[WWI] Gratuitous posting

[Andy Bannister]

Doug:
> To elaborate a bit on Joe's last post. He is correct when he 
> says prove 
> it or lose it. You start with 100 points for static. Your 
> documentation 
> package is the ONLY thing a judge may use to decide the 'quality' of 
> your build. Hence the need to throughly document the aircraft 
> you wish 
> to build BEFORE ever putting pencil to paper or gluing a 
> single piece of 
> wood. Color proof is probably the one area that gets most new scale 
> competitors into trouble.They usually decide on a model and a scheme 
> without properly documenting the color scheme. Proving color really 
> means you have color chips or a letter from the manufacturer 
> stating the 
> paint used and its color. And even that can be problematic. WWI 
> competitors are at a bigger disadvantage because there is really no 
> really good color proof available. We cannot easily reproduce the 
> paints/dopes/lacquers that were used. At best we have B&W photos and 
> perhaps some documentation from a 'recognized authority' on what the 
> colors should be. Do you see the problem? How does one prove a 
> 'recognized authority'? B&W photos with interpretations of what the 
> colors should be allows the judge to do the same thing. And if he/her 
> opinion doesn't match yours, you lose points. So while 
> competitive R/C 
> modelers are as pedantic as anyone it all comes down to 
> documentation. 
> So if I choose to do a incorrect scheme, but it is one I can PROVE 
> (color chips, color photography etc) then I will. The next area that 
> gets a new scale competitor into trouble is outline. You are 
> required to 
> provide a 3 or 5 view in your packet. Many points are lost 
> here because 
> a kit is built that doesn't quite match the 3/5 view. Following that 
> would be all the little pedantic details. As a fellow who is working 
> with me to create a competitive model of a 1/4 J3 Cub like to 
> remind me 
> that one's documentation package should tell a story. It 
> should tell the 
> story of your aircraft and by using arrow and labels you can 
> help draw 
> the attention of the judge away from flaws and onto those things that 
> make you plane as close to the full-scale as is possible. Once static 
> judging is over and the planes and pilots are in the pits 
> getting ready 
> to fly there are plenty of discussions about scheme s and 
> what is REALLY 
> correct!

And the enjoyment of this kind of competition is... what, exactly!? Yes,
much of WWI colour is open to interpretation, but what authority does a
judge have to say your colour scheme is incorrect when you've based it on
the educated opinions of men who have meticulously studied the subject for
decades? Are you honesty saying that if I entered a model and provided a
documentation pack that included research from the likes of well known and
respected historians like Peter Grosz, Dan San Abbott, Norman Franks, Harry
Woodman et al that a judge could just say, "no, I know better and this
information isn't good enough to convince me your colours are correct"?? Why
would anyone enter a competition like that?!?
Thanks for the clarification Doug.
Andy