WWI Digest 3132 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) RE: Spad A2/4 was More on topic models coming! by Crawford Neil 2) back with the questions again by "Bucky" 3) Double wires in 1/72nd scale by "Michael Kendix" 4) Gotha by huggins1@swbell.net (John Huggins) 5) Re: Maurice Farman XI by "Brian Nicklas" 6) RE: DH4s in 48th by Mark Vaughan-Jackson 7) Re: Double wires in 1/72nd scale by Suvoroff@aol.com 8) Re: Gotha by Jan Vihonen 9) Re: Double wires in 1/72nd scale by Jan Vihonen 10) Re: DH4s in 48th by RadspadMike@netscape.net 11) RE: Double wires in 1/72nd scale by Crawford Neil 12) RE: Double wires in 1/72nd scale by Volker Haeusler 13) RE: DH4s in 48th by "Ray Boorman" 14) RE: Michael and Ray- Decals Away! by "Ray Boorman" 15) RE: Double wires in 1/72nd scale by Volker Haeusler 16) Re: German pilot commands... by "Hans Trauner" 17) Re: Handley-Page O/400 References by "Hans Trauner" 18) RE: back with the questions again by Volker Haeusler 19) RE: [Fwd: Double wires in 1/72nd scale] by Crawford Neil 20) Re: back with the questions again by "Hans Trauner" 21) RE: back with the questions again by Crawford Neil 22) Maurice Farman XI by "VIKSproc" 23) Re: back with the questions again by Jan Vihonen 24) Dust was Handling Problems by Crawford Neil 25) IM index by "Matt Bittner" 26) RE: DH4s in 48th by Mark Vaughan-Jackson 27) RE: DH4s in 48th by Crawford Neil 28) Re: DH4s in 48th by "Lee J. Mensinger" 29) RE: Double wires in 1/72nd scale by "dfernet0" 30) RE: DH4s in 48th by Mark Vaughan-Jackson ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 15:22:22 +0100 From: Crawford Neil To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: Spad A2/4 was More on topic models coming! Message-ID: Treat factory drawings with a big pinch of salt. The only accurate drawings from the design dept. are for parts, GA drawings are only necessary for sales purposes, and thus not always properly updated. Also take what I just wrote with an even bigger pinch of salt! My instinct would tell me to trust the WS drawings, the drawings in the FMP book don't seem all that trustworthy IMHO. /Neil > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Kendix [mailto:mkendix@hotmail.com] > Sent: den 27 februari 2001 14:48 > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: Spad A2/4 was More on topic models coming! > > > Len Smith writes... > > >Matt further states that both the FMP and Datafile drawings > are >'wrong', > >but provides no indication of the 'wrongness'. I agree >that the > >Harleyford drawing shows the correct wing span, but I feel > >that the lower > >wing chord is too broad, when compared with the Spad >works > drawing in WW1 > >Aero 127. > > I need to go back and carefully measure the drawings. I did > not take down > the exact measurement but I did notice that it was > significantly short. > > Michael > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 23:21:30 +0900 From: "Bucky" To: Subject: back with the questions again Message-ID: <001501c0a0c8$94a63dc0$104207d3@compaqcomputer> Does anybody have any idea what color the gun mountings and rings on a Friedrichshafen G.IIIa might have been? Same color as the fuselage, i.e., Bosta gray? Some kind of steel maybe? A tan like on Tom Morgan's Halberstadt? Any info would be greatly appreciated. Bucky p.s. Y'all ain't gonna believe how far I've come on this. PROMISE CARVED IN STONE: Friedridactyl, 1@, come March 15. Write it down on your calendars, folks. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:32:57 From: "Michael Kendix" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Double wires in 1/72nd scale Message-ID: First, I need to ensure I have my nomenclature correct. In some biplanes, there are double wires. Are these called "Flying wires"? What are the single rigging wires called? Secondly, why are there double wires in one diagonal direction between the wings, and in the oppositie diagonal direction, there are only single wires? Thirdly, what techniques have folks used to make the double wires in 1/72nd scale. I know Shane Weier had a template for his 1/48th scale builds, however, I am using straight wire and not drilling holes. Suggestions gratefully received. Michael _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 08:32:34 -0600 From: huggins1@swbell.net (John Huggins) To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Gotha Message-ID: Fellow List Members, This is for any of the