WWI Digest 3253 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) RE: trust nothing wasRe: Windsock GA Drawings Accuracy by Shane Weier 2) Re: Blow By Models? by Al Superczynski 3) RE: trust nothing wasRe: Windsock GA Drawings Accuracy by Shane Weier 4) Re: Modelling Style Poll by "Jim Landon" 5) Re: a Q to the real pilots by Michael and Sharon Alvarado 6) Re: Amish Country (was: Amish Computer Virus) by David Fleming 7) Re: a Q to the real pilots by CAUhlir@aol.com 8) RE: April Internet Modeler by "Matt Bittner" 9) RE: Snow day musings by Shane Weier 10) RE: Medicinal drinking (was Re: a Q to the real pilots) by Shane Weier 11) RE: FMP Salmson book (And some Pfalz) by "Matt Bittner" 12) RE: Was YOU GUYS and Drawing Accuracy. by Shane Weier 13) RE: trust nothing by Shane Weier 14) Re: a Q to the real pilots by "TOM PLESHA" 15) RE: Lozenge question by Shane Weier 16) Re: trust nothing by "Steven M.Perry" 17) RE: Lozenge question by ERIC HIGHT 18) RE: Lozenge question by Shane Weier 19) RE: Lozenge question by ERIC HIGHT 20) Hans Trauner's Figures Comment by Andreikor@aol.com 21) Re: Hans Trauner's Figures Comment by MAnde72343@aol.com 22) Re: Was YOU GUYS and Drawing Accuracy. by "Tom Solinski" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 09:04:33 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: trust nothing wasRe: Windsock GA Drawings Accuracy Message-ID: <7186131CB805D411A60E0090272F7C7101748EC2@mimhexch1.mim.com.au> Neil says: > The other thing was, Shane wrote: > > simply by starting with known dimensions like wing span (from > > manufacturer and military specs), > > > Which gets me back on my pet bandwagon, manufacturers specs. Imagine > Sopwith, Hawker and Sigrist lofting up an a/c, presumably > someone might > write up the length, (without prop or maybe even without cowling ) . > Then during design somenone else gets told to do a G/A, he asks the > length, adds on length of the originally designed short cowling, and a > generic prop. Then they change the cowling, the tail was too small so > gets redesigned, nobody remembers to change the dimensions on the G/A. > Eventually when the machine is in production, one of the bosses gets > the bright idea of measuring the a/c, so sends off the office boy with > a measuring tape. He does a shabby job, measures from the lower tip of > the prop to the rudder (which wasn't straight), so now we > have two versions > of the length, an artist during the thirties takes an average of the > two lengths, and so on in absurdum. In other words I agree > completely with > Shane, but I wouldn't trust manufacturer or military specs either. You left out this - taking just one dimension, the "length" can be measured on the thrust axis, fuselage centre line, along the ground, along the manufacturers datum.....and as noted include or exclude propellors, formation lights, different rudders etc. Perhaps I should have placed the word "known" in quotes, because it isn't that simple, but from the perspective of the draughtsman preparing a drawing of a vanished type any published dimension is pure gold, since it provides at least one "source" on which to base his drawing. In this respect draughtsmen (of either sex BTW) are no different from other historians - they base their interpretation on the best research information they have available, or can make available. 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, 05 Apr 2001 18:10:31 -0500 From: Al Superczynski To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Blow By Models? Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Apr 2001 15:48:28 -0400 (EDT), Mark wrote: >IF I get a compressor for my birthday... Have you given any consideration to switching to a CO2 system? Al ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 09:21:17 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: trust nothing wasRe: Windsock GA Drawings Accuracy Message-ID: <7186131CB805D411A60E0090272F7C7101748EC5@mimhexch1.mim.com.au> Dave says: > > A few years back, WW1 AERO had an article on this topic. > >They took a side on > > photo of an Albatros D.III & overlaid it with about a dozen > >outlines based on various wellknown scale drawings. ALL failed > >to sync up exactly... ^_^ > > Parallax error on the photo ...... When I read the article in question I thought to myself... "What a load of crap" IIRC the "perfect photo" was taken from in front of the leading edge of the tailplane and not far back from the wingtip. That means really serious distortion. Sure, use a side view, but it has to be taken at right angles to the centre line, at the mid point of the fuselage and from as far away as possible (infinity preferred ;-) or all you're proving is that the draughtsmen all introduced different distortions to those of the camera (or maybe one draughtsman was *right* but *which* one?) 