WWI Digest 3803 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) re: Ansaldo A-1 by "Matt Bittner" 2) Dennis's Schnieder by "cameron rile" 3) Re: Archaeologists (was Ansaldo A-1 - Was Re: The 8th by "Grzegorz Mazurowski" 4) Re: A Vimy in the mail by "Grzegorz Mazurowski" 5) re: Polikarpov (was: Ansaldo A-1) by "Grzegorz Mazurowski" 6) re: Ansaldo A-1 by Ray Boorman 7) One more by "Matt Bittner" 8) re: Ansaldo A-1 by "Matt Bittner" 9) Re: German demands of returning 'Goering's collection' (planes by "David Layton" 10) Re: Yet another by "Pedro Soares" 11) re: Polikarpov (was: Ansaldo A-1) by Ray Boorman 12) Re: Aging plastic by Shane Weier 13) Re: Ansaldo A-1 by Shane Weier 14) re: Polikarpov (was: Ansaldo A-1) by "Grzegorz Mazurowski" 15) Re: Pedro's new models by "Pedro Soares" 16) re: Polikarpov (was: Ansaldo A-1) by Ray Boorman 17) Re: German demands of returning 'Goering's collection' (planes by "Grzegorz Mazurowski" 18) Re: Aging plastic by "Michael Kendix" 19) re: Polikarpov (was: Ansaldo A-1) by "Grzegorz Mazurowski" 20) Re: Aging plastic by Ray Boorman ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 17:47:12 -0500 From: "Matt Bittner" To: "wwi@wwi-models.org" Subject: re: Ansaldo A-1 Message-ID: On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 16:47:31 -0400 (EDT), Grzegorz Mazurowski wrote: > That difference was clearly seen in Polikarpov > I-16 case, which plane was inspired with Gee-Bee racer. It was very > fast and manouverable, but also very much unstable and generally hard > to control, which caused that in Spanish Civil War more I-16 were > lost in crashes than in combat. Careful when you talk off topic. The I-16 was *not* based on any western plane, regardless what the western press tells us. Yes, it was a little difficult to control, but in the right hands it was an awesome machine. I still want to see the same phenomenom with it as the F4F-4 - that of the wings "bobbing" in the air as the pilot cranks the landing gear up with one hand while trying to fly it with the other. ;-) Matt Bittner ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 18:58:19 -0400 From: "cameron rile" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Dennis's Schnieder Message-ID: Dennis, With your Eduard Schnieder, did you replace the PE struts for the wings and floats? and what with? Did you replace the engine too? cam ______________________________________________________________ Get Your Free E-mail at http://www.prontomail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 00:55:29 +0200 From: "Grzegorz Mazurowski" To: Subject: Re: Archaeologists (was Ansaldo A-1 - Was Re: The 8th Message-ID: <010a01c155cc$7d62c980$0200a8c0@x.pl> Hi IRA! Have you got my last mail about book? Grzegorz (sorry, friends that I'm using this channel to communicate, but I can't reach IRA off-list...) G. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 01:11:16 +0200 From: "Grzegorz Mazurowski" To: Subject: Re: A Vimy in the mail Message-ID: <011f01c155ce$b1d2f120$0200a8c0@x.pl> From: cameron rile > Got a package today which included the Eastern > Express Vimy. Gregorz is right, it is nice kit. > On the whole it is > about the normal quality that would be expected > from Eastern Express, Be carefull with that top of fuselage is completely wrong (aft gunners position about INCH (2-3cm) too much back! And just remember, that it is not really EE kit, (I think they made no single own kit!), it is old British Frog, mould later sold to USSR and produced undr Novo label, and in '90 also under Polish Chematic label with good Polish decals. BTW, are EE decals good? I know ones from Morane, rather not perfect, and from ex-Toko Nieuport, not very good too. > The Osprey US Aces and Spad VII aces books also > came in the package. The Spad VII book is > excellent, i think I will join Matt and Neil in > wanting a 1:72 Spad VII with cool French, > Italian, Belgian, Russian and American decals. > (especially Fulco Ruffo di Calabria's Spad! ) And Polish! You've forgotten Polish! We had about 33 planes. :-) Grzegorz _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 01:24:03 +0200 From: "Grzegorz Mazurowski" To: Subject: re: Polikarpov (was: Ansaldo A-1) Message-ID: <012f01c155d0$7b57e180$0200a8c0@x.pl> From: Matt Bittner > The I-16 was *not* based on any > western plane, regardless what the western press tells us. That statement about Gee-Bee inspiration I've read in Polish aviation constructor Tadeusz Soltyk's (main designer of eg. jet trainer TS11 Iskra, widely used in Poland and India) official scientific book published in communistic Poland in '70. Soltyk had no connections with western press, but he was part of Warsaw Pact aviation