[WWI] Need help deciding.

[Diego Fernetti]

Steve!
> I have two lists, the bite off more than I can chew list and the realistic 
> list.

I'll give you my opinion, just for sports, since I know zero about scale 
modeling.

Bite off more than I can chew list:
Nalgo: First off, it's named Naglo D.I and I'd advise against its 
construction unless you're prepared to draw a full set of plans of this odd 
quadruplane. Think of the complexities of biplane arrangement and then 
multiply for two.

Spad A.4: Dubious scale drawings, thin wing profile, short span and unknown 
rigging detail and big unwieldly pulpit in front of the propeller. Sure you 
want to toss this into thin air?

I'lya Muromets: Big WOW factor. Big, big wings are good for scale flying, 
IIRC. But sue you'd wish to put four engines (or at least two *working* 
engines at risk lifting that lot of wood and tissue?

SS class airship (Be.2c fuselage hung under a gasbag): Big WOW factor as 
well, may be fine if you fly in zero wind conditions. Else, be prepared to 
rescue the gasbag from a treetop.

Realistic list:
Sopwith Dolphin: Unusual reverse stagger wing, Long span, lots of room for 
the engine to be hidden. Nice challenge!
LVG C.VI: Beautiful fuselage, long wings, and if you have enough experience 
on lozenge wing covering, it's a beauty.
Roland C.II: Contoured, deep fuselage, thin wings, small rudder. Must fly 
like a pig.
LFG Roland D.VIa: Considered the klinker-built fuselage? Brave! Same 
comments on the lozenged wings as above.

D.