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, 05 Apr 2001 23:30:49 From: "Jim Landon" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Modelling Style Poll Message-ID: I wasn't going to say anything on this subject because of my unique situation, until I came to Andrei's post. It just struck a chord. Not that I haven't enjoyed reading all the others. I agree with Andrei when he says: "Quality. I'd rather build one super piece a year than ten fairly good ones ... for several reasons. Since the enjoyment I get out of building comes from the act, not the result, I'm in no need to rush things. Once it's done, the fun is over." Well said. Except I do still get a thrill out of looking at my Tommy when I go to the museum, or if someone emails me because they saw it on the web. I also agree with: <> Except in my case, it's not always a choice, it's mostly because I'm having to scratch build the Salmson, and also because nobody makes aftermarket stuff for 1:16 scale that I could go buy and stick in. Research is half the fun for me. Being an engineer I am fascinated by the construction of WWI planes. I have thoroughly enjoyed playing detective to find info on the Salmson. It is a huge thrill when an envelope arrives from NASM or the USAF Museum or Le musee de l'Air et de l'Espace. I like detailing better than painting because I am fascinated by the construction of WWI planes, plus I don't own an airbrush, and besides, the skin of the plane is just not as important to me as the internal construction. I very much wish I could leave the Salmson uncovered. A guy at the museum said the other day "You're not going to cover this are you?" (looking at the fuselage). But it wasn't started with that in mind, so I can't. There is a possibility of leaving selected areas uncovered. But I am very seriously thinking that my next model will be an uncovered one, made from real wood, with every nut and bolt visible. I absolutely love the interior construction of WWI planes. Shape/dimensions: I don't get too crazy either if something is off by a scale inch; partly my old age. I started building the Salmson from the drawings in "Scale Aircraft Drawings, Vol I" and later found it didn't exactly match the French drawings. I didn't start over or get upset. But I try to get the model as accurate as I can WITHIN REASON. I often think it would be fun to do an OOB 1:72 plastic model over the weekend, but I don't dare let myself get sidetracked from the Salmson because the empty display case is waiting for it. I too feel like I have a fixed number of projects left in me, because I'm 57. The average lifespan of Lockheed Martin employees after they retire at age 65 is 18 months. That's why I started building model airplanes at 55 instead of waiting until after I retire. Jim _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 19:57:21 -0400 From: Michael and Sharon Alvarado To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: a Q to the real pilots Message-ID: <3ACD0660.B07AFFD1@verizon.net> Wait for your instrument check ride. Alvie CAUhlir@aol.com wrote: > Gaston, > learning to fly is very mentally tiring. Your description brings > memories of my recent flying lessons. If you want to know what being really > exhausting is, just wait to see how you feel after you pass your check ride. > I was emotionally on top of the world, and pure exhausted!! All I did that > night was take a very hot bath followed by an early night to bed. > > It is a great feeling!! > > Candice ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 21:40:27 +0100 From: David Fleming To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Amish Country (was: Amish Computer Virus) Message-ID: <3ACCD83A.C600AAB3@dial.pipex.com> Allan Wright wrote: > > Lancaster, PA is a good place to visit. If you go there eat at the > 'Good and Plenty' - homestyle Amish restaraunt. > > I go there 2 times a year for historical miniatures conventions. > What do they make of you all ? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 20:08:32 EDT From: CAUhlir@aol.com To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: a Q to the real pilots Message-ID: <5f.1351de6a.27fe6300@aol.com> I did the instrument check ride! I didn't want to put Gaston off yet!! Candice Actuallly.....it wasn't that bad.....after all..who needs to see outside to fly an airplane?? "'and she is cleared for the approach!!" