WWI Digest 4810 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: New update by "Ross & Wendy Moorhouse" 2) Re: Something big coming to Squadron by "Ross & Wendy Moorhouse" 3) Re: Yet Another Albatros Done.... by "Ross & Wendy Moorhouse" 4) Re: Wylam plans Question by KarrArt@aol.com 5) RE: Wylam plans Question by "John & Allison Cyganowski" 6) Re: Something big coming to Squadron by KarrArt@aol.com 7) Re: Wylam plans Question by Mark Miller 8) Re: Wylam plans Question by Larry Marshall 9) Re: Wylam plans Question by "Shane Weier" 10) Re: Wylam plans Question by KarrArt@aol.com 11) =?big5?Q?=AB=F6=A4=EB=A4J=B1b=B3s=B3=F8=B5| $1,980?= by Sunrise_Account_&_Tax_Co 12) Re: Wylam plans Question by "Shane Weier" 13) Re: Wylam plans Question by KarrArt@aol.com 14) Re: Wylam plans Question by "Shane Weier" 15) =?GB2312?B?19+9+MTjztK1xMrAvec=?= by "1222" <1222@etang.com> 16) Re:Book Seller waring by "Michael Gilmore" 17) Re: Wylam plans Question by "peter leonard" 18) Re: Caffe Latte and boblinbks for breakkie by xtv16@dial.pipex.com 19) Re: Something big coming to Squadron by "Pedro N. Soares" 20) Note from Belgium by "Pedro N. Soares" 21) RE: Wylam plans Question by Crawford Neil 22) RE: Wylam plans Question by "Diego Fernetti" 23) Get well Lance Krieg, get well by "Diego Fernetti" 24) Re: Caffe Latte and boblinbks for breakkie by "Diego Fernetti" 25) RE: Wylam plans Question by "NEIL EDDY" 26) RE: Wylam plans Question by Crawford Neil 27) Re: Caffe Latte and boblinbks for breakkie by "NEIL EDDY" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 14:27:01 +1100 From: "Ross & Wendy Moorhouse" To: Subject: Re: New update Message-ID: <003001c295c4$d96d41e0$9a4e2dcb@future> As much as I love planes with black on white squares I also love the Austrian Albs. Great builds again Bill.. You must of just about built all of Rodens ones by now ? Cheers Ross ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Bittner" To: "Multiple recipients of list" Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 12:19 PM Subject: [WWI] New update > Just uploaded two Oeffag Albatros D.IIIs built by Bill Arnold. I > also split up his Albatros page into two pages: one for "German" > built and the other for Oeffag built. > > Both are extremely well done!! > > > Matt Bittner > WW1 Modeling Page > Assistant Editor > > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 14:28:12 +1100 From: "Ross & Wendy Moorhouse" To: Subject: Re: Something big coming to Squadron Message-ID: <003801c295c5$03ddd200$9a4e2dcb@future> Mark, Great stuff mate that a) you get got paid for this and that they are using your artwork. Hope more model companies choose your art work. Cheers Ross ----- Original Message ----- From: "MARK MILLER" To: "Multiple recipients of list" Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 1:40 PM Subject: [WWI] Re: Something big coming to Squadron > --0-1357334325-1038364726=:6211 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > > Hah! > They most certainly did get my permision - and PAID me as well :-D > > Philippe at Hi Tech sure works fast - I just sent him that image yesterday morning > I then discovered last night that I screwed up the camo scheme on the bottom wing > I have it on the artwork as purple\green I green\purple and it supposed to be green\purple I purple\green. > But Philippe doesn't have the corrected version yet because I just finished it about 15 minutes ago. > I hope the can swap it in. > Thanks for ponting it out Mat - made my day :-) > Mark > Matt Bittner wrote:On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 19:24:35 -0500 (EST), Carlos Valdes wrote: > > > http://www.squadron.com/ItemDetails.asp?item=hi0999 > > > > Is that a Mark Miller scene? > > Looks like that to me. Mark, did they get your permission first? > > > Matt > > --0-1357334325-1038364726=:6211 > Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii > >

Hah!
