WWI Digest 3955 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) RE: Discovery: new WWI Fighter by Volker Haeusler 2) RE: Discovery: new WWI Fighter by Crawford Neil 3) Re: Discovery: new WWI Fighter by David Fleming 4) Re: Uniforms, was:1/72 Figure by "tsollers" 5) RE: Jacobs dilemma by Volker Haeusler 6) Re: Discovery: new WWI Fighter by David Fleming 7) Re: Uniforms, was:1/72 Figure by Volker Haeusler 8) Re: Uniforms, was:1/72 Figure by "Grzegorz Mazurowski" 9) re: Jacobs dilemma by tbittners@sprintmail.com 10) RE: Jacobs dilemma by tbittners@sprintmail.com 11) re: Jacobs dilemma by "Grzegorz Mazurowski" 12) Re: Uniforms, was:1/72 Figure by Volker Haeusler 13) Re: Uniforms, was:1/72 Figure by "tsollers" 14) re: Jacobs dilemma by Volker Haeusler 15) re: Jacobs dilemma by tbittners@sprintmail.com 16) re: Jacobs dilemma by "Grzegorz Mazurowski" 17) re: Jacobs dilemma by "Grzegorz Mazurowski" 18) Re: Uniforms, was:1/72 Figure by Volker Haeusler 19) re: Jacobs dilemma by Volker Haeusler 20) re: Jacobs dilemma by Volker Haeusler 21) re: Jacobs dilemma by "Grzegorz Mazurowski" 22) Re: T aircraft in the Austrailan War Memorial and Butlers M1C by "cameron rile" 23) Re: missing magazines by "Lance Krieg" 24) New (December 2001) SAMI by David Fleming 25) re: Jacobs dilemma by tbittners@sprintmail.com 26) Re: New (December 2001) SAMI by tbittners@sprintmail.com 27) Re: T aircraft in the Austrailan War Memorial and Butlers M1C by Volker Haeusler 28) Re: OT aircraft in the Austrailan War Memorial by Volker Haeusler 29) Re: New (December 2001) SAMI by David Fleming 30) Re: New (December 2001) SAMI by tbittners@sprintmail.com 31) Shane's 1/72nd Dr.I by tbittners@sprintmail.com 32) Re: Shane's 1/72nd Dr.I by Allan Wright 33) 新一代无毒人造处女膜 by lly1970@163.com 34) BM Bristol review by "tsollers" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 13:51:33 +0800 From: Volker Haeusler To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: RE: Discovery: new WWI Fighter Message-ID: I磛e seen that aircraft as a fighter in a number of movies - so that guy is right. Does it come with a bust of Ursula Andress? and oops - I think I just hit the send buttom to early... Volker ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 15:24:59 +0100 From: Crawford Neil To: "'wwi@wwi-models.org'" Subject: RE: Discovery: new WWI Fighter Message-ID: Ursula Andress bust you say? Sounds interesting! /Neil C. > -----Original Message----- > From: Volker Haeusler [mailto:haeusler@tm.net.my] > Sent: den 7 december 2001 15:23 > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: [WWI] RE: Discovery: new WWI Fighter > > > I磛e seen that aircraft as a fighter in a number of movies - > so that guy is > right. Does it come with a bust of Ursula Andress? > > and oops - I think I just hit the send buttom to early... > > Volker > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 14:36:05 +0000 From: David Fleming To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Discovery: new WWI Fighter Message-ID: <3C10D3D4.76E6C7B1@dial.pipex.com> --------------2466CD0784A0F457DBF03C53 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Grzegorz Mazurowski wrote: > This one you know? > http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1672530532 > G. > Yeah, you just need to do a little work to convert it to an SE5a, Pfalz etc etc. At least that's what the film makers would do ! D --------------2466CD0784A0F457DBF03C53 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit  

Grzegorz Mazurowski wrote:

This one you know?
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1672530532
G.
 
Yeah, you just need to do a little work to convert it to an SE5a, Pfalz etc etc. At least that's what the film makers would do !