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 18:14:37 -0500 From: "Matt Bittner" To: "wwi@wwi-models.org" Subject: RE: April Internet Modeler Message-ID: <200104060012.RAA17203@gull.prod.itd.earthlink.net> On Tue, 3 Apr 2001 17:57:51 -0400 (EDT), Jim Landon wrote: > I finally figured out that I needed to hit the RELOAD button to get from the > March IM to the April issue (not sure why). At first I thought it was an > April Fools Day joke. But when everybody kept commenting on the April issue > I decided it must really be there somewhere. Indeed. You would have to put that issue next to Tom's 1/48th Stakken. ;-) Sorry for the late response. > I went directly to Matt's Hanriot HD3 because I have the unbuilt kit and > knew Matt was building it. I almost ruined his model by asking him to lay > it on his scanner to get advanced pictures for me. Still sorry about that, > Matt. Don't fret too much. As you can see it still turned out okay. :-) > Matt, what can I say? The model is absolutely beautiful and the write-up is > going to be priceless if I ever build this kit. I printed it out and plan > to put it inside the box with the kit. After I read it again more > thoroughly for general education. Thank you! > But I noticed you said it isn't for a first-time vac builder. Guess that > leaves me out ... a first-time any kind of plastic WWI bipe model builder! Well, for a person scratchbuilding a 1/16th Salmson, I think you should be able to hack it. Just ask the collective "us" for help if you need it. > And thanks for the free advertising for my web site. I was planning on > getting HD3 reference material from you, not the other way around! I'm glad > that I could "unknowingly" provide the cockpit references. My pleasure! It truly helped with the basic layout. Matt Bittner ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 10:12:55 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: Snow day musings Message-ID: <7186131CB805D411A60E0090272F7C7101748EC8@mimhexch1.mim.com.au> Neil, > The only thing odd is that nobody told me I was talking out of > my arse. Cabin crazy. Come to Oz and lie on a beach for a while. > /Neil, who will probably do the same thing next week again! Can't think of any reason why you should be any different form the rest of us.... 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, 6 Apr 2001 10:14:48 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: Medicinal drinking (was Re: a Q to the real pilots) Message-ID: <7186131CB805D411A60E0090272F7C7101748EC9@mimhexch1.mim.com.au> John says: > Best solvent, medicinal drink, all around miracle liquid(even > better than > Future; you can't DRINK Future) is good old Tennessee Bourbon: Jack > Daniels, Green Blue or Black Label!!!!! Rubbish. Can't stand that *foreign* crap. ;-) 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, 05 Apr 2001 18:17:54 -0500 From: "Matt Bittner" To: "wwi@wwi-models.org" Subject: RE: FMP Salmson book (And some Pfalz) Message-ID: <200104060015.RAA29935@gull.prod.itd.earthlink.net> On Thu, 5 Apr 2001 10:53:56 -0400 (EDT), Ray Boorman wrote: > Hey Matt, whats actually covered in the book. The two types??. Is the book > smaller in page count than the Pfalz book? The S.M.1, 2A2, 4 and 7. Turns out there were a few Salmson 4's and 7's that made it to the front, just before hostilites ended - just like a certain HD.3. :-) Oh, also a couple of one-offs are covered as well (S.M.2, 6 and I think 3). > Just curious since it would seem to be overkill for 180 pages or so for two > types. Actually only 116 pages. > Oh who wrote the book btw. Jack Herris?? No, Colin Owers, Jon Guttmann and Davilla. Lots of photos from them and Van Wyngarden and Alan Toelle. Some may consider it a tad expensive for the number of pages, but since there has been no coverage of the type to this point, I think it's well worth it. C'mon MPM/Azur!! Bring out that Salmson!! (Oh, and the Breguet too, of course. ;-) Matt Bittner ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 10:31:20 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: Was YOU GUYS and Drawing Accuracy. Message-ID: <7186131CB805D411A60E0090272F7C7101748ECB@mimhexch1.mim.com.au> John says: > .How can you even enter > that......"type of stuff. Fortunately, we seem to have NONE > of that on this > list. I have been on this list for about a year now and I > don't recall > ever seeing a message that negatively criticisized someones > work. Quite > the opposite. FWIW I've been on the list since 1994 and can't remember a negative message of that ilk in all that time either. If one single characteristic of the list makes it stand out it's the apparently list-universal tendency to enjoy others pleasure in their work. Round here we enjoy ourselves by showing our own work, not by dumping on others. 