WWI Digest 4748 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: box opening ceremony by "Michael Kendix" 2) RE: Modelling Block - SE5a by "Stuart L. Malone" 3) Good Report by Steven Perry 4) Re: box opening ceremony by Steven Perry 5) Re: box opening ceremony by Tom Gourdie 6) Re: Good Report by "Pedro Soares" 7) Re: Humps & Lumps by Ken Schmitt 8) Re: IM by "Pedro Soares" 9) RE: Modelling Block - SE5a by Crawford Neil 10) Re: Good Report by "Diego Fernetti" 11) RE: Modelling Block - SE5a by Crawford Neil 12) BAT Bantam by "Diego Fernetti" 13) RE: Modelling Block - SE5a by "Graham Hunter" 14) RE: BAT Bantam by Crawford Neil 15) Re: BAT Bantam by Dave Fleming 16) RE: BAT Bantam by Tom Gourdie 17) RE: BAT Bantam by Dave Fleming 18) RE: BAT Bantam by Crawford Neil 19) RE: BAT Bantam by xtv16@dial.pipex.com 20) RE: BAT Bantam by xtv16@dial.pipex.com 21) RE: BAT Bantam by "Diego Fernetti" 22) RE: BAT Bantam by Dave Fleming 23) Re: What do you do with old kit boxes was: RE: re: Ebay by Nigel Cheffers-Heard 24) RE: BAT Bantam by "Diego Fernetti" 25) RE: BAT Bantam by "Diego Fernetti" 26) quick attention from Aeroclub by "Dave Burke" 27) Re: Good Report by "Dave Burke" 28) Re: quick attention from Aeroclub by xtv16@dial.pipex.com 29) Re: Pegasus FK-8 /was: BAT Bantam by "Michael Kendix" 30) RE: quick attention from Aeroclub by Tom Gourdie 31) Re: Pegasus FK-8 /was: BAT Bantam by "Diego Fernetti" 32) Bumped by Karen Rychlewski 33) RE: BAT Bantam by "Graham Hunter" 34) RE: BAT Bantam by Dave F 35) RE: BAT Bantam by "Diego Fernetti" 36) RE: BAT Bantam by "Graham Hunter" 37) Re: quick attention from Aeroclub by Larry Marshall 38) Re: Bumped by "Lance Krieg" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 14:23:02 +0000 From: "Michael Kendix" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: box opening ceremony Message-ID: Opening those kind of things in public parking places is against the law around here. I don't like to have anyone else around when I do that - just makes me nervous and I don't get as much pleasure from it. I bring it up to my lair and when nobody's around, I rip the plastic wrap open and study the contents. Then, when the coast is clear, I run downstairs and shove it away in the stash cupboard. Michael _________________________________________________________________ Get faster connections -- switch to MSN Internet Access! http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 08:26:37 -0600 From: "Stuart L. Malone" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: RE: Modelling Block - SE5a Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20021101082119.00b15f38@pop-server.kc.rr.com> Definitely Camel in 17th aero American insignia (coolest looking Camel I ever built), but technically isn't that barely ot or just plain wrong? Stuart L. Malone At 08:54 AM 11/1/2002 -0500, you wrote: >For me, it's always been the SE5a. The Camel always looked kind of >clunky....and then they tried to gussy it up by painting the cowling red. >The SE5a, otoh, is sleek, stylish and racy looking. As for building them, >the rigging is a real bitch on the SE5a. >Mike Muth > > Can't decide which I like best, Camel or SE5? How about the rest of you? >Neil C. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 09:33:32 -0500 From: Steven Perry To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Good Report Message-ID: <3DC290BC.8050405@tampabay.rr.com> A little while ago I gave a kid an Airfix Roland CL.II. Well, he has finished it. No paint or decals, but all the seams were aligned as were the flying surfaces. Very minimal glue spooges. Best of all, he lost the axle and pilot seat and compensated by using a piece of wire for the axle and switching the pilot & gunner so they would fit well in the cockpits without seats. He didn't attempt the decals as he didn't know how they worked. I told him we'd get together and I'd show him. Not at all bad for a first airplane model. He said he liked the challenge of making the missing part. He was over to the house and got to see my models. He liked the Lohner because it was "technical", said he thought he'd like to work on details, but needed one of those "flippy up things with magnifying glasses". I sent him home with a Toko Nie.11 and my old Optivisor. sp ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 09:37:17 -0500 From: Steven Perry To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: box opening ceremony Message-ID: <3DC2919D.9010505@tampabay.rr.com> As a kid, a good model was one that I got home without loosing any