They most certainly did get my permision - and PAID me as well :-D

Philippe at Hi Tech sure works fast - I just sent him that image yesterday morning
I then discovered last night that I screwed up the camo scheme on the bottom wing
I have it on the artwork as purple\green I green\purple and it supposed to be green\purple I purple\green. >

But Philippe doesn't have the corrected version yet because I just finished it about 15 minutes ago.
I hope the can swap it in. >

Thanks for ponting it out Mat - made my day :-)
Mark >

 Matt Bittner <tbittners@sprintmail.com> wrote: >

On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 19:24:35 -0500 (EST), Carlos Valdes wrote:

> http://www.squadron.com/ItemDetails.asp?item=hi0999
>
> Is that a Mark Miller scene?

Looks like that to me. Mark, did they get your permission first?


Matt
> --0-1357334325-1038364726=:6211-- > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 14:28:57 +1100 From: "Ross & Wendy Moorhouse" To: Subject: Re: Yet Another Albatros Done.... Message-ID: <004001c295c5$1ec7ed30$9a4e2dcb@future> But I thought that was how you built your kits Shane.. ;-) Cheers Ross ----- Original Message ----- From: "Shane Weier" To: "Multiple recipients of list" Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 10:09 AM Subject: [WWI] Re: Yet Another Albatros Done.... > Ross > > >John, any chance of some in flight photos mate ? > > Care to explain how he points the camera with his hands over his eyes? > > That's where mine would be. > > Shane > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 22:44:19 EST From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Wylam plans Question Message-ID: <17d.128d5733.2b159993@aol.com> In a message dated 11/26/02 7:04:33 PM Pacific Standard Time, bristolf2b@hotmail.com writes: << I don't know that "made it up" is quite the right term. I'm betting that where he had no way of measuring from life, he based the drawings on an amalgam of existing drawing (official or unofficial general arrangement drawings and so on) with interpretation from photographs. >> For the overall outlines and such I'd say yeah. He's really been slammed for decades over his Pfalz D.III's too-full nose underside. But I can see how he might have arrived at that shape because in some photos, it is rather difficult to tell exactly what that curve does. But for his interiors he tended to cram them full of every instrument know to mankind! For the Albatros he has versions called "D-5B" and "D-6" with options for five gun armament instead of their usual three! When he was called out for showing the D.III and D.V bottom wings as having twin spars, he made up some story about these extra spars being thought to be special auxilliary spars. His drawings, and others from the "Golden Age" of Model Airplane News in the 1940s were made under tight publishing deadlines, and for the most part aimed at younger folks. Production Production Production! A lot of the photos we still see today were around then, and these guys probably were using them......for mistakes such as an incorrect number of ribs- I'd chalk that up to a quick miscount in the photos while working under publishing deadlines. I doubt if these guys were thinking they were drawing for the Ages or making "historical documents". They loved airplanes and airplanes guts and structures, and turned out some beautiful "art". Some of this is conjecture on my part, but I have read snippets here and there- WW I Aero and other places that mention this publishing pressure. "Hey- Finish up that Wright Flyer- the presses gotta roll, and we got kids out there waiting to see this" Wylam's Brisfit set IS as beautiful as it is fictional- it's what we all want in drawings- precision, meticulous labeling, explanations of complex mechanical devices...but it's an autopsy of a non-existant object. But just him loose on something with a fat duck load of good raw material to work from, and he could on occasion make beauty and accuracy! RK ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 22:46:44 -0500 From: "John & Allison Cyganowski" To: Subject: RE: Wylam plans Question Message-ID: <001501c295c7$9b2d1a10$9d3f5b0c@millipore.com> I think that the Spad 7 hanging at Le Bourget is a late model. Guynemer flew a few Spad 7s. The Special Hobby kit's markings are for one of Guynemer's early Spad 7s not the ship at Le Bourget. Although the side panel seems anomolus, they give you a cowl with a small opening. Cyg ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Fletcher" To: "Multiple recipients of list" Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 8:27 PM Subject: [WWI] RE: Wylam plans Question > Did Le Bourget do any drawings from their 7 when they did the last > restoration? IIRC that should be a fairly early 7 and the two sets of > drawings could then be compared. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 22:48:21 EST From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Something big coming to Squadron Message-ID: <74.26e465e2.2b159a85@aol.com> In a message dated 11/26/02 6:40:17 PM Pacific Standard Time, mark_.m@sbcglobal.net writes: << Hah! They most certainly did get my permision - and PAID me as well :-D >> Yeah- and what a great bonus- buy Mark's picture AND they toss in a 1/32 Albatros! Hmmmmmm.....I've got to look into something like that....... RK ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 20:18:15 -0800 (PST) From: Mark Miller To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Wylam plans Question Message-ID: <20021127041815.61053.qmail@web20203.mail.yahoo.com> --- Shane Weier wrote: > I'm betting that where he had no way of measuring > from life, he based the > drawings on an amalgam of existing drawing (official > or unofficial general Yes - you are probably right for the most part But, Im sorry, I can't imagine how some of the stuff I've seen could concievably have been based on any kind of tangable evidence. > To put it bluntly, Ian Stair, Col Owers and all the > rest of the current crop of draftsmen do precisely the same thing, but they have the advantage of > decades more research to winnow out the errors and > find better sources. I agree - in fact I had considered adding to my previous post on this subject something like: "But come to think of it, that's what I DO." and anyone who tries to generate technical drawings of machines this old is bound to resort to guesswork and photo interpretation - there is simply no way around it. So perhaps the only differnce in Wylam's work and that of contemperary draftsmen is that the data gaps were so much larger back then that it required more imagination. > Which doesn't mean *they* are perfect either...... > > Oh - and while Stair (for example) doesn't usually > give you interior detail > if he doesn't have a source, how many of us have > added some hypothetical > detail to an undocumented model cockpit on the > reasonable assumption that > it's bound to be similar to some other aircraft ? > One can hardly blame > Wylam too much for doing so, first, we are not talking about a model done for personal gratification - these are technical drawing whose sole purpose is to provide information, as such they should be held to a higher standard of accuracy and reliability. second I have some difficulty with the term "reasonable assumption" Do you mean to imply that Mr Wylam's work contains errors that should be considered to have been "reasonable asumptions" for his day? Maybe so, but they don't adhere to my definition. Or to any of the contemperary draftsman that you mention. like you said - if Rimmel doesn't know something - he leaves it out. > just so long as it's > understood where the > *detail* comes from. This is perhaps the most difficult thing about Wylams work. It just looks so plausable, how could you not believe them. And the problem was made worse by the fact that I suspect some of the older model makers based their kits on his work. A very nasty trap. The point is, you don't know where the detail comes from, and my only motivation in asking for opinions of this work was to try and clarify the situation. Don't get me wrong. I LOVE Wylam's work - probably more than you do. Hell, It's one of the things that prompted me into the career I chose. I have this thing for technical illustration I see beauty in it. But that doesn't change the fact that they are wrong Mark __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 23:35:48 -0500 From: Larry Marshall To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Wylam plans Question Message-ID: <200211262335.48608.larrym@sympatico.ca> > So perhaps the only differnce in Wylam's work and that > of contemperary draftsmen is that the data gaps were > so much larger back then that it required more > imagination. I think the big difference between then and now is mobility, both of people and of information. When Wylam was drawing air travel was still behind propellers and done regularly by only a few and most never flew anywhere. There was no Internet and even photocopiers were primitive devices that cost a lot and distorted images considerably. So, if you're in New York, what you draw had better be there too. Today, all of this has changed. > first, we are not talking about a model done for > personal gratification - these are technical drawing > whose sole purpose is to provide information, as such I don't think so Mark. These drawings were published in model aviation magazines. They were/are quite pretty and certainly above any standards being set by model builders of the day. > they should be held to a higher standard of accuracy > and reliability. Well...you can hold them to any standard but the standard of the 1950s model builder was considerably below yours I'm afraid. > assumption" Do you mean to imply that Mr Wylam's work > contains errors that should be considered to have been > "reasonable asumptions" for his day? > Maybe so, but they don't adhere to my definition. > Or to any of the contemperary draftsman that you > mention. If you would have put Bill Wylam in Chance Vought, Republic, or North American's company, he would have drawn as accurately as anything you would deem 'good enough' as the goal would be to draw parts