other inmates at the home who are working on the 1/72 Gotha. Have you made it to the Engine installation yet? (I am doing the G III) If so, am I missing something, or does the engine really not fit in the nacelle properly. If the latter is the case, what have you done to remedy the problem. If it does fit, would one of you please help me find the light switch so I can see the attachment points more clearly. Thanks John ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 09:38:51 -0500 From: "Brian Nicklas" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Maurice Farman XI Message-ID: Comparing Omega kit 72039 against the drawings in Windsock Vol 8, No 5 (Sept/Oct 92) by Ian R. Stair shows a good match. Mind you, this is comparing bits to the drawing like overlaying wings, tail boom bits, etc. I couldn't quite lay boom, pod and skids to check length to the profile view. Brian ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 11:13:58 +0100 From: Mark Vaughan-Jackson To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: RE: DH4s in 48th Message-ID: >Jump in the deep pool! >SCRATCHBUILD!!!!!!!!! >D. Sorry D, The murky weaters of scratch building are too deep for this timid soul. Mine is limited to interior detailing - just finished the cockpit of a Handley page Hampden - ot I know but hey it's still a biplane. Framing, extra lewis drums, throttles trim wheels etc. That's about all I can manage. MVJ nb - Curtis Jenny, Hampden, Tadpole, Sop tripe for cookup. nsa - (now sweating about) annual Hobby show I organize coming up April 21 and 22 - my 32nd b'day. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 09:42:29 EST From: Suvoroff@aol.com To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Double wires in 1/72nd scale Message-ID: <7d.11816984.27cd16d5@aol.com> "Flying wires" are wires which lead from the outboard upper position to the inboard lower position, and serve to take the stress of the lift of the wings when the aircraft is in flight. These are doubled in some aircraft because 1. They take the most stress, and 2. If there's only one wire and it breaks, the wings fall off. The other, single wires, leading from the inboard upper positions to the outboard lower positions, take the weight of the wings on the ground, and the stress of the wing's lift while flying inverted. They (normally) don't take as much stress, and so, to save weight and wind resistance, remain single wires. Yours, James D. Gray ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 16:47:00 +0200 From: Jan Vihonen To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Gotha Message-ID: <3A9BBDE4.719B94CC@helsinki.fi> John, A friend of mine was faced with the same problem, he just shaved off some material from the "shelves" in the engine compartment halves until he could fit the engine there. HTH. Jan John Huggins wrote: > > Fellow List Members, > This is for any of the other inmates at the home who are working on > the 1/72 Gotha. Have you made it to the Engine installation yet? (I > am doing the G III) If so, am I missing something, or does the engine > really not fit in the nacelle properly. If the latter is the case, > what have you done to remedy the problem. If it does fit, would one > of you please help me find the light switch so I can see the > attachment points more clearly. > Thanks > John ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 16:52:18 +0200 From: Jan Vihonen To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Double wires in 1/72nd scale Message-ID: <3A9BBF22.9A05B514@helsinki.fi> James wrote: > The other, single wires, leading from the inboard upper positions to the > outboard lower positions, take the weight of the wings on the ground, and the > stress of the wing's lift while flying inverted. They (normally) don't take > as much stress, and so, to save weight and wind resistance, remain single > wires. And they are called "landing wires", I might add. Jan ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 09:54:53 -0500 From: RadspadMike@netscape.net To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: DH4s in 48th Message-ID: <5B45EA2A.551C4D03.3E0364A1@netscape.net> I've got a few of the old AMT kits and an Aurora kit. I think (always subject to correction) that the AMT kit is a DH-4B - about 1/4" between the pilot and observer on the kit. The distance between the pilot and observer on the Aurora kit is about one inch. FWIW Mike K. MVJ wrote: > > Who was asking about a possible reissue of the DH4 in 1:48? > Well there's now two of em up on ebay. > One (Item number 563670689) is packaged with an old Smer Swordfish. The > other (can't recall the number, search for wwi) is solo. Both are the old > AMT kits and seem to be in good condition > I'd bid myself but alas I have no budget :-( __________________________________________________________________ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Webmail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 16:03:42 +0100 From: Crawford Neil To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: Double wires in 1/72nd scale Message-ID: This title is RE:Double wires in 1/72nd scale, but I still haven't seen the original question. What happened to that mail? This is a very interesting answer to something anyhow! /Neil > -----Original Message----- > From: Suvoroff@aol.com [mailto:Suvoroff@aol.com] > Sent: den 27 februari 2001 15:48 > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: Double wires in 1/72nd scale > > > "Flying wires" are wires which lead from the outboard upper > position to the > inboard lower position, and serve to take the stress of the > lift of the wings > when the aircraft is in flight. These are doubled in some > aircraft because > 1. They take the most stress, and 2. If there's only one > wire and it > breaks, the wings fall off. > The other, single wires, leading from the inboard upper > positions to the > outboard lower positions, take the weight of the wings on the > ground, and the > stress of the wing's lift while flying inverted. They > (normally) don't take > as much stress, and so, to save weight and wind resistance, > remain single > wires. > > Yours, > James D. Gray > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 07:03:33 +0700 From: Volker Haeusler To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: RE: Double wires in 1/72nd scale Message-ID: Michael, "Flying wires" are those which lead from the outboard side of the upper wing to the inboard side of the lower wing. Their task is to resist/balance the forces that try to bend a wing upward in (normal - not "Strange kind") flight. The other wires are called "landing wires". They lead from the inboard upper wing (basically near the cabane struts) to the outboard lower wing (near the lower attachment points of the interplane struts. they balance the forces that try to move/bend a wing downwatrd - typically those experienced on landing/touch down, when the fusleage (being on the ground) no longer can continue it´s downward travel, whereas the wings (because of the inertia) try to move further down - hence the name. Single or double - obviously there is no rule for it, as you can find nearly all combinations. In general, double flying wires make more sense (because of the comparatively higher stresses/forces), but that´s not true in general terms. As for modelling: I have found "load carrying" ("functional") landing wires quite helpful, as they counteract gravity, that might ultimately lead to some wing bending (especially of vac or resin wings with low resistance to that bending). But then you will have to drill those holes... Volker -----Original Message----- From: wwi@wwi-models.org [mailto:wwi@wwi-models.org]On Behalf Of Michael Kendix Sent: 27 February 2001 21:37 To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Double wires in 1/72nd scale First, I need to ensure I have my nomenclature correct. In some biplanes, there are double wires. Are these called "Flying wires"? What are the single rigging wires called? Secondly, why are there double wires in one diagonal direction between the wings, and in the oppositie diagonal direction, there are only single wires? Thirdly, what techniques have folks used to make the double wires in 1/72nd scale. I know Shane Weier had a template for his 1/48th scale builds, however, I am using straight wire and not drilling holes. Suggestions gratefully received. Michael _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 07:13:22 -0800 From: "Ray Boorman" To: Subject: RE: DH4s in 48th Message-ID: Mark, Sorry cant resist, when did a Handley Page Hampden become a biplane??? Do you mean Heyford instead??? Ray > -----Original Message----- > From: wwi@wwi-models.org [mailto:wwi@wwi-models.org]On Behalf Of Mark > Vaughan-Jackson > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 6:45 AM > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: RE: DH4s in 48th > > > >Jump in the deep pool! > >SCRATCHBUILD!!!!!!!!! > >D. > > Sorry D, > The murky weaters of scratch building are too deep for this timid soul. > Mine is limited to interior detailing - just finished the cockpit of a > Handley page Hampden - ot I know but hey it's still a biplane. Framing, > extra lewis drums, throttles trim wheels etc. That's about all I > can manage. > > MVJ > nb - Curtis Jenny, Hampden, Tadpole, Sop tripe for cookup. > nsa - (now sweating about) annual Hobby show I organize coming up April 21 > and 22 - my 32nd b'day. > > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 07:13:23 -0800 From: "Ray Boorman" To: Subject: RE: Michael and Ray- Decals Away! Message-ID: Thanks Todd, you are a gentleman! Ray > -----Original Message----- > From: wwi@wwi-models.org [mailto:wwi@wwi-models.org]On Behalf Of Todd > Hayes > Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 2:24 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Michael and Ray- Decals Away! > > > Decals Away! Enjoy. There should be enough to do at > least a dozen a/c. > > Todd > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 07:16:56 +0700 From: Volker Haeusler To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: RE: Double wires in 1/72nd scale Message-ID: To add to the function of those wires and the forces involved in flight, I can only recommend to look into the article "Albatros - Defeat by Design" by John A. Cohionchio in Air Enthusiast Quarterly 38, which not only contains a "5 minute course in aerodynamics", but also a extremely good FEM (Finite Elements Method) comparison of the relative structural integrity (dynamic) of the Albatros D III/V versus SPAD wing - incredibly good reading, and after this you understand where the real problems in that design were. Disgressing, that issue has also a very nice "Viewed from the Cockpit" piece on the Fokker D VII (albeit one used for training in the Netherlands in 1937) Volker ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 16:38:35 +0100 From: "Hans Trauner" To: Subject: Re: German pilot commands... Message-ID: <002c01c0a0d3$59389d40$8ba272d4@custom-pc> >Then from the French pilots, "M***e!" when it wouldn't start! .... :-} Gabe German: Sch****e or Mi*t, english Sh** ! Great idea! I'll mail this to Hans in the Netherlands. And in the U.S. this SIM will be rated 'For adults only'! XXX! Huns ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 16:39:54 +0100 From: "Hans Trauner" To: Subject: Re: Handley-Page O/400 References Message-ID: <003701c0a0d3$88013ce0$8ba272d4@custom-pc> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: RadspadMike@netscape.net An: Multiple recipients of list Datum: Dienstag, 27. Februar 2001 03:01 Betreff: Re: Handley-Page O/400 References >Thanks, Hans. Brad recommended the same yesterday..... Uh, I am always late. I stand up when the rest of the listees go asleep. Hans ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 07:40:58 +0700 From: Volker Haeusler To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: RE: back with the questions again Message-ID: Not sure on the colour, but the "Report on the Friedrichshafen Bomber" issued by the Technical Department, MoM states: " Both the forward and rear cockpits are furnished with with swivel mounts carrying Parabellum machine guns. These mounts consist of BUILD UP LAMINATED WOOD TURNTABLES (capital letters by me, not in the original report)) working on small rollers" etc ect. So as a first guess I would think (laminated!) wood seems probable - but I admit not having looked at any photos now (beside the one in the report, which is not very clear, but shows a rather light colour). Volker -----Original Message----- From: wwi@wwi-models.org [mailto:wwi@wwi-models.org]On Behalf Of Bucky Sent: 27 February 2001 21:30 To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: back with the questions again Does anybody have any idea what color the gun mountings and rings on a Friedrichshafen G.IIIa might have been? Same color as the fuselage, i.e., Bosta gray? Some kind of steel maybe? A tan like on Tom Morgan's Halberstadt? Any info would be greatly appreciated. Bucky p.s. Y'all ain't gonna believe how far I've come on this. PROMISE CARVED IN STONE: Friedridactyl, 1@, come March 15. Write it down on your calendars, folks. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 16:49:31 +0100 From: Crawford Neil To: "WW1 list (E-mail)" Subject: RE: [Fwd: Double wires in 1/72nd scale] Message-ID: Thanks to Jan, I now have the original question, I must have missed it when I did some over-enthusiastic deleting on Monday morning. I do double wires in 1/72 by using steel wire and white glue. First I measure the length as accurately as possible with a pair of dividers. Then I glue on the inner flying wire with white glue, turn the model upside down, and glue on the landing wire, then turn it right way up and glue on the second forward flying wire. The reason for turning it upside down when glueing on the landing wires is to make the glue dry in a good position for stretching the wires. I can never remember which is which, so I may have mixed up, I always check in St. Harrys book first. I'll check tonight. I have no magic formula for getting the right gap between them, just keep trying till it looks right. Absolutely straight wires are vital.You also have to let the glue dry between wires. But by the time you've done a few, you will need to! /Neil > > Thirdly, what techniques have folks used to make the double wires in > 1/72nd > scale. I know Shane Weier had a template for his 1/48th > scale builds, > however, I am using straight wire and not drilling holes. > Suggestions > gratefully received. > > Michael > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 16:51:04 +0100 From: "Hans Trauner" To: Subject: Re: back with the questions again Message-ID: <008801c0a0d5$17720340$8ba272d4@custom-pc> >Does anybody have any idea what color the gun mountings and rings on a >Friedrichshafen G.IIIa might have been? > >Same color as the fuselage, i.e., Bosta gray? Some kind of steel maybe? A >tan like on Tom Morgan's Halberstadt? To be honest, I can't proof anything. But what I know ist that there where several versions. These rings where made from wood ( = tan = Tom's BMIQSILTY) or the where made from metal ( = blackened steel). I don't have detail pics for Fr.GIIIa, but I am convinced that these gun rings where from the metal variant. Hans BMIQSILTY = BestModelInQuarterScaleIntheLastTenYears ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 17:03:52 +0100 From: Crawford Neil To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: back with the questions again Message-ID: I hate to disagree, but go to the Internet Modeller and look at RK's HP 0/400. Just an example, I can think of a few other stunners. /Neil > Hans wrote: > > BMIQSILTY = BestModelInQuarterScaleIntheLastTenYears > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 23:22:17 +0100 From: "VIKSproc" To: Subject: Maurice Farman XI Message-ID: <0102279832.AA983290141@lysntsmail.oslo.pgs.com> Hei, I would like to comment on this one, in my opinion Farman aircraft from before WW1 and some time into the war were made more or less to user specifications. Want more lift for a heavy pilot? Increase the wingspan. Want a trainer? Extend the nacelle and place another seat there. Want to do stunting? Shorten the wings and change the rudders. Many subcontractors came up with improvements of various kind, others copied the design. Some Norwegian built aircraft were based on a few blueprints and a sales brochure! When an aircraft crashed, it could be rebuilt using original parts, spare parts and what was available from other designs that did fit besides incorporating improvements. So you will either need access to drawings and/or measures made from the aircraft you want to model or you apply your best guesses based on photos. I had an opportunity to photograph a Farman Longhorn in the NTM Science Museum, this one was originally procured from France, but I do not know how much it was modified. Alberto borrowed some negatives to make prints from, it will be interesting to hear how much he thinks it differs from Italian Farman aircraft. As far as I know, you can find Longhorns and Shorthorns with the same wingspan as well as Shorthorns with different wingspans as well as rudder arrangements. Engines were also dependent on what was available. The Norwegian Army workshop at Kjeller was building Farman aircraft without engines, they just waited for one of the others to crash so they could install that engine in the newbuild. In Norway, the only aircraft were we have not been able to sort out all the different marks and individual identities are the various Farman designs belonging to the Army, the mix of modifications, rebuilds and