[WWI] Added:Westland Wapiti

Douglas Anderson djandersonza at yahoo.com
Tue Feb 27 14:56:59 EST 2007


Hi Chris
  Problem is I am a Scientist and an Engineer. For us there is no 'clear cut' or 'black-and-white'. Everything is a grey area and it all merges into one. From an engineers point of view, if the wings were manufactured during the great war, the aircraft itself dates from that period as the whole is only as good as the oldest or frailest part. Speaking as a scientist, one could go either way since parts date from the Great War and parts date post-Great War.
  I supopse this is why lawyers always get the better of us, we are too wishy-washy!
  Hahahahahaahahaha
   
  P.S. Don't you find it ironic that is called the 'great' war, when as you, Chris, pointed out that there is nothing great about war?
  

Christopher Malany <cmm-saj at snet.net> wrote:
  Hello, Andy:

I AM a lawyer. Re the Westland Wapiti:

1) It was an interesting aircraft;

2) Joel's build looks like a fine rendition of an
interesting aircraft;

3) The Air Ministry's effort to use up surplus
"Nine-Ack" parts in Specification 26/27 is a good
example of interwar parsimony;

4) However many "Nine-Ack" components were used in a
Wapiti, and irrespective of their date of manufacture,
the machine was an Interwar RAF biplane, and off-topic
by definition.

>(who ever values the opinion of a lawyer?)!

I must address this comment, since it seems to reflect
an implicit misunderstanding of the legal profession. 
Lawyers do not care if anyone values their opinion. 
They care only if they can bill for it. War is,
undoubtedly, the greatest and most tragic waste
humankind ever devised. Law runs a close second.

- Chris Malany, Esq.

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."
- 

--- Andy Bannister wrote:

> Well I'll add my 2 rubles worth, as I often do. I
> have to agree with Shane here; if we're to be a WW1
> list then let's be a WW1 list and not an "aircraft
> that evolved from WW1 types" list. By that logic a
> Spitfire could be classed as OT. There are plenty of
> other forums where ot aircraft models can be
> displayed and there already hundreds of models to
> choose from on the WW1 site without adding other
> eras. And no, sticking Sopwith Camel wings on a
> Hawker Harrier is not OT either (who ever values the
> opinion of a lawyer?)!
> 
> Andy
> 
> > 
> > From: Douglas Anderson 
> > Date: 2007/02/26 Mon AM 10:02:04 GMT
> > To: World War I Modeling Mailing List
> 
> > Subject: Re: [WWI] Added:Westland Wapiti
> > 
> > Well, lets not get too hasty here Shane. If teh
> wings were surplas stock left over from teh great
> war, and these wings were fitted to teh example
> modelled, then maybe a lawyer would say that it is
> OT
> > 
> > Shane Weier 
wrote: The
> all seeing voice says:
> > 
> > > Joel Christy sent in photos of his
> > >Westland Wapiti,
> > >See
>
http://www.wwi-models.org/Images/Christy/Allied/index.html#wapiti
> > >or see news.
> > 
> > By no stretch of the imagination could a Wapiti be
> deemed On Topic.
> > 
> > Shane, off to build a Swordfish.
> > 
> > .---- - --- ....- ---.. .-. ..- .-.. . ... .-.-.-
> > 
> > My Strine is a Toad in Disguise
> > 
> > Quidvis recte factum,
> > quanvis humile, praeclarum
> > .---- - --- ....- ---.. .-. ..- .-.. . ... .-.-.-
> > 
> >
>
_________________________________________________________________
> > Advertisement: 50% off on Xbox 360, PS and
> Nintendo Wii titles! 
> >
>
http://www.play-asia.com/SOap-23-83-4lab-71-bn-49-en-84-k-40-extended.html
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ---------------------------------
> > 8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time
> > with theYahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut.
> > 
> 
> -----------------------------------------
> Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email
> Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned
> for spam
> 
> 




 
---------------------------------
Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.
Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.


More information about the WWI mailing list