industry. Grzegorz _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 16:20:00 -0700 From: Ray Boorman To: Subject: re: Ansaldo A-1 Message-ID: <20011015232547.FNKW22609.priv-edtnes11-hme0.telusplanet.net@ray> Matt's right the I-16 was not a copy, it was more a solution to the same problem as the GeeBee that of fitting the smallest possible airframe around a huge for that time engine. Therefore the I-16 looks similiar. However take a look at other monoplane radial engined aircraft of the time. You could argue that many look similar. Actually the I-16 was not as unstable as many would have it. If you allow for the hand cranked landing gear and the fact that it was way faster than most pilots were used to, then it comes off as being very successful. Bottom line at its introduction the I-16 was cutting edge and more than a match for anything flying at the time. In that period though a few years was all it took to go from ground breaker to obsolete. Which is exactly what had happened by 1941. Ray (Sorry about the ot post but hey I am an unabashed I-16 fan) On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 18:53:32 -0400 (EDT), Matt Bittner wrote: >On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 16:47:31 -0400 (EDT), Grzegorz Mazurowski wrote: > >> That difference was clearly seen in Polikarpov >> I-16 case, which plane was inspired with Gee-Bee racer. It was very >> fast and manouverable, but also very much unstable and generally >>hard >> to control, which caused that in Spanish Civil War more I-16 were >> lost in crashes than in combat. > >Careful when you talk off topic. The I-16 was *not* based on any >western plane, regardless what the western press tells us. Yes, it >was >a little difficult to control, but in the right hands it was an >awesome >machine. I still want to see the same phenomenom with it as the F4F- >4 >- that of the wings "bobbing" in the air as the pilot cranks the >landing gear up with one hand while trying to fly it with the other. >;-) > > >Matt Bittner > > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 18:29:03 -0500 From: "Matt Bittner" To: "wwi@wwi-models.org" Subject: One more Message-ID: <200110152327.QAA29081@pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net> Yes, another update. No wonder I don't get any modeling done... :-) Sandy Adam sends us an extremely well done Flea. Cool! Matt Bittner WW1 Site Assistant Editor ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 18:30:28 -0500 From: "Matt Bittner" To: "wwi@wwi-models.org" Subject: re: Ansaldo A-1 Message-ID: <200110152328.QAA06234@pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net> On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 19:26:39 -0400 (EDT), Ray Boorman wrote: > Ray (Sorry about the ot post but hey I am an unabashed I-16 fan) Sorry for this admission, but the I-16 is my *second* favorite aircraft type (right after the Nieuports, of course...). Matt Bittner ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 18:33:03 -0500 From: "David Layton" To: Subject: Re: German demands of returning 'Goering's collection' (planes Message-ID: <00d101c155d1$bc720780$416cd918@DavidLayton> I have followed this story for a few years and I wonder, still, why the Poles haven't just simply sell the aircraft back to the Germans. The Germans get their planes back and the Poles get cash. Why this simple transaction hasn't take place is beyond me. But as an American, where everything has a price, I may never understand the nationalism involved. Now, there is that P*ssing match between the US Navy and Doug Champlin over the Devastator in the sea..... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Volker Häusler" To: "Multiple recipients of list" Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 3:56 AM Subject: [WWI] Re: German demands of returning 'Goering's collection' (planes > Gregorz, you wrote: > > It says, that German govt demands return of so-called 'Goering's > > collection', which is 25 planes exhibited in Krakow's museum > and > > That planes were really part of Goering's collection of airplanes > > from WWI and mid war period > > This statement already shows the problem, which is a purely political one: > The aircraft are in no > way coming from a "Goering Collection" - something that *never existed*. > They are from the "Deutsche Luftfahrtsammlung" > (German Aeronautical Collection), a thing already started (originally in > Stuttgart, only later moved to Berlin's Anhalter bahnhof) before the Nazis > came to power, and with no connection to Goering. But naming it Goering > collection already shows that the discussion will not follow logical terms. > > Too, while it might "officially" be true that the "German govt." "demands" > the return (even though I think both these terms are not completely > correct), the truth is a little bit more complicated, and (from my point of > view) fascinating: Obviously, todays "German govt." (being composed of > Social Democrats and Greens) has little interest in those leftovers from a > long gone time, that also has miltary implications (something anyway viewed > with suspicion these days in Germany). But there is one man with a dream (or > an obsession, if you like), who goes any distance to rebuild that "lost > collection" That's Holger Steinle, heading the aeronautical section of > Berlin's MVT (Museum fuer Verkehr und Technik). He wrote "Phoenix aus der > Asche" (Phoenix from the ashes) in the 80ies, when he discovered the > existence of so many aircraft originally thought missing and gone forever, > describing this rediscovery and the idea to recreate at least in part what > was once the biggest aircraft collection of the world. And he really spares > no effort to get this collection rebuild as far as possible. We OT fans owe > him a lot: The reconstruction of the original lozenge by Silberstreif (going > down to the detail of using the same kind of fabric structure as the > original), the rebuilding to excellent standards of the 3 Straehle > collection Halberstadts (including the NASM and Air force Museum one), of > the Jeannin Stahltaube and the Albatros B II that (AFAIK) is in Cracow would > not have been possible without the obsession of this guy. Now, he obviously > even managed to put a basically uninterested government on his list of > supporters... > > > Der Spiegel wrote, that planes in Krakow are stored in closed dump, > > and are in very bad condition, covered by dust. On Tomasz pictures > > you can clearly see that things goes different. They are patiently > > restored, by professional speciallist, and are exhibited! > > Well, that's the main point: There was originally a (AFAIR *written*) > agreement on how to deal with these aircraft, all worked out by Steinle and > a small band of Polish and German enthusiasts, at a time when Poland was > still under socialist rule. The agreement was to *fully* restore *all* > aircraft, using the Berliner "Museum fuer Verkehr und technik" resources and > finance, with those aircraft of interest to Poland remaining/going back > after renovation to Poland, and the others going to Germany (and the > renovation done by a joint Polish/German team). I'd call that a sound and > logic proposal (quite similar to the agreement on the Halberstadts, which > are shared between the US and Germany). The first results were the near > parallel renovation of the Jeannin and the Albatros B II, with the B II > finished in Polish markings and returned to Cracow. Now *there is* a > difference between the renovation of these first two aircraft (which are > complete, including a lot of newly manufactured parts) and the rest, > obviously mainly caused by a lack of necessary funding for the rest (as > well, I'd say, a lack of obsession - but that's a personal opinion only). > > Well, there's always the question whether only an original structure should > be displayed or whether new parts might be included, but I think nobody > would take a look at Mona Lisa today if only LdV's paints would be there... > > > That planes were really part of Goering's collection of airplanes > snip > > left in Poland), and nationalized by Polish govt. At first Germany > > accepted that situation, but now changed mind... > > As said above, not completely right, given the understanding reached in the > 80ies > > > Polish museum and authorities doesn't want to give it back to > > Germany, as Germans destroyed or aquired much more Polish 'goods of > > culture' during war, including Polish WWI aircraft collections, and > > after war agreements states, that invader should compensate with > > similar things all destroyed or robbed 'goods of culture' if it can't > > give it back. (it is not necessary to say that Poland lost much, much > > more than Germans can give us back, including whole National > > Archives, burned intentionally by Germans in Warsaw, and Warsaw Royal > > Castle, Archcathedral, and many other palaces and churches which > > German 'Sprengkommandos' burned and blew up after fall of Warsaw > > Uprising in Autumn 1944, at personal Hitler's order to 'remove > > Warsaw from map of Europe' - Hitler finally wanted to make big lake > > in place where Warsaw is) > > What do you think about it? Especially German list friends? > > Well, frankly speaking: That's the reason why I write this: Yes, Germany > commited terrible crimes during WW II, especially in Poland. so there's the > "justice" aspect of payback. Of course, the aircraft can be seen as a > compensation. If it makes some people feel better, that's fine for me... > > Legally, there are two aspects: On one hand, the aicraft may be seen as a > booty or reparation. On the other hand, there was this post war agreement to > "share" the aircraft - did the article mention that? > > But just personally I feel that the chances for a complete > renovation/rebuild of these aircraft (including replacement wings etc.) > would be better if the original agreement would be filled with live again. > And it would also mean a happy end to the desire of Holger Steinle of > rebuilding a lost collection (which, as already said, I find extremely > fascinating). And to me this kind of obsession/enthusiam is more important > than the rather dubious political issues behind the development of that deal > or where the aircraft are physically located... > > Volker > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 00:29:11 +0100 From: "Pedro Soares" To: Subject: Re: Yet another Message-ID: <002101c155d1$3218daa0$2d7216d5@netcabo.pt> Gracias, D. Diego. The reversed lozenge was made with a piece of normal lozenge taken from a toko decal and then the colours were subdued with a tinted future wash. The external lozenge were by almark (I had just one sheet top and bottom and use it all since I goofed up on the top wing at the first try). These are really nice decals, unfortunately I suppose they are OOP nowadays. The rib tapes were home brewed with clear decal film painted in a Dicta Ira shade of blue, and the fuselage blue is the kit's recommended humbrol reference. There are a few fit problems but the worts of the kit is the enormous amount of flas on the struts which are really a pain to clean. Also as I stated before the decals on my sample were completely unusable. I tried coating them with Superscale liquid decal film and even then they would break. Um abraço Pedro ----- Original Message ----- From: dfernet0 To: Multiple recipients of list Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 12:04 PM Subject: [WWI] Re: Yet another > Well done Pedro! > The D.VI is a beauty. What did you used to represent the "reversed" lozenge > inside the cockpit? inquiring minds etc. etc. > Um abraço > D. > > > > Just uploaded two new models from Pedro. Excellent! Welcome back, > > > Pedro! Keep up the wondrous work. > > > > > > > > > Matt Bittner > > > WW1 Site Assistant Editor > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 16:27:37 -0700 From: Ray Boorman To: Subject: re: Polikarpov (was: Ansaldo A-1) Message-ID: <20011015233325.FOHG22609.priv-edtnes11-hme0.telusplanet.net@ray> Grzegorz, The quote about the GeeBee and I-16 is much older than that. It came about during the Spanish Civil War. Western designers were surprised at the I-16 and well its the same thing as with the later Japanese Zero, they had to put down the backward Russian Aero Industry hence the quote about the GeeBee. If you look through late 30's aero magazines you'll find quotes as to the I-16 being a copy of American racing planes. Rather like Weyl Platz and Fokker (see its OT) its one of those old chestnuts that has now become law and is only in later times being revisited and corrected. In the end its more a case of similar design problem requires similar solutions. Ray On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 19:24:32 -0400 (EDT), Grzegorz Mazurowski wrote: > >From: Matt Bittner >> The I-16 was *not* based on any >> western plane, regardless what the western press tells us. >That statement about Gee-Bee inspiration I've read in Polish aviation >constructor Tadeusz Soltyk's (main designer of eg. jet trainer TS11 >Iskra, widely used in Poland and India) official scientific book >published in communistic Poland in '70. Soltyk had no connections >with western press, but he was part of Warsaw Pact aviation industry. >Grzegorz > > >_________________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 09:34:49 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: Re: Aging plastic Message-ID: <7186131CB805D411A60E0090272F7C7102BCD620@mimhexch1.mim.com.au> Michael says: > It is true: i'm building a DH2. I > have sanded out the cockpit/fusealge interior - had to > re-charge the Dremmel > batteries, there was so much plastic. Surely, Chris Gannon > could save > himself a few bob on plastic supplies if he used a semi-decent mold. Low pressure moulding. If the walls aren't thick the pressure isn't sufficient for the plastic to properly fill the cavity and you'll get short shots. It's easier to thin the parts than scratch build them entirely. > > As for the other thing: what I do in the privacy of my > bedroom