that were accurate enough to construct an aircraft and he would have had enough information to do just that. In the case of doing drawings for model aviation buffs of the day, if it looked more like an Albatros than a Piper Cub, it was probably an Albatros and any scan of the flying scale models being flown at that time will bear that out. With the exception of the top 2-3% of the flying scale model world, they're STILL good enough. It's all in your perspective. > like you said - if Rimmel doesn't know something - he > leaves it out. Did Ray Rimmel do drawings in the 1950s? I don't think that Windsock Datafiles could have existed at that time and certainly few would have bought them. > But that doesn't change the fact that they are wrong Nope...not at all. But when we look back and ask "Why did they think the earth was flat?" we can actually come to an understanding why that was the case. And so it goes for drawings created largely in a vacuum for consumers who were wanting 'plausible' and weren't nearly as worried as you are about perfection in their scale models. -- Cheers --- Larry ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 14:43:15 +1000 From: "Shane Weier" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Wylam plans Question Message-ID: RK says: > Wylam's Brisfit set IS as beautiful as it is fictional- it's what we >all >want in drawings- precision, meticulous labeling, explanations of complex >mechanical devices...but it's an autopsy of a non-existant object. Mmmm. You could be talking about a well known draftsman working for a current general modelling publication............ I often repeat what a drafting instructor once said about one of my drawings "good draftsmanship is not a substitute for accuracy" However, if the drawing *looks* highly detailed there's plenty who'll believe the draftsman knew what he was doing. Shane _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 23:56:50 EST From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Wylam plans Question Message-ID: <67.307226d.2b15aa92@aol.com> In a message dated 11/26/02 8:45:38 PM Pacific Standard Time, bristolf2b@hotmail.com writes: << I often repeat what a drafting instructor once said about one of my drawings "good draftsmanship is not a substitute for accuracy" However, if the drawing *looks* highly detailed there's plenty who'll believe the draftsman knew what he was doing. Shane >> Same good advice my old drafting teacher had, and as for any beauty that may exist in a drawing, his idea was that if the correct information was portrayed clearly and understandably- then you had a beautiful drawing. Accuracy and clarity. That impression of complexity and precision I think was the selling point for the old MAN drawings. Kids saw this stuff and went nuts. RK ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 00:16:19 -0500 (EST) From: Sunrise_Account_&_Tax_Co To: 2002 Subject: =?big5?Q?=AB=F6=A4=EB=A4J=B1b=B3s=B3=F8=B5| $1,980?= Message-ID: 中小企會計優惠 ========== 按月入帳連報稅 $1,980。 核數安排可節省高達25%核數費。 歡迎致電 9127 3299日昇會計稅務公司查詢 Special offer for accounting services to small & medium enterprises =========================================== Monthly bookkeeping plus taxation services $1,980. Audit arrangement saves up to 25% of audit fee. Please phone 9127 3299 to Sunrise Account & Tax Co for further information. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 15:21:00 +1000 From: "Shane Weier" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Wylam plans Question Message-ID: Mark > > Oh - and while Stair (for example) doesn't usually > > give you interior detail > > if he doesn't have a source, how many of us have > > added some hypothetical > > detail to an undocumented model cockpit on the > > reasonable assumption that > > it's bound to be similar to some other aircraft ? > > One can hardly blame > > Wylam too much for doing so, > > >first, we are not talking about a model done for >personal gratification - these are technical drawing >whose sole purpose is to provide information, as such >they should be held to a higher standard of accuracy >and reliability. Different times, different purposes. Your perspective is as an historian in 2002, not as a draftsman preparing plans for a 1950's modelling magazine > >second >I have some difficulty with the term "reasonable >assumption" Do you mean to imply that Mr Wylam's work >contains errors that should be considered to have been >"reasonable asumptions" for his day? Yes. It's surely fair to assume in the absence of evidence that an aircraft will have a control column if others of the same manufacturer and period all do so? That there will be some form of wooden framework on a second type of plywood skinned fighter if another version has it (but the width and depth might be specualtive) >Maybe so, but they don't adhere to my definition. >Or to any of the contemperary draftsman that you >mention. Ah, but Wylam *isn't* contemporary with us. (Well maybe *some* of us ;-) >This is perhaps the most difficult thing about Wylams >work. It just looks so plausable, how could you not >believe them. I say (about yearly, and