WWI Digest 2989 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: Latest OtF by "Michael S. Alvarado" 2) Re: Most Important? by "Michael S. Alvarado" 3) Re: some roumors by "Michael S. Alvarado" 4) RE: Price of Toko/Roden, was Thanks Neil and Steven by "Michael Kendix" 5) DML DVII by "Charlie and Linda Duckworth" 6) RE: Gotha GL.VII by Todd Hayes 7) SMML by Shane & Lorna Jenkins 8) Re: Giant Cookup by Ernest Thomas 9) Re: Giant Cookup by Todd Hayes 10) Re: Giant Cookup by Todd Hayes 11) Gotha sprues at Roden site by Marc Flake 12) RE: some roumors by Shane Weier 13) RE: Hotmail sucks by "Paul Schwartzkopf" 14) Re: Gotha sprues at Roden site by "Matt Bittner" 15) RE: Gotha sprues at Roden site by Shane Weier 16) Re: Gotha sprues at Roden site by Todd Hayes 17) Re: Giant Cookup by GRBroman@aol.com 18) RE: Gotha sprues at Roden site by "Michael Kendix" 19) RE: Gotha sprues at Roden site by Shane Weier 20) RE: Gotha sprues at Roden site by Shane Weier 21) Re: Most Important? by Eli Geher 22) Re: some roumors by "Michael S. Alvarado" 23) Re: Giant Cookup by CAUhlir@aol.com 24) Re: Gotha sprues at Roden site by Rob & Sherry 25) Re: Price of Toko/Roden, was Thanks Neil and Steven by "Francisca e Pedro Soares" 26) Re: Price of Toko/Roden, was Thanks Neil and Steven by Witold Kozakiewicz ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 19:45:56 -0500 From: "Michael S. Alvarado" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Latest OtF Message-ID: <3A678E43.67A5A336@bellatlantic.net> Got mine today. Even if it is too dark all I can say is very pretty. Alvie Bob Pearson wrote: > Matt says ... > > > 15/3 of Over the Front showed up today. There's a lot to get through > > in this issue! Luckily only one article on a British subject. :-) > > Seriously though, it's one of the better issues. Plus Bob has an ad > > for his CD in there, and supplies the excellent (although printed very > > dark) color profile of SPAD 7 S.1777 on the back cover. > > WOW. . is he ever right. . so far every single profile I have had in OTF > has been misprinted in some way, but this is the worse by far. ... Take a > look at the Vickers gun .. and note the colour .. it should be in black and > grays. .. the entire thing has way too much magenta in it/ > > > One interesting observation I didn't know - there were a couple of SPAD > > 7's that took part of the fly-over in which the multi-colored SPAD 13's > > flew that a few listee's supplied to IM. Very interesting. You do > > learn something new every day. > > The ones I like are the SPADs with the anemic looking cats on them. .. > definately have to profile them for the CD. > > Bob ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 20:13:11 -0500 From: "Michael S. Alvarado" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Most Important? Message-ID: <3A6794A7.56131D24@bellatlantic.net> The effect of war on technology is not so much that of a crucible for new discovery but rather a high pressure stimulus for the devlopment, improvement and mass production of technologies that are slow developing or embryonic in the peace time years preceeding the onset of hostilites. In both world wars, very little new was discovered or invented but technologies and discoveries that were new, cutting edge and basically still in the breadboard stage were developed at a pace three to five times faster than would have occured in peace time. The most extreme example would probably be WWII's Manhattan project - from a theoretical letter by Albert Einstein to President Roosevelt to two incinerated cites in four years. Just my thoughts Alvie DAVID BURKE wrote: > Neil wrote: > > > It's a myth that warfare benefits new technology. If you look at > > aviation the major strides were made between 1903-1912 when the > > basic conceptions were worked out. Then between 1919 and 1926, > > all the advances in engine-cooling, variable propellors, > > retractable undercarriages and all-metal monocoque construction > > were made > > Oooh Boy, do I disagree with this! > > I guess that you can make a distinction between what is an already > existing technology which has been adapted to military use, and technology > developed during wartime, but even then it would be folly to suggest that > the ultimate test of man and material is not the forge from where new and > improved technology emerges. > > This is a WWI List, so I shall restrict myself to applicable examples. > It is true that the airplane was invented at the beginnin of the century and > had been in existence for about 10 years by the time the Great War broke > out. As I have mentioned, the aircraft were very simple: little more than > powered kites with warping controls and very little maneuverability. They > were designed to fly straight and level, and for very short distances > carrying one (rarely two) person(s). The