newbuilds has so far eluded our efforts. So, basically, you will need to apply Dicta Ira here and build the model based on your interpretation of photos and other available sources. >From the warm and sunny sea off Brunei where I access the list over the WWW. Eders Knut Erik Michael Kendix wrote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ There is some confusion on my part regarding the various MF-XI's around and which one of these the Omega 1/72nd (72039) scale kit is supposed to represent. I understand that this is the "Shorthorn". Is this correct? The length is given in the kit's instructions as 8.3m, which is less than any other 80hp Renault machine's specs that I can find. Is it possible that because this is an early machine, there was a lack of standardization? There seems to be many versions, and then there's a bunch of Italian versions listed in the FMP tome. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 18:08:10 +0200 From: Jan Vihonen To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: back with the questions again Message-ID: <3A9BD0EA.336A96B7@helsinki.fi> Volker, > Not sure on the colour, but the "Report on the Friedrichshafen Bomber" > issued by the Technical Department, MoM states: > Is that published somewhere? Could you cite the source, please. Jan ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 17:43:15 +0100 From: Crawford Neil To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: Dust was Handling Problems Message-ID: OK. so what do you all do about dust? /Neil Nigel wrote: > The final proof point was Dennis saying this is an issue for > him - he's a > speedbuilder, so curing time must be an issue. For the rest > of us, dust is > the issue - so much settles on the sub-assemblies while we're > building! I > guess the real answer is to build two (or more) kits at once. > > Thanks a lot, > > Nigel > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 10:42:53 -0600 From: "Matt Bittner" To: "wwi@wwi-models.org" Subject: IM index Message-ID: <3A94141400217C47@mail01.san.yahoo.com> (added by postmaster@mail01.san.yahoo.com) Some of you may remember I was maintaining an index for WW1 articles in Internet Modeler, which Joey started. Unfortunately I no longer have the time to maintain this. Does someone else want the files to maintain? LMK and I'll zip 'em up and ship 'em on over. For those who have never seen it, go to: http://www.kithobbyist.com/IPMSFortCrook/IM_Index/ Matt Bittner _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 13:23:19 +0100 From: Mark Vaughan-Jackson To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: RE: DH4s in 48th Message-ID: How do you spell embarrassed H..A..M..P..D..E..N. Mea Culpa. . .not only do I digress into ot but I get the bloody name wrong. Quick, someone send me a beechnut kit as penance. (Then again maybe that's a bit drastic.) Veering OT but non-modeling. . .my new computer system will be up and running this weekend. Of course now that I have enough power to actually play the damned thing I can't find a copy of Red Baron 3D for love nor money. Is this still available?? Does anyone have a copy to sell or know of a retail source where I can get one?? TIA MVJ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 17:57:09 +0100 From: Crawford Neil To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: DH4s in 48th Message-ID: Another little thing, you wrote it was a biplane, I've always thought of the Hampden as a monoplane, am I wrong? /Neil > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Vaughan-Jackson [mailto:mvj@thetelegram.com] > Sent: den 27 februari 2001 17:53 > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: RE: DH4s in 48th > > > How do you spell embarrassed H..A..M..P..D..E..N. > > Mea Culpa. . .not only do I digress into ot but I get the > bloody name wrong. > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 11:15:10 -0600 From: "Lee J. Mensinger" To: wwi@wwi-models.org, lemen@x25.net Subject: Re: DH4s in 48th Message-ID: <3A9BE09E.A62B07A5@x25.net> MVJ You will have to get the Red Baron 3D, from Sierra, direct. I have not seen it on the regular retail market for almost 2 years. Go to: www.sierra.com At the top of the page there are two blocks for clicking enter Red Baron 3D in the upper one and in the space below select product. click and it will go to that product. From there select "Buy Now" I did check out the address just before I typed this note. It