twice today) what my own instructor said - "good draftsmanship is not a substitute for accuracy" yet I can show you a thousand modellers who believe an electronically drafted drawing with lots of detail *must* be more accurate than a hand drawn one with simple outlines. >But that doesn't change the fact that they are wrong Indeed, not and I don't actually disagree at all in that regard Shane _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 00:53:39 EST From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Wylam plans Question Message-ID: <31.30d6c375.2b15b7e3@aol.com> In a message dated 11/26/02 9:22:22 PM Pacific Standard Time, bristolf2b@hotmail.com writes: << Ah, but Wylam *isn't* contemporary with us. (Well maybe *some* of us ;-) >> Last I heard, he was still alive and working on his life's masterpiece- that Breguet XIV. WW I Aero has printed some of his ongoing work on this and it looks great. They've also ran some of the material he's using. THIS one should be as accurate as he can make it- no deadlines (other than maybe "his" deadline.....) good research resources, and he's doing it for the love of the airplane itself. Jeez, he must 149 by now. RK ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 16:07:19 +1000 From: "Shane Weier" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Wylam plans Question Message-ID: RK > Jeez, he must 149 by now. Well that reduces how many of us are his contemporaries rather a lot ;-) Shane _________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 14:27:53 +0800 From: "1222" <1222@etang.com> To: wwi@mustang.sr.unh.edu Subject: =?GB2312?B?19+9+MTjztK1xMrAvec=?= Message-ID: <200211270630.BAA82139@mustang.sr.unh.edu>
------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 02:11:44 -0800 From: "Michael Gilmore" To: Subject: Re:Book Seller waring Message-ID: <005601c295fd$64a9a860$0101a8c0@hppav> John, Have you contacted bookfinder.com about this guy. Maybe they have had others complain about him and they could ban him from using their website has a way for him to do business. Michael T. Gilmore "The Interstate Railroad" http://hobbystop.tripod.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 05:07:49 -0500 From: "peter leonard" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Wylam plans Question Message-ID: <20021127100749.90426.qmail@mail.com> Last time I checked Wylam was registered on the Aerodrome forum. In my view an inaccurate drawing can always be checked against references and corrected as necessary and is infinitely better than no drawing at all. The Wylam and Nieto drawings are still in some cases the only game in town. Where they score bigtime against modern drawings is in the provision of a complete set of sections and table of dimensions, not to mention the many detail sketches on the side. By comparison some of to-days stuff is little better than a GA drawing with few if any sections and little additional material. cheers Peter L ----- Original Message ----- From: KarrArt@aol.com Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 00:55:53 -0500 (EST) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [WWI] Re: Wylam plans Question In a message dated 11/26/02 9:22:22 PM Pacific Standard Time, bristolf2b@hotmail.com writes: << Ah, but Wylam *isn't* contemporary with us. (Well maybe *some* of us ;-) >> Last I heard, he was still alive and working on his life's masterpiece- that Breguet XIV. WW I Aero has printed some of his ongoing work on this and it looks great. They've also ran some of the material he's using. THIS one should be as accurate as he can make it- no deadlines (other than maybe "his" deadline.....) good research resources, and he's doing it for the love of the airplane itself. Jeez, he must 149 by now. RK -- __________________________________________________________ Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup One click access to the Top Search Engines http://www.exactsearchbar.com/mailcom ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 10:29:13 +0000 From: xtv16@dial.pipex.com To: Subject: Re: Caffe Latte and boblinbks for breakkie Message-ID: <1038392953.3de49e79eae12@netmail.pipex.net> Quoting NEIL EDDY : > > I think the Bobolink is a type of bird...or was it the pet name given to > the > CEO of Boulton-Paull by his secretary? > It was a bird - one of the periodic rules for names was that at this time single seat fighters were named after birds (Snipe, Buzzard, Nighthawk, Swallow) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 10:36:48 -0000 From: "Pedro N. Soares" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Something big coming to Squadron Message-ID: <12AEB3D996DDD311B98A00508B6D75B3025C1E04@TUFAO> Congrats Mark. Your work really deserves all the exposure it can get. Pedro > -----Original Message----- > From: MARK MILLER [mailto:mark_.m@sbcglobal.net] > Sent: quarta-feira, 27 de Novembro de 2002 2:40 > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: [WWI] Re: Something big coming to Squadron > > > --0-1357334325-1038364726=:6211 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > > Hah! > They