crucible that was the Great War > saw - in a space of time that was less than half of the prewar time that the > airplane was in existence - a quantum leap in development. To list a few > examples, I would cite: ailerons, synchronized guns, powerplant develpoments > (rotary to radial, for example), radio communication from the air, aerial > bombardment, metal airframes and skin, 15,000 ft. (+) ceilings, airspeed > that approached 130MpH (70MpH was fast in 1914), heavy load-carrying, long > range, aerial photoreconnaisance, and other developments. On the ground, we > see that the idea of the armored tank was invented and developed, poison > gas, artillery developments, etc. The sea saw (see-saw?) the use of the > combat submarine (the Holland-type engine-driven boat), tordepoes, > armor-piercing naval shells, and different classes of ships - the Destroyer, > IIRC. > > I shall comment on the developments of the '20's and '30's as being > militarily-driven. The quest for speed (power-plant developments, > retracting gear, etc) were publicly developed by slide-rule types like the > aforementioned (and great) Barnes Wallis, and Reginald Mitchell. However, > the money for these ventures ultimately came from the respective governments > who were not as surprised by the future German aggression as one might > believe. If one considers the Great War to have actually lasted from the > outbreak of hostilities in August 1914, to the Japanese surrender in August > of 1945, we see that the situation was actually a 31-year long war. It saw > the human race go from unsteady flight to being pointed to the very stars > that have mystified us since our ancestors developed eyes and a suitable > brain. > > Consider also that psychology and psychotherapy advanced a great deal > during this time, as did medical and prosthetic technology. Neccesity is > the Mother of Invention (as was Frank Zappa). Or more accurately,: 'needs > must as the devil drives'. > > If your point is that there are few, if any, technological advances or > discoveries during wartime, and that what we see as invention is merely > adaptation of peacetime-derived technology, I would disagree and then agree. > You have to consider that both are correct and incorrect. THere is a lot of > invention and discovery done during wartime. Much of it is to advance > extant materiel to a more efficient use. On the other hand, many new things > are come up with too. As for the jet engine: it goes back to Archimedes' > screw! A truly ancient idea! > > DB ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 20:14:33 -0500 From: "Michael S. Alvarado" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: some roumors Message-ID: <3A6794F9.B47F674F@bellatlantic.net> I must admit the BF2C-1 has been a pain in my side since August. Alvie Brent Theobald wrote: > Howdy! > > DB exclaims: > That's because that they are CRAP! > > I would like to gently remind you that you are among friends and should not > hold back. You will only harm yourself by respressing your feelings. So > breath deep and let it out! > > :-) > > Later! > > Brent ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 01:33:13 From: "Michael Kendix" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: RE: Price of Toko/Roden, was Thanks Neil and Steven Message-ID: >From: Shane Weier > > > Translates to US$21 so it's better than Squadron's US$25.96. > > Also, NKR is quicker and more reliable in my experience. > >Was that with or without GST? You may even get it airmailed to the US >for >less than SMO > Shane: After taking GST into account, the conversion is a shade over 50 US cents for AU$1. Postage is about the same because that is also in AU$ (of course) and converts at 56 US cents per AU$. Michael _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 19:41:43 -0600 From: "Charlie and Linda Duckworth" To: "wwi-faq" Subject: DML DVII Message-ID: <00d501c081b8$fb8c10c0$442c57d8@unionrai> About the time we all bought Rimmell Fokker DVII Specials (volumes I and II) DML/Dragon Fokker D.VII's disappeared off the shelves. I'm keeping my fingers crossed they are sold to the same distributors as (Hobby Town). These large hobby chains had some great discount sales on the DML SPAD XIII and Fokker triplane that were too good to pass up and perhaps got some more people interested in the planes we all find intriguing. And for the modellers that don't want to apply all that loz., or stripes or checkers they can release one in white plastic and do Goering's a/c..... And there's all the after market side panels to keep Barry busy. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 17:35:47 -0800 (PST) From: Todd Hayes To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: RE: Gotha GL.VII Message-ID: <20010119013547.1720.qmail@web9009.mail.yahoo.com> Brent, Thanks. I see that RVHP does one in 1:72. Lubos has it on his site. Todd --- Brent Theobald wrote: > Todd, > > Apparently it is really huge. On my map the wings > stretch from Dallas all > the way to El Paso. That's half way to Australia! > > But seriously, if memory serves, the wingspan isn't > that great. I don't > think the 1/72 kit I have even has a wingspan of 8" > > The Sierra Scale kit of it is really nice. Another > one of Bob's gems. > > Good luck! > > Brent > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Todd Hayes [mailto:thayes_52601@yahoo.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 6:11 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Gotha GL.VII > > > Hi ya'll, > > Does anyone here know if this a/c is a very large > one? > > Todd > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 12:40:21 -0800 From: Shane & Lorna Jenkins To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: SMML Message-ID: <3A68A635.574FC033@tac.com.au> Tony Mollica wrote: > > Hi Shane, > I know you had some hard disk problems that prevented publication of SMML, > however, I'm still not getting it. Is that because it's not happening at the > moment, or am I not receiving ift for some other reason (eg hotmail). > Thanks > Tony Mollica Hi Tony, You need to resubscribe as I lost everything, including the SMML distribution list. That goes for any other SMMLie on the list who hasn't recieved SMML for the past fortnight or so ;-) Just send an email to SMML at mailto:shipmodels@tac.com.au with subscribe or re-subscribe in the title or body Shane ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 20:01:00 -0600 From: Ernest Thomas To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Giant Cookup Message-ID: <3A679FDB.54154405@bellsouth.net> Matt Bittner wrote: > I doubt it would go soon, since the Albatros just (almost) ended, and > the Sopwith started... And were'nt we discussing armor or ships for the next cook-up after Sopwiths? E. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 18:21:12 -0800 (PST) From: Todd Hayes To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Giant Cookup Message-ID: <20010119022113.83260.qmail@web9010.mail.yahoo.com> I don't do cookups but interested parties might consider waiting until Eric's Gotha is done and released. Todd --- Ernest Thomas wrote: > > > Matt Bittner wrote: > > > I doubt it would go soon, since the Albatros just > (almost) ended, and > > the Sopwith started... > > And were'nt we discussing armor or ships for the > next cook-up after > Sopwiths? > E. > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 18:22:24 -0800 (PST) From: Todd Hayes To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Giant Cookup Message-ID: <20010119022224.83639.qmail@web9010.mail.yahoo.com> Maybe others would consider the 1:72 Gotha GL.VII by RVHP. --- Ernest Thomas wrote: > > > Matt Bittner wrote: > > > I doubt it would go soon, since the Albatros just > (almost) ended, and > > the Sopwith started... > > And were'nt we discussing armor or ships for the > next cook-up after > Sopwiths? > E. > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 20:23:07 -0600 From: Marc Flake To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Gotha sprues at Roden site Message-ID: <3A67A50B.45ED@airmail.net> Since I'm in digest mode it's likely that Matt or Tom has probably already beaten me with this information, but just in case: Here are the [pictues of the parts for the Gotha over at the Roden site: http://www.rodenplant.com/HTML/gothag2.htm Marc(hoping I'm not being redundant) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 12:44:44 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: some roumors Message-ID: <7186131CB805D411A60E0090272F7C7101748A74@mimhexch1.mim.com.au> Alvie says: > I must admit the BF2C-1 has been a pain in my side since August. > In my case that would make it a quickie. 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 phone: Australia 1800500646 ********************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 20:46:23 -0600 From: "Paul Schwartzkopf" To: Subject: RE: Hotmail sucks Message-ID: I finally received word the other day why I got unsubbed several times. It seems that Road Runner had a mail server that was randomly sending out "undeliverable" replies to incoming mail. The problem is supposed to have been fixed. No problems since they informed me... Paul ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 20:53:11 -0600 From: "Matt Bittner" To: "wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu" Subject: Re: Gotha sprues at Roden site Message-ID: <200101190253.SAA19639@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> On Thu, 18 Jan 2001 21:28:13 -0500 (EST), Marc Flake wrote: > Since I'm in digest mode it's likely that Matt or Tom has probably > already beaten me with this information, but just in case: > > Here are the [pictues of the parts for the Gotha over at the Roden site: > > http://www.rodenplant.com/HTML/gothag2.htm No you're not, but am I missing something? I see no parts, just an image of the box top and the artwork used for the box. Matt Bittner ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 12:59:23 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: Gotha sprues at Roden site Message-ID: <7186131CB805D411A60E0090272F7C7101748A76@mimhexch1.mim.com.au> Matt says: > > No you're not, but am I missing something? I see no parts, just an > image of the box top and the artwork used for the box. > ...which just goes to show Matt wasn't paying attention to the thread whaich started with.... >-----Original Message----- >From: Witold Kozakiewicz >Sent: Wednesday, 3 January 2001 19:36 >To: Multiple recipients of list >Subject: Roden Gotha G.II/III > > >New year, new model. Hope soon in the shops. >http://www.rodenplant.com/HTML/gothag2.htm >-- > Witold Kozakiewicz When I looked at it then the sprues were all there - and it's innteresting to note two types of engine cowls and so forth already there 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 phone: Australia 1800500646 ********************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 19:03:22 -0800 (PST) From: Todd Hayes To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Gotha sprues at Roden site Message-ID: <20010119030322.13695.qmail@web9009.mail.yahoo.com> uh Matt, try scrolling down to the bottom past the text. Todd --- Matt Bittner wrote: > On Thu, 18 Jan 2001 21:28:13 -0500 (EST), Marc Flake > wrote: > > > Since I'm in digest mode it's likely that Matt or > Tom has probably > > already beaten me with this information, but just > in case: > > > > Here are the [pictues of the parts for the Gotha > over at the Roden site: > > > > http://www.rodenplant.com/HTML/gothag2.htm > > No you're not, but am I missing something? I see no > parts, just an > image of the box top and the artwork used for the > box. > > > Matt Bittner > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 22:25:57 EST From: GRBroman@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Giant Cookup Message-ID: <43.f7fc040.27990dc5@aol.com> Hey Matt, I hear the Giant Cookup means anything 1/48th scale or larger... Glen ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 03:39:14 From: "Michael Kendix" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: RE: Gotha sprues at Roden site Message-ID: >From: Shane Weier >When I looked at it then the sprues were all there - and it's >innteresting >to note two types of engine cowls and so forth already >there Shane: I can't see 2 types. I see 2 identical sprues - presumably one for each engie and 2 halves of the cowl on each sprue. Where is the other version/type of cowl? Michael _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 13:49:36 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: Gotha sprues at Roden site Message-ID: <7186131CB805D411A60E0090272F7C7101748A77@mimhexch1.mim.com.au> Michael, > > I can't see 2 types. I see 2 identical sprues - presumably > one for each > engie and 2 halves of the cowl on each sprue. Where is the other > version/type of cowl? > Each engine sprue has two full height cowl halves and two of the half height, no fuel tank type halves 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 phone: Australia 1800500646 ********************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 13:58:04 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: Gotha sprues at Roden site Message-ID: <7186131CB805D411A60E0090272F7C7101748A79@mimhexch1.mim.com.au> I said: > > I can't see 2 types. I see 2 identical sprues - presumably > > one for each > > engie and 2 halves of the cowl on each sprue. Where is the other > > version/type of cowl? > > > > Each engine sprue has two full height cowl halves and two of the half > height, no fuel tank type halves > Probably a misnaming. The cowls are on a sprue separate from the engines, but IMHO the *cowl* sprue has two styles of cowl on it 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 phone: Australia 1800500646 ********************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 22:34:42 -0600 From: Eli Geher To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Most Important? Message-ID: <3A67C3E2.D05D50FF@hiwaay.net> DAVID BURKE wrote: > Oooh Boy, do I disagree with this! > Easy, Dave. Take a deep breath and count to 10. You've designated a laundry list of wartime developments and a few are wartime inventions but most are updates of prewar work. Aileron... Invented well before the war and widely accepted and used. Radial engine... Langley used one as did Bleriot. Only the Salmson was used during the war. Synchronized guns... I'll give you that one. Airborne radio... I'm not sure. I think it