 2000, Crawford Neil wrote: > > Mike wrote: The dimension marked on the drawing for span is almost exactly > 26' 6" > . It does strikes me as odd that a British drawing of a British > aircraft in a British publication is dimensioned in metric though. > > > I think the British are gradually going over the metric system, I think > I've heard my cousin (in England) complaining that he can't understand > his children any longer. Not for the usual reasons, but because they talk > metric measurements. Just as a curiosity, in Sweden which is one of the most > > metric countries in the world, we still use inches for plank dimensions, > and a swedish inch is slightly different from a british inch! > /Neil I heard somewhere that one of those failed NASA Mars missions was caused by the use of the wrong unit of measure - pretty embarassing way to blow millions of dollars Personaly - I wish everyone would just pick one and be done with it I'll vote metric because it makes more sense - even though I still "think" in inches although I think by now I have all the decimal equivalents of the major fractions memorised Mark _______________________________________________________________________ Free Unlimited Internet Access! Try it now! http://www.zdnet.com/downloads/altavista/index.html _______________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 15:58:48 GMT From: "Michael Kendix" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Inexpensive bokk: German Knights of the Air Message-ID: While going through the Barnes & Nobles discount area, I found a Barnes & Noble published edition of "German Knights of the Air" at $8.98 hardback. I cannot speak to accuracy or completeness but it's supposed to have all the WW1 German flyers who were winners of the "Pour Le Merit". Plenty of photos of the people and some of the aeroplanes. I peeled off the label and it had been reduced from $12.98, which in itself was advertized as a "sale" price. Also, ot, picked up "Fighter" about the Battle of Britain for around $10. On a less happy note, I found Martin Middlebrook's "The First Day of the Battle of the Somme" in Peguin paperback but Barnes & Noble wanted $19.95 for it! I was aghast and reasoned I could purchase a more durbable copy secondhand for less, plus the writing in this edition is tiny. Michael HTH _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 09:58:27 -0600 From: "Graham Hunter" To: Subject: RE: Degelow's Pfalz DIIIa Message-ID: <000101c0530a$b8f4c040$fa0101c0@grahamh> Add another cool looking Phalz D.IIIa to the list of 8. Degelow's D.IIIa is another beauty :-) Graham H. ------------------------------ Date: 20 Nov 2000 08:01:13 -0800 From: Mark Miller To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: DVa wing tip conflict Message-ID: <20001120160113.27917.cpmta@c012.sfo.cp.net> On Mon, 20 November 2000, John Huggins wrote: > > >snipThe 1/48 Eduard DV wing measures out to 184 mm = 8832 at 1:1 - > >a scale 172 mm to short > >mutiply by 25.5 makes that a scale 6.7 inches to short !! > > snip > In other words, the wing is just a pencil line width over 1/8 of an inch short? Yea that's about right .14 inches or 3.6 mm actualy a good example at how much easier metric numbers are to deal with and I put in the wrong scaling factor in the original post it's 25.4 not 25.5 the calculations were done with the right number- just a typo Mark _______________________________________________________________________ Free Unlimited Internet Access! Try it now! http://www.zdnet.com/downloads/altavista/index.html _______________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 10:04:28 -0600 From: "Lance Krieg" To: Subject: Re: Sikorski S.XVI, was RE: Loose books, was RE: Underneath Message-ID: Todd wants: "...a basic breakdown of types of material used in the Master Club Sikorski kit?" Just resin, though there is fine wire imbedded in the resin for all struts. The wheels (amazing little beauties!) seem to be some kind of synthetic thread. I don't recall any PE... And you get a used syringe needle, so open the box with care, or you may get HIV or Hepatitis in addtion to a damn fine model. A more detailed breakdown was posted about 9 months or so ago - you can check the archives. An Il'ya in 1/48 from these guys would be something, though I'd just as soon have a Voisin first... Keep us posted! Lance ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 10:19:51 -0600 From: "Lance Krieg" To: Subject: Re: My Modeling Days are Over! Message-ID: Brent, you're approaching this all wrong. Instead of having less time, you should have more, as you can now delegate a number of those irritating personal chores like cooking and cleaning to one or more assistants. I thought this was the original reason proposed for even HAVING children. Personally, I kept divorcing wives until I found one with her own hobbies, and have now found connubial bliss. Mind you, this approach is expensive, and recalling that you need to have enough money left for paint, glue, booze, and ammo, you should consider at length before executing this plan. But you are welcome to stop in Des Moines on your way to Texas, and take a look for yourself. You can drop off unbuilt kits, and I will forward them on in small, unobtrusive or camouflaged packets - assuming I already have the model in question. Lance ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 16:31:59 GMT From: "Michael Kendix" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Sikorski S.XVI, was RE: Loose books, was RE: Underneath Message-ID: >From: "Lance Krieg" >An Il'ya in 1/48 from these guys would be something, though I'd just >as >soon have a Voisin first... A 1/48th scale Ilya - 25 inch (63.5cm) wingspan - most impressive and in resin too. That would require significant structural strength for the struts and maybe rigging too. Bigger than that 1/48th scale Short 185 and 4 engines too. Extrapolating form the cost of an S-16, comes to about $800. hey, you could do a Zveno with a couple of S-16's on each wing and round the whole thing off for about a grand. I wonder how they will do on accuracy? I can see St. Harry poised to have a go. Michael _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 12:06:59 -0500 From: Sharon Henderson To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Schmupfstein Made Me Do It!!! Message-ID: It's not my fault, as Capt. Hans Solo of the Luftstreitkraefte has been known to say at staff meetings.... ;-) Call it being over-eager, but I had to repaint my tyres this weekend. I am trying some new techniques on making my albatros look real. .. and overdid it. Therefore, rather than blame myself -- Who, ME?? -- I have decided to blame the good Schutze Schmupfstein. Please reference Diego's cool cartoon: http://members.nbci.com/_XMCM/otprojects/images/cartoon_df012.jpg I think we should adopt an institution: any time anything goes wrong modelling WW1 anything, it should be blamed on Schmupfstein. So I am assigning the inaugural blame... :-) Sharon, Back to repainting tyres. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 12:41:48 -0500 (EST) From: cadsoft@mailcity.com To: Spliter4 Cc: HK99-9 Subject: =?big5?Q?=A8=C8=ACw=B3=CC=A4j=AA=BA=B9q=A4l/CAD/CAM/CAE/=B3n=C5=E9=BA=F4?= Message-ID: <200011201741.MAA21054@pease1.sr.unh.edu> 我們的軟體都一定是正式版.全模組,歡迎來信詢問各個軟體的價格 如果有興趣請寫信到下列E-MAIL位置並請留下您的姓名及聯絡電話 mailto:cadsoft@mailcity.com ========================================================== OUR SOFTWARES IS RELESE VERSION AND FULL MOLD IF YOU WANT ASK THEY PRICE PLEASE E-MAIL TO FOLLOW E-MAIL ADDRESS mailto:cadsoft@mailcity.com ========================================================= ABAQUS VERSION 5.8.1 ADAM V 10.1 ALPHA CAM 2000 ANSYS V5.6.2 ART CAM PRO VERSION 4.5 CAMAX VERSION 14.0 CATIA V5R4 中文版 CADCEUS VERSION V5-1R-2E CIMAGRAFI(浮雕大師) VERSION 6.2 CIMATRON VERSION 11 中文版 CODE V 8.30 COPY CAD VERSION 3.001 DIGI SURF Delcam SOLUTIONS DUCT 5540 EDGE CAM VERSION 5.0 (中文版)" ESPRIT 2000(DP) (中文版)" EUCLID VERSION 3.2.1 B GBTOOL V10.0 SR 2 HELIX 2000 HP SolidDesigner V2000 PLUS V8.1 Hyper Mill V 5.1 (附MDT 5.0)中文版 ICEM 2000 I R2 IDEAS MASTER 8.0 中文版 IMAGEWAVE Bulid!IT V1.3 MASTER CAM V8.0 中文版 MODEX 5.1中文版 MOLDFLOW 4.0 專業版 Moldflow Plasctics Insight 2.0 POWER INSPECT VERSION 1350 POWER MILL VERSION 3005 POWER SHAPE V 3020 PRO/E 2000I R2 (2000100) (中文版)" PRO/E CDRS 2000I R2 (2000090)(英文版)" PTC CADDS5 VERSION 11.0 QUANTURM 2.0 D SHOE-MAKER V1.1 SMART CAM VERSION 11 SOLID WORK 2000 SOLID EDGE8.0中文版 SPACE-E (GRADE) V 2.2 STRIM 100 VERSION 6.1.3 SURFACER 10.5 THINK 5 中文專業版 ToolChest 7.2 TOP SOLID 中文版 TYPE 3 V4.2(中文版)" UG17英文版 UG-II V16 SLICE For UG15 UG_Light 車燈設計分析的最佳模擬工具! VERI CUT VERSION 4.4!!! VISI 8.0 英文版 VISI 7.14中文版 Virtual Gibbs 2000 WORK NC 99.4 景興鞋類設計模擬系統 