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, 6 Apr 2001 10:38:17 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: trust nothing Message-ID: <7186131CB805D411A60E0090272F7C7101748ECC@mimhexch1.mim.com.au> Dave says: > One point - I remember an interview in Scale Models with > Chris Gannon where he said > he DELIBERATELY exaggerated some features in his kit, because > the model just didn't > look right as a 'pure scale' replica. Make of that what you will !!! Case in point - panel lines. Now we all *know* that the joins aren't that big in scale, and we probably all accept that the lines wouldn't be visible at a distance and shouln't be in 1/x scale BUT the brain is a funny thing. Once you've seen something close up and "know" how it looks, your mind will assume things that your eye won't see, and be offended that it doesn't. If manufacturers left off the panel lines and modellers built them that way 9 out of 10 people would say "toylike" (Raised ribs under wings is another. It just isn't so, but modellers have been brought up with them that way, so many go to much trouble adding them to the DML Dr.I) 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, 5 Apr 2001 20:41:57 -0400 From: "TOM PLESHA" To: Subject: Re: a Q to the real pilots Message-ID: <000501c0be32$630b48a0$10434c0c@tom> That's an understatement Tom ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael and Sharon Alvarado" To: "Multiple recipients of list" Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 8:04 PM Subject: Re: a Q to the real pilots > Wait for your instrument check ride. > > Alvie > > CAUhlir@aol.com wrote: > > > Gaston, > > learning to fly is very mentally tiring. Your description brings > > memories of my recent flying lessons. If you want to know what being really > > exhausting is, just wait to see how you feel after you pass your check ride. > > I was emotionally on top of the world, and pure exhausted!! All I did that > > night was take a very hot bath followed by an early night to bed. > > > > It is a great feeling!! > > > > Candice > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 10:59:39 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: Lozenge question Message-ID: <7186131CB805D411A60E0090272F7C7101748ECD@mimhexch1.mim.com.au> Bob says: > > I am not a member but would like to ask a few questions on > > lozenge decals.(snip) > > If someone has time to answer, please reply to my e-mail address > > swhyte@heritage.co.za > I have 1/48 and 1/72 lozenge from three or four companies, > but so far I have > only used the 1/72 from Pegasus and have been very pleased with it. Bob did you answer him direct as well? Has *anyone* answered him at all? Bear in mind that as a non member he won't receive list posts - I'd hate him to feel he'd been brushed off simply because we all thought someone else was answering him! (I'll answer him when I get time to write a longer email, but I don't have experience with all the loz types he asked about) 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, 5 Apr 2001 21:06:22 -0400 From: "Steven M.Perry" To: Subject: Re: trust nothing Message-ID: <000f01c0be35$cca0ac80$3ef1aec7@default> Well said Shane. It's in the balamcing act between perfect scale accuracy and optical illusion that I find so much of the fun I get from modeling. sp > Case in point - panel lines. Now we all *know* that the joins aren't that > big in scale, and we probably all accept that the lines wouldn't be visible > at a distance and shouln't be in 1/x scale BUT the brain is a funny thing. > Once you've seen something close up and "know" how it looks, your mind will > assume things that your eye won't see, and be offended that it doesn't. > > If manufacturers left off the panel lines and modellers built them that way > 9 out of 10 people would say "toylike" > > (Raised ribs under wings is another. It just isn't so, but modellers have > been brought up with them that way, so many go to much trouble adding them > to the DML Dr.I) > > 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, 05 Apr 2001 18:53:37 -0700 From: ERIC HIGHT To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: RE: Lozenge question Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010405185316.01cedec0@pop.amug.org> shane, i did eric At 09:04 PM 4/5/01 -0400, you wrote: >Bob says: > > > > I am not a member but would like to ask a few questions on > > > lozenge decals.