is listed in their catalog at $19.95 plus shipping Lee M. New Braunfels, TX Mark Vaughan-Jackson wrote: > How do you spell embarrassed H..A..M..P..D..E..N. > > Mea Culpa. . .not only do I digress into ot but I get the bloody name wrong. > > Quick, someone send me a beechnut kit as penance. > (Then again maybe that's a bit drastic.) > > Veering OT but non-modeling. . .my new computer system will be up and > running this weekend. Of course now that I have enough power to actually > play the damned thing I can't find a copy of Red Baron 3D for love nor > money. > Is this still available?? Does anyone have a copy to sell or know of a > retail source where I can get one?? > > TIA > MVJ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:12:22 -0300 From: "dfernet0" To: Subject: RE: Double wires in 1/72nd scale Message-ID: <008a01c0a0e0$737c0540$4640a8c0@ssp.salud.rosario.gov.ar> > what techniques have folks used to make the double wires in 1/72nd > scale. I know Shane Weier had a template for his 1/48th scale builds, > however, I am using straight wire and not drilling holes. Suggestions > gratefully received. Some months ago, when I rigged a Sopwith Camel I tried to replicate the doubled flying wires "without" unassembling the upper wing or drilling thru the wings. The plane was assembled since 1996, so I didn't wanted to mess with it anymore, but it proved a good test field. Method #1: I measured the correct lenght for the wires, cut two equal lenghts and one slightly shorter. I put the three on a glass, the shorter on the middle, and with a small drop of white glue I joined them side by side. When the glue dried, I popped themoff the glass with a knife and applied the "ensemble" on location as usual, using superglue on one end and white glue on the other (for a bit of elasticity) in the free ends of the longer strands. When that dried toroughly, I brushed a moistened paintbrush on the mid section of the wires, trying hard to avopid running the water along the wires to the white glue attachment. Eventually the middle (shorter) loosened and I carefully got it out. Any white glue residue was wiped off carefully from the two remaining wires. I'm not entirely satisfied with the result, for I have not the steady hand required for the last operation to be carried neatly. If you use too little water, the white glue in the middle won't melt. If you use too much, capilarity sent the water zooming where the attachment point is and the rigging came off. The white glued end is a must, I must point, since the rigging may experience some stress while brushing and later when tightening it with moderate heat. Method #2: I'll try this the next time... drill two little hole side by side on the fuselage attachment points before final painting and assembly. Drill two holes THRU the wing attachment point, at the right angle, of course. With a sharp knife point join the holes on the wing making a small slit (its width wil be the maximum wire gap, so be shy with the knife). Put inside the slit a small styrene strip dividing the slit in 2, cut flush and tidy up the place. Paint, assemble as usual and rig glueing the fuselage ends firmly and first. Adjust the wires aperture in the wing and fix with superglue as well, dressing the wing holes as usual. Would it work? D. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 13:49:26 +0100 From: Mark Vaughan-Jackson To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: RE: DH4s in 48th Message-ID: Rub the salt a little deeper. . . .;-) Yes my first post was hideously incorrect (as well as ot) the hampden is indeed a monoplane. . .it's the Heyford that's the bi-plane. my brain has turned to jelly due to Tenax fumes so I can't tell the difference any more. MVJ P.S. making this OT again. . .I have an old Lindberg Se5 en route from a friend. . .any thoughts to share on this kit. Good? bad? ugly? TIA M >Another little thing, you wrote it was a biplane, I've >always thought of the Hampden as a monoplane, am I wrong? >/Neil > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark Vaughan-Jackson [mailto:mvj@thetelegram.com] >> Sent: den 27 februari 2001 17:53 >> To: Multiple recipients of list >> Subject: RE: DH4s in 48th >> >> >> How do you spell embarrassed H..A..M..P..D..E..N. >> >> Mea Culpa. . .not only do I digress into ot but I get the >> bloody name wrong. >> >> ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 3132 **********************