is my own beeswax!:) Uh-huh. Next you'll be goose stepping around in high heels and fishnet stockings telling us that Bf-10thingies are things of beauty. Shane (who wonders if Lorna will lend him her experience ;-) ********************************************************************** 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 International ++61 7 38338042 ********************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 09:37:05 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: Re: Ansaldo A-1 Message-ID: <7186131CB805D411A60E0090272F7C7102BCD621@mimhexch1.mim.com.au> Alberto says: > > The engine is done and its very good conditions could make a > running test a welcome possibility.... Sound recordings ! Please. If and when it happens. 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 International ++61 7 38338042 ********************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 01:49:01 +0200 From: "Grzegorz Mazurowski" To: Subject: re: Polikarpov (was: Ansaldo A-1) Message-ID: <015101c155d3$f813eb80$0200a8c0@x.pl> Hi all involved! From: Ray Boorman > Grzegorz, > The quote about the GeeBee and I-16 is much older than that. It came > about during the Spanish Civil War. Yes, I know it, as I'm SCW fan even more than WWI (I actually write my Master of Science Degree about SCW). I wrote it to show, that it was opinion of Warsaw Pact aviation designer, who had many contacts with Soviet, so must be right here! BTW, I-16 during SCW was mistaken with Boeing, not with Gee-Bee. > Sorry for this admission, but the I-16 is my *second* favorite aircraft > type (right after the Nieuports, of course...). Matt!!! How similar we are! (now I understand your asking for prop-boss for I-16 - maybe you can use YAK-1 boss? Or take one from A-model I-16 type 5/6 - please, contact me off list, I love I-16 and have many interesting references form SCW) Grzegorz _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 00:55:55 +0100 From: "Pedro Soares" To: Subject: Re: Pedro's new models Message-ID: <002e01c155d4$edc939e0$2d7216d5@netcabo.pt> ----- Original Message ----- From: Sandy Adam To: Multiple recipients of list Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 6:06 PM Subject: [WWI] Re: Pedro's new models > Nice models Pedro - I especially like your wood effect propellors. > Sandy > Sandy, my better models look quite pale when compared to the masterpieces you keep turning out. That Floh is really a charming lady, isn't it? Thanks for the encouragement Pedro ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 17:20:04 -0700 From: Ray Boorman To: Subject: re: Polikarpov (was: Ansaldo A-1) Message-ID: <20011016002520.JUHY14200.priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net@ray> Grzegorz, You have to be very careful with anything to do with Polikarpov. Remember the entire design team spent time in jail during Stalins purges. Especially during the years 29-33. This is why its even harder to say they based design on foreign aircraft since they didn't get to see in detail many foreign aircraft from jail. The prototype I-16 had a big VT painted as part of its serial #. The VT standing for "Vnutrennaya Tyur'ma", or "internal prison". Polikapov went on to become one of the persons who was unjustly blamed for Russia's unpreparedness in 1941, which ended his career and worse. The I-16 was like all aircraft based on designs that went before. How much this was based on American Aircraft is really not known. However my point was that the GeeBee and I-16 are not clones of each other. The I16 was started in early 32 and flew in late 33, The GeeBee R2 flew and won the Thompson Trophy during the summer of 1932. During the SCW the I-16 was said to have been based on the GeeBee by western observers. I know it was often mistaken as the Boeing but that wasn't what was being said or meant, so please don't move the discussion in that direction. ! As to Polish designers of 40 years later, well again remember the design Bureaus of the 1960's and 70's were some of the same Bureaus who's designs in the early 30's had been surpassed by the I-16 and made to look archaic, so I would use some skeptism. Now if it was someone from the same design Bureau I would put much more credence to the statement. Designers have been famous for putting down products of other companies and in this case design Bureaus. Btw Polikarpov got his start with with Igor Sikorsky and a certain big OT bomber. Ray ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 02:34:32 +0200 From: "Grzegorz Mazurowski" To: Subject: Re: German demands of returning 'Goering's collection' (planes Message-ID: <015601c155da$541cf560$0200a8c0@x.pl> Karen, Hans, Volker, Gaston, Diego