parts. These days I prefer to get my kits through the mail. Much safer than trying to fondle styrene, drive and dodge idiots talking on cell phones at the same time. sp ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 14:36:20 -0000 From: Tom Gourdie To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: Re: box opening ceremony Message-ID: <02Nov1.143732gmt.118181@ucas-firewall.ucas.ac.uk> This makes us all sound like people who surreptitiously drink from a bottle with the bag still wrapped round it... Tom -----Original Message----- From: Michael Kendix [mailto:mkendix@hotmail.com] Sent: 01 November 2002 14:24 To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [WWI] Re: box opening ceremony Opening those kind of things in public parking places is against the law around here. I don't like to have anyone else around when I do that - just makes me nervous and I don't get as much pleasure from it. I bring it up to my lair and when nobody's around, I rip the plastic wrap open and study the contents. Then, when the coast is clear, I run downstairs and shove it away in the stash cupboard. Michael _________________________________________________________________ Get faster connections -- switch to MSN Internet Access! http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp This message is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please notify us immediately. You may not copy it or use this message for any purpose or disclose its contents to any other person or take any action based on them. E-Mails are susceptible to interference. UCAS accepts no responsibility for information, errors or omissions in this e-mail nor for its use or misuse nor for any act committed or omitted in connection with this communication. If in doubt, please verify the authenticity of the contents with the sender. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 14:45:37 -0000 From: "Pedro Soares" To: Subject: Re: Good Report Message-ID: <000d01c281b5$57a6ad40$636e16d5@netcabo.pt> .> I sent him home with a Toko Nie.11 and my old Optivisor. > > sp Not only a Commander, but also a true boy Scout. Well done Chief ;-) Pedro ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 08:45:27 -0600 From: Ken Schmitt To: Subject: Re: Humps & Lumps Message-ID: > >> Can't decide which I like best, Camel or SE5? How about the rest of you? BOTH. have wondered about this ever since I got caught fondling models in the car. . .I confess, Mr. Weier. both provide equal challenges as kits. both have difficult cockpits, Diego, for sl. different reasons. both have odd tail rigging and the SE has the Stuka backwards pegleg. Camel has you wrestle a rotary into place and cowl-fiddle and SE goes overboard with louvers, vents, radiators and manifolds. each have oddball dihedrals both have inspection winders the Vickers in the SE is a pain but ultimately rewards diligence, the Loo is another item for interest. 'to headrest or not to headrest' some SE's had a brief adolescence until High Command tsk'd & clucked that out of existence (one week?) See Bishop's group. BOTH had a number of superb pilots in them. An SE is more forward looking in terms of 'first Allied aircraft to sneak-peek WW2 fighter design principles'. It's an F-4 or an F-15 to the Camel's F-16...sorta. Rotary-based aircraft essentially were a dead end. (I LOVE them so no harm done) Both are well-researched and displayed in at least 4 different Windsock df's, 3 Osprey booklets. different tactics, different designs. apples & oranges. depends on the pilot. depends on the modeler. as a teenager, a Camel is the proper hooligan. as an old man, reckon the SE would get you there & back again, more often than not. so I built both and will do it again once Eduard has its way with me. Shane: How is one to expose oneself, proper, now that most orders are online? 'Virtual Parking' Ken S ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 15:04:24 -0000 From: "Pedro Soares" To: Subject: Re: IM Message-ID: <003e01c281b7$f7885320$636e16d5@netcabo.pt> Ok, The guys did hear me: It's on fellas. Well done Dennis. That 3 wing thingie really has a lot of "WOW" factor. And Bob's Machi profiles are... well, It's Bob's usual standard. Pedro ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 16:25:17 +0100 From: Crawford Neil To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: Modelling Block - SE5a Message-ID: I think the last time we discussed this, it was regarded as OK if a plane (or tank whatever) originated during WW1. Also I think there was a concensus that the