電子軟體類(electronic softwares) ANPS9600 ANSOFT HFSS Version 7.0.0.4 Ansoft Maxwell SpiceLink 4 ANSOFT SERENADE V8.0 CADENCE V13.6 Exemplar FabMaster V8D5 GOLD Fidelity 2.1英文版 GBTOOL V10.0 SR 2 GC-PLACE GC-CAM V4.1.4 PAR-CAM HP EESOF(ADS)1.3 HP HEFF V5.5 IE 3D7.0英文版 MICROWAVE OFFICE 2000 (VERSION 3.21) MENTOR GRAPHIC C4 MEBTOR GRAPHIC 2000 ModelSim 5.4 B PlanMaster V 3.39 POWER PCB 3.51 PROTEL 99 SP-5 Symplicity R600 VALOR Genesis 2000 Version 7.0 VALOR ENTER-PRICE 3000 V5.3 Veri Best 2000 _____________________________________________________________________________________ ｄ ｍ ． ｓ ｕ ｎ ｕ ｐ ． ｎ ｅ ｔ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 12:04:33 -0600 From: "DAVID BURKE" To: Subject: Re: S.E.5 Questions Message-ID: <005901c0531d$961fd740$b890aec7@com> > Gee, and what book would that be from? Alex Revell's 'Victoria Cross' from FMP. >Mannocks SE5a D278 was conjectural, > the form and location were based on other SE5as from No.74 Sqn, but it can > be assumed that the letter is on the lower wing > > Bob > DB ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 10:14:34 -0800 From: "Bob Pearson" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: S.E.5 Questions Message-ID: <200011201926.LAA02269@mail.rapidnet.net> That is No.25 Sqn USAS. .. they reached the front too late to fly actual combat missions, but did fly one or two unarmed missions on the 10/11th November 1918 so they could say they were in the war. Many USAS squadrons used it postwar. Bob ---------- >From: "Michael Kendix" >To: Multiple recipients of list >Subject: Re: S.E.5 Questions >Date: Mon, Nov 20, 2000, 5:27 am > > I clearly missed something here. The 1/72nd scale Revell kit came with what > looked liked US decals. They had a load of "19" 's in them and a little > person with a chopper in his hand. I built this kit with those decals, so > is this not a WW1 scheme? > > Michael > >>--- DAVID BURKE wrote: >> > Hi Guys, >> > >> > When I got the Lindberg S.E.5a kit, it came with >> > U.S. markings. Did the >> > USAS use them in combat? How many? > > _________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 15:32:56 -0300 From: "dfernet0" To: "WW1 modeling Mail List" Subject: another interesting fokker site Message-ID: <002c01c05320$4e7f5340$4640a8c0@ssp.salud.rosario.gov.ar> hey friends! Check this one! http://www.collectors-edition.com/f-t-s_titel_english.htm You have to become a member to enjoy these goodies, but I know that some list members will be pleased to do so. D. another cheapskate ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 12:52:52 -0600 From: "Matt Bittner" To: "wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu" Subject: New S.16 images Message-ID: <200011201852.KAA16362@harrier.prod.itd.earthlink.net> Thanks to Dave Calhoun, I just uploaded some images of the replica Sikorsky S.16 as it exists at the New England Air Museum to the Photo Archives section. Matt Bittner WW1 Modeling Site Assistant Editor :-) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 14:33:32 EST From: Zulis@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: DVa wing tip conflict Message-ID: <95.332c348.274ad68c@aol.com> Neil writes: << swedish inch is slightly different from a british inch >> At the risk of playing straight man to each and every joker on this list.... one wonders why the Swedes adopted a 'short' inch..... DZ :-) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 14:18:05 -0600 From: Lee Mensinger To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: S.E.5 Questions Message-ID: <3A1986FD.F80FE8B2@x25.net> I do not recall seeing a Royal Aircraft Factory SE 5 with a spinner on it.. Seems I have a mental block or something. Flat nose and high pitch propeller. Am I really ill? Lee M. Todd Hayes wrote: > Dave, > > I thought it was McCudden that had the red LVG spinner > on his SE5a. So far, none of the a/g sheets I have > include markings for Mannock. Americals does > excellent 56 squadron decal sets for SE's. They also > do an SE5/5a sheet for 1 squadron. I was thinking > about doing my CSM kit as Ball's a/c. The Se5a, I > believe, equipped one AEF squadron, and it never saw > combat. That's the unit represented in the Linberg > kit. > > TH > > --- DAVID BURKE wrote: > > Hi Guys, > > > > When I got the Lindberg S.E.5a kit, it came with > > U.S. markings. Did the > > USAS use them in combat? How many? > > > > Which type was Mick Mannock's AC with the red > > LVG spinner? Was it a > > S.E.5 or 5a? Are his markings on any of the A/G > > sheets? > > > > Figured I'd do my CSM kit as Mannock's. > > > > > > DB > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Calendar - Get organized for the holidays! > http://calendar.