most certainly did get my permision - and PAID me as well :-D > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 11:16:40 -0000 From: "Pedro N. Soares" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Note from Belgium Message-ID: <12AEB3D996DDD311B98A00508B6D75B3025C1E81@TUFAO> Just heard from Phillipe Spristerbach (who's on lurk mode) that Frederic Liefferinck has had a break down on his computer and as such asks to let the list know he is off for the time being while he gets the machine going again. Pedro (the carrier pigeon) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 12:43:54 +0100 From: Crawford Neil To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: Wylam plans Question Message-ID: Thanks Tomasz for the new input on the Wylam Spad 7 drawings, I thought they were better than the Ian Stair drawings, checking side-view and top-view, but I didn't think to check cross-section. I'm sorry to say I haven't yet checked the Spad 7 drawings I got from Robert, they look good, but as has been said already, so do most of them. The problem is that to check drawings thoroughly it's a lot of hard work, so it's not the sort of thing (I) want to do, unless I'm going to scratchbuild something. These Czech drawings look very good, they have the correct lines of the rear fuselage, that the Stair drawings lack. Must go home and have a look at those cross-sections. And Mark, Wylams Spad 13 drawings are wrong in the side-view of the rear fuselage, so I reckoned Doug Carricks Windsock DF drawings are better for that one. /Neil C. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 12:20:34 +0000 From: "Diego Fernetti" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: RE: Wylam plans Question Message-ID: Neil from the northern fields wrote: >The problem is that to check drawings thoroughly it's a lot >of hard work, so it's not the sort of thing (I) want to do, unless >I'm going to scratchbuild something. These Czech drawings look very >good, they have the correct lines of the rear fuselage, that the >Stair drawings lack. Must go home and have a look at those cross-sections. Ditto from here Neil, I just wish to have 25 hrs. days. Or maybe 27. D. _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 12:23:08 +0000 From: "Diego Fernetti" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Get well Lance Krieg, get well Message-ID: Hope Lance gets better soon and return to the list ASAP. We all are goign to miss him! I knew that someone who built that Felixstowe must have been sick! D. >From: tbittners@sprintmail.com (Matt Bittner) >Just received a message from Lance's wife. He's in the hospital for >awhile, so I thought the list should know so everyone can keep him in your >thoughts and prayers (if you do that sort of thing). _________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 12:24:50 +0000 From: "Diego Fernetti" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Caffe Latte and boblinbks for breakkie Message-ID: Neil of the Southern seas wrote: >The Boulton-Paull Bobolink is THE neglected aircraft of World War One. I >don't think it has ever been kitted AFAIK. Well, we may convince Barry of Rosemont to make this one!!!!! D. _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 23:30:06 +1100 From: "NEIL EDDY" To: Subject: RE: Wylam plans Question Message-ID: <001801c29610$b834b3e0$b48786cb@default> Ah, newlyweds!! All the Best Neil :-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Diego Fernetti" s. > > Ditto from here Neil, I just wish to have 25 hrs. days. Or maybe 27. > D. > > _________________________________________________________________ > MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 13:29:37 +0100 From: Crawford Neil To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: Wylam plans Question Message-ID: > Ditto from here Neil, I just wish to have 25 hrs. days. Or maybe 27. > D. > Ah, but even if I had an extra hour or three, I wouldn't spend them checking drawings, unless I was forced to, I'd spend them modelling. /Neil C. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 23:55:16 +1100 From: "NEIL EDDY" To: Subject: Re: Caffe Latte and boblinbks for breakkie Message-ID: <000e01c29616$a4586aa0$b48786cb@default> Diego Yes, the modelling world is just full of frustrated Bobolink fans, ready to form a lynch mob and bust down the doors of any manufacturer who refuses to kit the revered Bobolink ;-) All the Best Neil (Bobolink Liberation) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Diego Fernetti" To: "Multiple recipients of list" Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 11:28 PM Subject: [WWI] Re: Caffe Latte and boblinbks for breakkie > Neil of the Southern seas wrote: > >The Boulton-Paull Bobolink is THE neglected aircraft of World War One. I > >don't think it has ever been kitted AFAIK. > > Well, we may convince Barry of Rosemont to make this one!!!!! > D. > > _________________________________________________________________ > MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus > ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 4810 **********************