Russian Civil War is also OT. It all depends on when you think WW1 ended, many people think that was in 1945. Which is the 17th's insignia Stuart? /Neil C. > > Definitely Camel in 17th aero American insignia (coolest > looking Camel I > ever built), but technically isn't that barely ot or just plain wrong? > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 12:39:38 -0300 From: "Diego Fernetti" To: Subject: Re: Good Report Message-ID: <010001c281bc$e3b945c0$4640a8c0@ssp.salud.rosario.gov.ar> Steve! > I sent him home with a Toko Nie.11 and my old Optivisor. Sure you made a kid happy. Sometimes I really miss that feeling of complete happiness you get as a child when you recieve a nice present. Seems like the time is 100% full of fun in those days. Good deed Commander Perry! D. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 16:39:35 +0100 From: Crawford Neil To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: Modelling Block - SE5a Message-ID: I agree Mike, the SE5 looks better, but the whole idea of a fighter as whacky as the Camel sort of evens things out. Still I think the SE5 nudges ahead slightly. I can well imagine rigging is a bitch on a SE, as it is on most British designs. /Neil C. > > For me, it's always been the SE5a. The Camel always looked kind of > clunky....and then they tried to gussy it up by painting the > cowling red. > The SE5a, otoh, is sleek, stylish and racy looking. As for > building them, > the rigging is a real bitch on the SE5a. > Mike Muth ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 12:42:06 -0300 From: "Diego Fernetti" To: "ww1 list" Subject: BAT Bantam Message-ID: <010801c281bd$3b7635c0$4640a8c0@ssp.salud.rosario.gov.ar> >From an exchange offlist, the topic of this small-odd airplane arised. I remember that someone somewhere was making a replica or restoring one of these biplanes (IIRC the designer's name was Koolhoven). Does anyone knows any more about this Bantam? D. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 09:45:06 -0600 From: "Graham Hunter" To: Subject: RE: Modelling Block - SE5a Message-ID: <000001c281bd$a798b480$770101c0@ghunter> All markings aside. As aeroplanes the Camel IMHO is way cooler than the SE5a. Looks better, has two Vickers mg's, and in the hands of a skilled pilot a very effective fighter. Graham ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 16:46:01 +0100 From: Crawford Neil To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: BAT Bantam Message-ID: I recently saw a note in Aeroplane that the Aviodrome in Holland has just got their replica(?) finished. The Koolhoven connection is the reason for the dutch interest. It was a failure because of the ABC Dragonfly engine, see we've turned full circle! /Neil C. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 15:46:12 +0000 From: Dave Fleming To: Subject: Re: BAT Bantam Message-ID: <1036165572.3dc2a1c45fe55@netmail.pipex.net> Quoting Diego Fernetti : > >From an exchange offlist, the topic of this small-odd airplane arised. > I remember that someone somewhere was making a replica or restoring one > of > these biplanes (IIRC the designer's name was Koolhoven). Does anyone > knows > any more about this Bantam? > D. > There was a recent update in Flypast or Aeroplane - it's eing rebuilt bu the Koolhaven Society in Holland IIRC, and they plan to build a flyable one as well ! Dave ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 15:49:35 -0000 From: Tom Gourdie To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: BAT Bantam Message-ID: <02Nov1.155045gmt.118149@ucas-firewall.ucas.ac.uk> Diego Don't know much about the Bantam (though I've heard of it). Koolhoven was the Armstrong Whitworth designer responsible for designs such as the FK8. Tom -----Original Message----- From: Diego Fernetti [mailto:dfernet0@rosario.gov.ar] Sent: 01 November 2002 15:42 To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [WWI] BAT Bantam >From an exchange offlist, the topic of this small-odd airplane arised. I remember that someone somewhere was making a replica or restoring one of these biplanes (IIRC the designer's name was Koolhoven). Does anyone knows any more about this Bantam? D. This message is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please notify us immediately. You may not copy it or use this message for any purpose or disclose its contents to any other person or take any action based on them. E-Mails are susceptible to interference. UCAS accepts no responsibility for information, errors or omissions in this e-mail nor for its use or misuse nor for any act committed or omitted in connection with this communication. If in doubt, please verify the authenticity of the contents with the sender. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 15:52:41 +0000 From: Dave Fleming To: Subject: RE: BAT Bantam Message-ID: <1036165961.3dc2a34948caa@netmail.pipex.net> Quoting Crawford Neil : > I recently saw a note in Aeroplane that the Aviodrome in Holland > has just got their replica(?) finished. The Koolhoven connection > is the reason for the dutch interest. It was a failure because > of the ABC Dragonfly engine, see we've turned full circle! > /Neil C. > > Nope, iit used the ABC Wasp, and the small production order (12 machines) was limited bacause the RAF didn't like the Wasp, and also had enough Snipes for immediate post war use (The same dicat that saw the end of the Nieuport Nightjar and Martinsyde Buzzard) At least according to my references...... Dave ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 16:56:33 +0100 From: Crawford Neil To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: BAT Bantam Message-ID: I'd better correct myself before someone else does (beginning with D), it was the ABC Wasp (thaks Dave) not the Dragonfly, that engine didn't work either I believe. And I'm not sure about the Aviodrome, maybe it will end up there, which I hope, because I haven't been there, and I want to, is it easy to get there from Schipol? /Neil C. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 16:00:13 +0000 From: xtv16@dial.pipex.com To: Subject: RE: BAT Bantam Message-ID: <1036166413.3dc2a50deb7f0@netmail.pipex.net> Quoting Tom Gourdie : > Diego > > Don't know much about the Bantam (though I've heard of it). Koolhoven > was > the Armstrong Whitworth designer responsible for designs such as the > FK8. > > Tom And my favourite, the FK10 Quadroplane (See, not just Naglo) Dave Fleming ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 16:03:19 +0000 From: xtv16@dial.pipex.com To: Subject: RE: BAT Bantam Message-ID: <1036166599.3dc2a5c767fa3@netmail.pipex.net> Quoting Crawford Neil : > I'd better correct myself before someone else does (beginning with D), > it was the ABC Wasp (thaks Dave) I'm getting my offlist and onlist messages mixed up - see trying to manage three email accounts at the same time ......... I'm away for a lie down and a rub with a fluffy towel (Or rather I'm away to lie down and be jumped on by a two year old yelling 'Bouncing Daddy!' but she knows the difference between an aeroplane and a helicopter!) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 13:07:58 -0300 From: "Diego Fernetti" To: Subject: RE: BAT Bantam Message-ID: <018b01c281c0$d9224180$4640a8c0@ssp.salud.rosario.gov.ar> > And my favourite, the FK10 Quadroplane (See, not just Naglo) Yeah, these and naglos certainly gave a new twist to the phrase "blind flying" D. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 16:11:31 +0000 From: Dave Fleming To: Subject: RE: BAT Bantam Message-ID: <1036167091.3dc2a7b388798@netmail.pipex.net> Quoting Diego Fernetti : > > And my favourite, the FK10 Quadroplane (See, not just Naglo) > > Yeah, these and naglos certainly gave a new twist to the phrase "blind > flying" > D. LOL! Nice One! Dave ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 15:49:25 +0000 From: Nigel Cheffers-Heard To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: What do you do with old kit boxes was: RE: re: Ebay Message-ID: >In the latest issue of Aeroplane, there's a small article about a newbook >with aviation artwork by the guy that did some of the airfix covers (Roy >Cross?. The cover even has the airfix logo on it, so I suppose Airfix is >sponsoring the edition. Roy Cross is a guest at the IPMS UK Nationals, and signing copies of his book. 8-9th Nov, I reckon. N -- Nigel Cheffers-Heard photography + design tel: +44 (0)1392 87 58 57 fax: +44 (0)1392 87 74 97 mobile: 0771 261 4514 nigelch@cheffers.co.uk www.cheffers.co.uk Laburnums, Bridge Hill Topsham, Exeter EX3 0QQ, UK ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 13:24:04 -0300 From: "Diego Fernetti" To: Subject: RE: BAT Bantam Message-ID: <002601c281c3$188a0720$4640a8c0@ssp.salud.rosario.gov.ar> Neil! > I'd better correct myself before someone else does (beginning with D), Who? Me? I confess almost complete ignorance in the engine dept. You say it's a LeRhône I say that's fine! D. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 13:25:44 -0300 From: "Diego Fernetti" To: Subject: RE: BAT Bantam Message-ID: <003001c281c3$53d3f200$4640a8c0@ssp.salud.rosario.gov.ar> Tom wrote: > Don't know much about the Bantam (though I've heard of it). Koolhoven was > the Armstrong Whitworth designer responsible for designs such as the FK8. The FK8 is so ugly that makes for a nice model. How good is the Pegasus kit? D. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 10:49:07 -0600 From: "Dave Burke" To: Subject: quick attention from Aeroclub Message-ID: <001e01c281c6$98f9a340$5d96aec7@s0024008072> Hi Y'all, I just wanteed to report that I got an e-mail today from Peter Wright at Aeroclub saying that the missing parts to my 1/72 Bristol Scout D are on the way, and I only contacted him yesterday!! Now THAT is the way to treat customers and I reckon that I am just gonna have to make an order to say thanks. BUT - what I really want is an ot Meteor F.8, and I can only get it in 1/72; apparently Classic Airframes is going to make Meteors and haven't figured out which marks they are going to make. I won't be buying any, at least not any Classic kits. Guess that'll teach me to entertain thoughts of ot models... DB ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 10:51:35 -0600 From: "Dave Burke" To: Subject: Re: Good Report Message-ID: <006801c281c6$f0f9b6c0$5d96aec7@s0024008072> > .> I sent him home with a Toko Nie.11 and my old Optivisor. > > > > sp > > Makes me eyes well up with tears of joy... DB ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 16:46:05 +0000 From: xtv16@dial.pipex.com To: Subject: Re: quick attention from Aeroclub Message-ID: <1036169165.3dc2afcd9e7e5@netmail.pipex.net> Quoting Dave Burke : > Hi Y'all, > > I just wanteed to report that I got an e-mail today from Peter > Wright at > Aeroclub saying that the missing parts to my 1/72 Bristol Scout D are on > the > way, and I only contacted him yesterday!! Ditto my enquiry re ABC Dragonfly engines !! > BUT - what I really want is an ot Meteor F.8, and I can only > get it > in 1/72; apparently Classic Airframes is going to make Meteors and > haven't > figured out which marks they are going to make. I won't be buying any, > at > least not any Classic kits. The Classic one 'tis rumoured to be an F8. The Aeroclub one is a nice kit... Dave Fleming ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 16:51:43 +0000 From: "Michael Kendix" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Pegasus FK-8 /was: BAT Bantam Message-ID: Diego: Go to: http://www.wwi-models.org/IM/British/fk8.html Dennis Ugulano did a great job on a Pegasus kit. Michael >From: "Diego Fernetti" >>Tom wrote: > > Don't know much about the Bantam (though I've heard of it). Koolhoven >was > > the Armstrong Whitworth designer responsible for designs such as the >FK8. > >The FK8 is so ugly that makes for a nice model. How good is the Pegasus >kit? >D. _________________________________________________________________ Choose an Internet access plan right for you -- try MSN! http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 16:58:03 -0000 From: Tom Gourdie To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: quick attention from Aeroclub Message-ID: <02Nov1.165913gmt.118146@ucas-firewall.ucas.ac.uk> In my experience Aeroclub gives about the best service going. (I'm talking UK here) Hannants is good but it just doesn't have the personal touch you get with Aeroclub. Tom -----Original Message----- From: Dave Burke [mailto:dora9@sprynet.com] Sent: 01 November 2002 16:37 To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [WWI] quick attention from Aeroclub Hi Y'all, I just wanteed to report that I got an e-mail today from Peter Wright at Aeroclub saying that the missing parts to my 1/72 Bristol Scout D are on the way, and I only contacted him yesterday!! Now THAT is the way to treat customers and I reckon that I am just gonna have to make an order to say thanks. BUT - what I really want is an ot Meteor F.8, and I can only get it in 1/72; apparently Classic Airframes is going to make Meteors and haven't figured out which marks they are going to make. I won't be buying any, at least not any Classic kits. Guess that'll teach me to entertain thoughts of ot models... DB This message is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please notify us immediately. You may not copy it or use this message for any purpose or disclose its contents to any other person or take any action based on them. E-Mails are susceptible to interference. UCAS accepts no responsibility for information, errors or omissions in this e-mail nor for its use or misuse nor for any act committed or omitted in connection with this communication. If in doubt, please verify the authenticity of the contents with the sender. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 14:03:27 -0300 From: "Diego Fernetti" To: Subject: Re: Pegasus FK-8 /was: BAT Bantam Message-ID: <001901c281c8$994b81e0$4640a8c0@ssp.salud.rosario.gov.ar> How could I have forgotten this one! Thanks Michael! D. ----- Original Message ----- > > Go to: > > http://www.wwi-models.org/IM/British/fk8.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 12:29:28 -0500 From: Karen Rychlewski To: aa-to post Subject: Bumped Message-ID: <3DC2B9F9.7D761BA1@earthlink.net> Well, I guess the listproc didn't like what I said about the DH4 kit--I got dropped from the list from about midnight till now. So whatever you boys have been saying--I missed it all. Arrggggghhhhh! Karen ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 11:36:47 -0600 From: "Graham Hunter" To: Subject: RE: BAT Bantam Message-ID: <000101c281cd$41528100$770101c0@ghunter> This reminds me of the two part article in Windsock on the BAT. I really like this aeroplane. This is one that I may have to scratch build as I am sure no one will produce it. If I do scratch it though I would do one of the early examples with the Le Rhone engine. Graham ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 17:41:14 +0000 From: Dave F To: Subject: RE: BAT Bantam Message-ID: <1036172474.3dc2bcbaa3031@netmail.pipex.net> Quoting Graham Hunter : > This reminds me of the two part article in Windsock on the BAT. I really > like this aeroplane. This is one that I may have to scratch build as I > am > sure no one will produce it. If I do scratch it though I would do one of > the > early examples with the Le Rhone engine. > Graham > If you build 1/72, Libramodels did a kit, which I'm sure was re-released when ED Models took them over. May be able to find one. Dave ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 14:45:29 -0300 From: "Diego Fernetti" To: Subject: RE: BAT Bantam Message-ID: <00c901c281ce$7833c520$4640a8c0@ssp.salud.rosario.gov.ar> Graham Perhaps you can get one of the libramodels/scalemodels vacs (avoid the cramercraft kit!). I've never seen one of these, but the rest of the range seems to be decent enough. I'm not sure wich version it was neither. D. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Graham Hunter" To: "Multiple recipients of list" Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 2:34 PM Subject: [WWI] RE: BAT Bantam > This reminds me of the two part article in Windsock on the BAT. I really > like this aeroplane. This is one that I may have to scratch build as I am > sure no one will produce it. If I do scratch it though I would do one of the > early examples with the Le Rhone engine. > Graham > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 11:57:34 -0600 From: "Graham Hunter" To: Subject: RE: BAT Bantam Message-ID: <000201c281d0$28e6f300$770101c0@ghunter> Strike one Dave, Strike two Diego :-) I only build in the seeing-eye-dog scale. But if there is a dinky scale kit maybe someone will release a baloon scale. How about it ERIC... Graham ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 13:12:45 -0500 From: Larry Marshall To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: quick attention from Aeroclub Message-ID: <200211011312.45466.larrym@sympatico.ca> On Friday 01 November 2002 11:36 am, you wrote: > I just wanteed to report that I got an e-mail today from Peter Wright > at Aeroclub saying that the missing parts to my 1/72 Bristol Scout D are on > the way, and I only contacted him yesterday!! Now THAT is the way to treat > customers and I reckon that I am just gonna have to make an order to say I can't say enough good things about Aeroclub. I've ordered from them several times and they manage to get stuff to me in Canada faster than most US sellers, though Barry at Rosemont is something just short of amazing in this regard. -- Cheers --- Larry ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 12:27:28 -0600 From: "Lance Krieg" To: Subject: Re: Bumped Message-ID: "So whatever you boys have been saying--I missed it all." Nothing but nice things, of course. But it seems to me that the BM DH4 has two banks of cylinders for its Liberty engine. I've been cherishing an Aurora kit for years, hoping it would spark some sort of new DH4. And it also seems to me that an enterprisiing soul with a lot of sandpaper could turn the AMC kit into a DH9A. Lance Lance ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 4748 **********************