(snip) > > > If someone has time to answer, please reply to my e-mail address > > > swhyte@heritage.co.za > > > I have 1/48 and 1/72 lozenge from three or four companies, > > but so far I have > > only used the 1/72 from Pegasus and have been very pleased with it. > > >Bob did you answer him direct as well? Has *anyone* answered him at all? >Bear in mind that as a non member he won't receive list posts - I'd hate >him to feel he'd been brushed off simply because we all thought someone else >was answering him! > >(I'll answer him when I get time to write a longer email, but I don't have >experience with all the loz types he asked about) > >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, 6 Apr 2001 12:02:26 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: Lozenge question Message-ID: <7186131CB805D411A60E0090272F7C7101748ED1@mimhexch1.mim.com.au> Eric, > > shane, > i did > eric > Give him your opinion of all the brands then Eric? ;-) 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, 05 Apr 2001 19:10:02 -0700 From: ERIC HIGHT To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: RE: Lozenge question Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010405190656.01cdeb60@pop.amug.org> shane, no because i haven't used any of the ones he mentioned. i understood he was looking for how the different sets/sols work on them. i don't recognize him either. in fact it wasn't even a plug!!! eric At 10:06 PM 4/5/01 -0400, you wrote: >Eric, > > > > > shane, > > i did > > eric > > > >Give him your opinion of all the brands then Eric? > >;-) > > >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, 5 Apr 2001 23:05:41 EDT From: Andreikor@aol.com To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Hans Trauner's Figures Comment Message-ID: Hans wrote: That's a problem I do not see in WWI modelling. But as I do model figures occassionally ( see No.3, that's the reason), I am dissappointed through the years. If you see award winning figures, you can't tell who made them. Same style! Oh, I have to disagree with you there, Hans... if you look at enough figures at enough shows, you can recognize different people's work! Maybe only a handful, but those are the outstanding ones! Cheers, Andrei Andrei Koribanics II 8 Falcon Place Wayne, NJ 07470 Voice/Fax: 973-696-9378 email: andreikor@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 23:12:39 EDT From: MAnde72343@aol.com To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Hans Trauner's Figures Comment Message-ID: <50.13d4ee56.27fe8e27@aol.com> --part1_50.13d4ee56.27fe8e27_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Andrei is being a little modest, he's a fine sculptor in his own right, (hey Andrei, how about some OT figure subjects, Hustad's probably lonely, and you're the better figure painter) BTW did you see and or buy Hecker and Goros' 54mm German pilot and groundcrew figures? Merrill --part1_50.13d4ee56.27fe8e27_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Andrei is being a little modest, he's a fine sculptor in his own right, (hey
Andrei, how about some OT figure subjects, Hustad's probably lonely, and
you're the better figure painter) BTW did you see and or buy Hecker and
Goros' 54mm German pilot and groundcrew figures?
Merrill
--part1_50.13d4ee56.27fe8e27_boundary-- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 22:12:27 -0500 From: "Tom Solinski" To: Subject: Re: Was YOU GUYS and Drawing Accuracy. Message-ID: <004f01c0be47$68e0eae0$a6a20d41@okcnc1.ok.home.com> Now wasn't that fun? To all that my late night sarcasm may have offended I most humbly apologize. I meant no harm in my rantings of last night. To the kind replies from the OOBers, thank you. For the very polite reminders that I was nearing out of line from the AMSer again I thank you and I apologize. To Tomaz for taking a negative note and creating a positive thread Here Here! May Dicta Ira and to each his own always rule this great collection of intellect! But expanding on the below. >>I don't recall ever seeing a message that negatively criticisized someones work. Quite > > the opposite. We usually don't criticize one anther's work, on the contrary as previously expressed, the majority of us stand in total and absolute awe and utmost respect for the craftsmanship and artistry that is displayed here. But there have been several long strings bashing manufacturers for there best effort. Mind you the operative words are best effort, for the reasonable profit margin. The threads that seem to go on and on about the errors in the minutia of a kit or a drawing seem to contradict Dicta Ira, and it was one of these in the recent past that jerked my chain last night. What is the logic of arguing the accuracy of a drawing that you can't prove the accuracy of? I just find that frustrating and wasteful. And now as penance, I promise to burn my soapbox, and remove the w from my keyboard and keep my editorials confined to the R/C scale world. at least till my birthday on Thursday! 'Nuf waves already I'm sea sick. Tom S ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 3253 **********************