[WWI] Merlin vs Pegasus
hopeandmercy at sbcglobal.net
Fri Feb 16 23:34:33 EST 2007
The Merlin Hansa-Brandenburg W.20 was a pretty decent kit, I agree. very workable.
Merlin's wings always were annoyingly thicker near the tips. Also the wings were asymetrical on some kits - different rib patterns and aileron dimensions from side to side. Wheels were oval shaped from bad mold alignment.
The worst one I encountered was the Nieuport 10 - on the edge of unbuildable. Not even good for a scratchbuild pattern. The metal parts were just horrible.
I built the Sopwith 'Strutter and threw it out when the Roden kit came out. I also put together the Albatros D.IV (with the help of some Roden extra parts) just to have a cool line-up of Albatros fighters, but that was really a poor kit.
The MS AI is also still in the collection, with lots of working over and all new tail surfaces.
I never even built the JN 4 - I was saved that ordeal by the Olimp kit !
----- Original Message ----
From: Knut Erik Hagen <knut.erik.hagen at eunet.no>
To: World War I Modeling Mailing List <wwi at wwi-models.org>
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 12:54:45 PM
Subject: [WWI] Merlin vs Pegasus
There were decent kits from Merlin, they had a pretty nice Cierva C.30.
The strange thing is tht most companies improve in quality while Merlin
degraded over the years.
>Something def. happened to Merlin. The Dh 5 and Roland d-type built up very
nicely. Then they had the the 1/48 Alb. D ll- not bad, a chore, but not bad.
Then the infamous Fee and Salmson-not the two worst kits ever made, but tied
for #2, the worst kit ever made on GGE was the Merlin Halb C-whatever. What
were the Merlin dies made of? Papier-mache? Wax? But right now I'm working
on a pair of Rumplers that are Pegalin and Merlsus-I used the Peg extra
parts to turn the Peg into a Clll, and the Merl is now a C lv-yeah, I know,
the bottom wing is wrong for a C lll, but I realized that after both were
built up. Is this miscegnation? (sp.?)-J Marganski
More information about the WWI