might have been demonstrated pre-war but maybe not. Aerial bombardment... An operation rather then a development and not a significant one until postwar development enabled the carriage of enough bombs to do serious damage. Not a real factor until the Spanish Civil War. Metal airframes... Agreed. And a big one that was. But Junkers had to fight like hell to get the army's attention. Armored Tank... Yes, although the underlying technology was an existing farm machine. The other things you list all seem to me to be based on prior art. I don't wish to belabor the point, but the technological innovations of wartime are simply overstated. Economics and military necessity force the priority to be on incremental improvement and production efficiency. Not to say that invention doesn't occur. The jet engine wasn't a wartime invention, but the digital computer certainly was. > As for the jet engine: it goes back to Archimedes' > screw! A truly ancient idea! Don't you meant the little steam turbine rather than the screw propellor? Eli ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 23:30:07 -0500 From: "Michael S. Alvarado" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: some roumors Message-ID: <3A67C2CE.FA85AF10@bellatlantic.net> I'm currently rebuilding the wreck of the first one. Its in the painting, final assembly, rigging stage so maybe the end is in sight. I only build one at a time and its hard to get enthusiatic about a kit that presents problems at every step. Alvie Shane Weier wrote: > Alvie says: > > > I must admit the BF2C-1 has been a pain in my side since August. > > > > In my case that would make it a quickie. > > 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 > phone: Australia 1800500646 > ********************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 00:35:12 EST From: CAUhlir@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Giant Cookup Message-ID: --part1_b1.5f49b4a.27992c10_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This sounds most cool...count me in for the 1/48 Vimy,considering I already started the research and parts buying :) Candice --part1_b1.5f49b4a.27992c10_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This sounds most cool...count me in for the 1/48 Vimy,considering I already
started the research and parts buying :)

Candice --part1_b1.5f49b4a.27992c10_boundary-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 00:49:47 -0500 From: Rob & Sherry To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Gotha sprues at Roden site Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010119004947.0088b100@pop-server.tampabay.rr.com> Using Netscape, I have nothing past the text. Using Neoplanet I get them. Rob At 10:08 PM 1/18/2001 -0500, you wrote: >uh Matt, try scrolling down to the bottom past the >text. > >Todd > >--- Matt Bittner wrote: >> On Thu, 18 Jan 2001 21:28:13 -0500 (EST), Marc Flake >> wrote: >> >> > Since I'm in digest mode it's likely that Matt or >> Tom has probably >> > already beaten me with this information, but just >> in case: >> > >> > Here are the [pictues of the parts for the Gotha >> over at the Roden site: >> > >> > http://www.rodenplant.com/HTML/gothag2.htm >> >> No you're not, but am I missing something? I see no >> parts, just an >> image of the box top and the artwork used for the >> box. >> >> >> Matt Bittner >> >> > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. >http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 07:37:47 -0000 From: "Francisca e Pedro Soares" To: Subject: Re: Price of Toko/Roden, was Thanks Neil and Steven Message-ID: <002401c081ea$b8da0480$95060dd5@pc1> Just received a messae from NKR and Earl now lists the Gotha at 32 AUD. Definitively better tnah suqdron and as Michael said. Earl's service is really 5 star. Pedro (who has nothing to do with NKR other than being a satisfied customer) ----- Original Message ----- From: Michael Kendix To: Multiple recipients of list Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 12:39 AM Subject: RE: Price of Toko/Roden, was Thanks Neil and Steven .. > > Shane: > > Translates to US$21 so it's better than Squadron's US$25.96. Also, NKR is > quicker and more reliable in my experience. > > Michael > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 08:56:21 +0100 From: Witold Kozakiewicz To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Price of Toko/Roden, was Thanks Neil and Steven Message-ID: <3A67F325.1ED01C22@bg.am.lodz.pl> Michael Kendix napisał(a): > I thought Roden was a Ukranian firm. Yes, it is. Prices of Toko/Roden kits in Poland are very low. I bought Strutter for about $5.50. For 150 swedish crowns I can get almost three Snipes. Gotha should be in the same price as He.111 - about $18. -- Witold Kozakiewicz ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 2989 **********************