Re: Denver Fokker D.VII redux

Matt Bittner (
Thu, 27 Jul 1995 14:28:29 -0500

On 27 Jul 95 at 11:43, Erik Pilawskii spake:

> On Thu, 27 Jul 1995, Randy J Ray wrote:
> > Since I now have the relatively rare opportunity to get in close to a very
> > close if not perfect replica of a WWI bird, I have given thought to doing a
> > D.VII as my first WWI project, rather than the E.III. Kind of a test run, on
> > a subject with less rigging to vex me. So I plan on visiting the museum
> > Saturday, but I also would like to know:
> >
> > * How good is the Airfix kit (which I know where to get) vs. the Esci kit
> > (which I would have to hunt down)
> I like the Ravell D.VII in 1/72. The ESCI kit is fine, but hard to get.
> >
> > * What other sources of reference can I find fairly easily? Is there a Windsock
> > Datafile, that I could order from Wise Owl or someone? (If so, someone
> > remind me of their business phone #)
> I have the old Profile Series on it. Lemme know if you want a photocopy.
> >
> > Mind you, I don't really plan on doing any sort of job comparable to Steve or
> > Derek Brown. But I don't really want to just slap it together out of the box,
> > either.
> >
> Who's Derek Brown? (not to sound *too* stupid...) Erik

He took best of show, judges grand, and a whole slew of other awards
at the 1994 Nationals, here, in Omaha. He won with an immaculate
Japanese WW2 Dinah. Quite the amazing model, especially since it's
in 1/72nd!!

One thing I've noticed over the years, especially at this past
weekend's local hobby shop contest, is that WW1 - for whatever
bizarre reason - will not win popularity awards, especially if you're
up against the general "un-WW1-knowing" populace. Quite the bummer.
I've seen it with my own models, as well as those of others at any
contest where "popularity" matters. Case in point: I had my 1/48th
Dr.I and my XF-85 at a club contest, that gets voted via popular
vote. Even though I - and a few others - considered the Dr.I better
built, the Goblin took it because it's "cute", and unusual. Or maybe
it because it was under the wing of an XB-35? Hmm... Well, I
thought the XB-35 wasn't that well built, but it took more votes than
my Dr.I - which didn't get any.

Anyways, sorry to ramble. Once again, off topic: I saw last night
test shots for AMT/Ertl's 1/72nd XB-70 Valkyrie. Man, that sucker's
going to be HUGE! Long, especially!

Which brings me to another point: here we have an aircraft that they
only made two of, and gets noticed by a "larger" company. We have
Nieuports and Camels and ... that are produced more in "real life",
and get ignored. Where's the justice? Just think of all the
Nieuports one can build, versus the TWO XB-70's. And you know - of
course - that next year's Nat's are going to be considered the
"Valkyrie" of shows. Ah well, just a small rant...