and all interested! Thanks for answers! > The aircraft are in no > way coming from a "Goering Collection" - something that *never existed*. > They are from the "Deutsche Luftfahrtsammlung" Here I can agree. As that collection is really called 'Goering's' in Poland, that term is overused, mostly by me in my e-mail, not by article author - cause: it was more simple for me to remember that name... (but Polish planes, captured by Wermacht in 1939 are said to be Goerings collection, and they are part of that group) BTW, I'll use term "Deutsche Luftfahrtsammlung" > in the 80ies, when he discovered the > existence of so many aircraft originally thought missing and gone > forever, Keeping that planes in secret was (really!) very good idea in communistic Poland, and I think it saved it! Communists didn't liked western designs (especially German), and destroyed, for propaganda purposes, not only all left in Poland WWII German planes, but Pipers and even Spitfires too! They were really idiotic, and you must understand, that 'iron curtain' was real thing, and communists really wanted to create here 'Brave New World' without remainings of 'stinking west'. Now things are different! > Well, that's the main point: There was originally a (AFAIR *written*) > agreement on how to deal with these aircraft, all worked out by Steinle and > a small band of Polish and German enthusiasts, at a time when Poland was > still under socialist rule. The agreement was to *fully* restore *all* > aircraft, using the Berliner "Museum fuer Verkehr und technik" resources and > finance, with those aircraft of interest to Poland remaining/going back > after renovation to Poland, and the others going to Germany (and the > renovation done by a joint Polish/German team). I'd call that a sound and > logic proposal (quite similar to the agreement on the Halberstadts, which > are shared between the US and Germany). The first results were the near > parallel renovation of the Jeannin and the Albatros B II, with the B II > finished in Polish markings and returned to Cracow. Now *there is* a > difference between the renovation of these first two aircraft (which are > complete, including a lot of newly manufactured parts) and the rest, > obviously mainly caused by a lack of necessary funding for the rest (as > well, I'd say, a lack of obsession - but that's a personal opinion only). > > Well, there's always the question whether only an original structure should > be displayed or whether new parts might be included, but I think nobody > would take a look at Mona Lisa today if only LdV's paints would be > there... Yes, there is the main point. That agreement was made by some untrustworthy communistic clerk, and was later questioned as illegal by Polish authorities. Polish law simply forbid taking things made before 1945 out of Poland without Ministry of Culture permit. But this is one aspect. Second, much more important and (IMHO) for list members interesting, is method of that restoration! In Poland we have really very good art renovators, who are known and work in almost every country of World (eg. Italian Assisi, Egyptian Hatshepsut Temple, France, Holland and much more). They study renovation on 5-years University studies, and are very good specialists, some are my friends. And there is one unbreakable rule of renovation: no 'including a lot of newly manufactured parts' as you wrote. And I'm sure that Mona Lisa has also only old LdV paints only (see 'stinking' old pigment topic on list some days ago), like Venus from Milo has no hands, and Nike from Samotraki has one wing only. That renovation of Albatros is considered as complete disaster in Poland, and it is one of secondary causes of withdrawal from that '80 agreement. Plane looks good, but it is in Polish markings (which she historically never had) and it is now more than 50% replica, not original! Stored in Krakow planes are renovated (not all yet), but only original parts are used. And belive me, many enthusiasts are involved! When I finally buy scanner (maybe next week :-) I can send you all photo of 'Camel restoration group', who are nice guys and made really good job. (also Polish 'White Eagle' fundation which restored Bf 109 found in one of Polish lakes resisted temptation to make it flying, in order to keep its historical value). We as a modelers should follow that point of view, because replica cannot be trustworthy reference for us! (imagine troubles with replica of Voss F.I :-) This is true, that we are short in funds, but this is just place for you, German friends! Help us to exhibit that treasures better! For yours and ours profit (cultural, not material :-) And German demands doesn't help