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 14:09:59 -0600 From: "ZELNICK, KENNETH T" To: "'WWI Modeling Digest'" Subject: Pegasus kit question Message-ID: <15888960D28CD211AD1900105A249078012ABA5E@ano-exs02.ano.entergy.com> Greetings, There are some Pegasus kits listed on Ebay that no one has bid on yet, and I'm wondering if these are bad kits, or just overpriced (which never stopped anyone on Ebay before.) They are a Sopwith Salamander, and an early and late issue Snipe, all starting at $4.00. Does anyone out there have an opinion on these kits? I'm thinking about bidding on them so I have something to build for the next cookup. Help! They're 1/72! I'm being tempted by the Dark Side! ;) Please reply directly, as I'm in digest mode and may not see replies to the list until it's too late. TIA, Ken Zelnick ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 21:09:50 +0000 From: Peter Leonard To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: S.E.5 Questions Message-ID: <3A19931E.474053C5@cwcom.net> It's okay Lee, you haven't lost the plot. This was a very local one off mod at squadron level. At risk of opening a(n either a yellow or olive) can of worms, does it look like a Nieuport "Cone" to anyone but me? cheers Peter L Lee Mensinger wrote: > I do not recall seeing a Royal Aircraft Factory SE 5 with a spinner on > it.. Seems I have a mental block or something. Flat nose and high pitch > propeller. Am I really ill? > > Lee M. > > Todd Hayes wrote: > > > Dave, > > > > I thought it was McCudden that had the red LVG spinner > > on his SE5a. So far, none of the a/g sheets I have > > include markings for Mannock. Americals does > > excellent 56 squadron decal sets for SE's. They also > > do an SE5/5a sheet for 1 squadron. I was thinking > > about doing my CSM kit as Ball's a/c. The Se5a, I > > believe, equipped one AEF squadron, and it never saw > > combat. That's the unit represented in the Linberg > > kit. > > > > TH > > > > --- DAVID BURKE wrote: > > > Hi Guys, > > > > > > When I got the Lindberg S.E.5a kit, it came with > > > U.S. markings. Did the > > > USAS use them in combat? How many? > > > > > > Which type was Mick Mannock's AC with the red > > > LVG spinner? Was it a > > > S.E.5 or 5a? Are his markings on any of the A/G > > > sheets? > > > > > > Figured I'd do my CSM kit as Mannock's. > > > > > > > > > DB > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Calendar - Get organized for the holidays! > > http://calendar.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 15:31:35 -0600 From: "Ken Acosta" To: , Subject: Washout Was: DVa wing tip conflict Message-ID: The aeronautical engineer in me is obligated to spout the following: Washout is one method employed by aircraft designers to cause the root to stall first. I can't speak for the engineers of the OT era, but the primary reason for this consideration in the last 70 (ish) years is so that aileron effectiveness can be maintained after the majority of the wing has stopped flying. Some planes have a "stall strip" attached to the leading edge of the wing root that has the same effect, but is simpler and cheaper than building in a wing "twist." Whatever method is used, the bottom line is as sp states: "to increase stability through a stall." The private pilots among us can probably attest to the helpless feeling when our trusty Cessna bug-crusher didn't respond to full left yoke after our instructor talked us into our first full stall. I'm sure the Albatros pilots quickly learned to recognize the onset of a stall and kept the AOA down before the wing tips (and associated ailerons) stopped working. KA >>> smperry@mindspring.com 11/19/00 08:45AM >>> I believe that the Albatros upper wing had a slight washout built in at the tips to increase stability through a stall causing the stall to break from the roots outward to the tips. (A stall breaking at the tip of a wing during a turn can precipitate a nasty spin). ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 2824 **********************