here. (here enters POLITICS) The only political problem here is, that bigger and stronger country is trying to use its power on smaller and weaker - why Germany doesn't ask Canada, US, France or Britain for the same? They have many OT objects (Aussies even A7V tank), and all that are war booty! And "Deutsche Luftfahrtsammlung" was not CAPTURED by Poland, it was left in Poland by Germans! And at last, two things: "Deutsche Luftfahrtsammlung" is the only collection of pre-1945 planes in Poland, because our dear Germans bombed and burned our own two or three collections which included treasures like first Polish glider 'Lotnia' from 1896, or Gotha G.III or IV, legally aquired by Poland in 1919, and many others. (Karen once wrote about futile attempts to find some 'sworl' fabric parts in Krakow - of course futile, as nothing from before 1945 remained, and museum was made from scratch, saing in modeler's language) Second problem, what to do with such "Deutsche Luftfahrtsammlung" parts like Camel or DH 4 (or 9, I don't remember) - who's property it should be? German? Why not British? Volker, please, if you can contact Holger Steinle, let him know my comments! I think that whole thing will go much better for all of us, in Poland, Germany and whole world, if he stops insisting on moving planes to Berlin, and start helping to renovate and better expose it in Krakow! It is really not political problem from Polish side, just German side uses political pressure on Poland! And this doesn't help, as you can imagine very good! Warm greetings Grzegorz _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 00:47:06 From: "Michael Kendix" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Aging plastic Message-ID: Shane: >Low pressure moulding. If the walls aren't thick the pressure isn't >sufficient for the plastic to properly fill the cavity and you'll get > >short shots. It's easier to thin the parts than scratch build them > >entirely. True and besides the Revell, it's the only game in town in 1/72nd scale. >Uh-huh. Next you'll be goose stepping around in high heels and fishnet >stockings telling us that Bf-10thingies are things of beauty. > >(who wonders if Lorna will lend him her experience ;-) I have all I require but thanks anyway. Michael _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 02:52:44 +0200 From: "Grzegorz Mazurowski" To: Subject: re: Polikarpov (was: Ansaldo A-1) Message-ID: <016801c155dc$de84dd60$0200a8c0@x.pl> Speaking about OT designer Polikarpov ;-)... I must admit, that Tadeusz Soltyk was designer in AFAIK fromearly '50s, (his 11th design, Iskra, is from 1960) so only 20 years after I-16, from '70 is book I mention. > Remember the entire design team spent time in jail during Stalins > purges. Especially during the years 29-33. This is why its even > harder to say they based design on foreign aircraft since they didn't > get to see in detail many foreign aircraft from jail. The prototype > I-16 had a big VT painted as part of its serial #. The VT standing > for "Vnutrennaya Tyur'ma", or "internal prison". Also Tupolev was working in 'jail' but I'm VERY SURE that it was not real jail, just some kind of 'restricted area' and designers were treated not like prisoners, more like state property or slaves - as USSR was not normal country. It was almost the same sort of jail that Oppenheimer's during work on 'Manhattan Project' I'm sure that Soviet spies were working good, and Polikarpov must have had enough informations what's going on in aviation world, as in such totalitary country all was working for military industry. And GeeBee Y is from 1930. Greetings Grzegorz (shall we move to GoldenAge with that discussion? that can make it more living!) _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 17:49:18 -0700 From: Ray Boorman To: Subject: Re: Aging plastic Message-ID: <20011016005507.FXWH22609.priv-edtnes11-hme0.telusplanet.net@ray> Sheesh, Michael makes my bedroom seem boring. I don't even want to think about some Goose stepping Guy in fishnets holding a Tamiya not to be mentioned and a whip. I bet you're going to tell me he has the Tombraider lady in there too. Ray On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 20:48:11 -0400 (EDT), Michael Kendix wrote: >>Uh-huh. Next you'll be goose stepping around in high heels and >>fishnet >>stockings telling us that Bf-10thingies are things of beauty. >> >>(who wonders if Lorna will lend him her experience ;-) > >I have all I require but thanks anyway. > >Michael > >_________________________________________________________________ >Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at >http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 3803 **********************