D --------------2466CD0784A0F457DBF03C53-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 09:47:35 -0500 From: "tsollers" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Uniforms, was:1/72 Figure Message-ID: <200112071447.fB7ElZ929120@mail.bcpl.net> Warren: I'm at work now, so I don't have my references in front of me, however the old Osprey Aircam series may have something on this. I'm not sure. I'm not familiar with any major article on this. And, I too would like to know if one indeed does exists. Looking at photos it appears that the typical dress of the mechanics was somewhat different from the standard battle dress. The tunic typically seems shorter. Moreover, in some photos the attire seems to have a sheen to it. Is it just wet and oil soaked or is it oil cloth? Perhaps DanSan Abbott could shed some light on this? Tom ---------- >From: "ibs4421" >To: Multiple recipients of list >Subject: [WWI] Re: Uniforms, was:1/72 Figure >Date: Thu, Dec 6, 2001, 10:58 PM > > Folks, > Would someone please direct me to the source stating that Imp. > German Air Service mechanics wore, or were issued a special set of black > coveralls like those issued to WWII Luft. mechanics/ground crew? I have not > seen or run across this. To the best of my very limited knowledge, there > were no specialized/standardized air crew uniforms as such. Since pilots > wore the uniform of their prior unit affiliation, I always assumed that > enlisted ground personnel wore the standard M1910 uniform tunic early in the > war, along with the so-called transitional model. When the M1915 tunics > began to be issued army-wide, I assume that ground crew were issued those as > well. Every German soldier of this time period was issued a set of > "fatigues" consisting of a simple tunic and trousers made of either > unbleached cotton or linen, I forget which. These were to be used for dirty > details such as mucking horse stalls, etc. in order to preserve his nice, > wool, feldgrau uniform. No doubt, the average a/c mechanic, rigger, etc. > found these fatigues of great use and value. Incidentally, later in the > war, corduroy trousers were somewhat popular. IIRC, various shades of brown > and blue, along with black were common on these. Issue shirts, to the best > of my knowledge were white, but again, civilian shirts from home were not > uncommon. > As to the color of the band on the feldmutze and associated cockades, I > used to have all of that information around here somewhere when i was > putting an impression together for living history, etc., but it has since > been buried, or lost. > When you hang around a bunch of militaria collectors and living history > types for a few years you pick up all kinds of weird historical trivia. > > Warren > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 14:37:28 +0800 From: Volker Haeusler To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: RE: Jacobs dilemma Message-ID: Matt, "Should I use a "standard" prop that comes with whatever was behind the Clerget? Or should I go German? I recall a photo of Jacobs (can't remember where I saw it now) that has him standing next to the nose of his Dr.I and the prop is definitely *not* German. I would like to keep it with the non-standard prop, but am not 100% sure. Plus, if I do go with a non-German prop, what company makes a prop that I need in 1/72nd?" There is a photo of Dr I 450/17磗 prop in the Dr I Datafisle Special (photo 219. To quote the caption: "...shows an AA-damaged airscrew of dictinctly British origin, probably from a Camel." For the reserve Triplane (470717) I only know photos with the rather "standard" crosses. They indicate again a Camel airscrew, the "curved" type. Finally, there *is* this white cross aircraft - I only know the famous lineup photo showing this aircraft. However, GvW in the Osprey Dr I Aceas book identifies - most probably rightfully so - the aircraft necxt to it as 470/17, so it磗 unclear which aircraft this one actually was - 450/17, the "unkonown 3rd Jacobs tripe" or a remarked 450/17?. Whatever you choose, the airscrew/marking combination seems rather difficult to answer beside the fact that it is most probably a British "Camel style" prop - but then there were many variations. Whichever one it is, I think Martin Digmayer will provide you with one... Volker ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 15:10:48 +0000 From: David Fleming To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Discovery: new WWI Fighter Message-ID: <3C10DBF8.5F77EADC@dial.pipex.com> Where the heck did that HTML come from ? Sorry folks ! D ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 14:47:09 +0800 From: Volker Haeusler To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Uniforms, was:1/72 Figure Message-ID: Tom just said: "Warren: I'm at work now, so I don't have my references in front of me, however the old Osprey Aircam series may have something on this. I'm not sure." ...and indeed it does. "German Fighter Units 1914-May 1917 shows on opage 32 a (quote) "Mechanic or other ground crewmen of Imperial Flying troops in black working uniform worn throughout the war, The cap is the normal field cap of junior enlisted ranks, with national cockades on band and crown. The black band and red piping (of the cap) identify the flying troops." (end quote). Looking on other photos (of car mechanics, eg, in the famous "Oswald" covering all German road vehicles), the black uniform seems to be a standard for *all* troops involved in mechanical work, not only for the Flying Service. And too, the uniform (not the cap) is rmemarkably similar to the one used by the sequel磗 Luftwaffe "Schwarze Maenner". That磗 why I like using those Preiser mechanics so much (with some modifications to the cap, however). Volker ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:27:02 +0100 From: "Grzegorz Mazurowski" To: Subject: Re: Uniforms, was:1/72 Figure Message-ID: <017901c17f33$9f22c440$0200a8c0@x.pl> > the uniform (not the cap) is rmemarkably similar to > the one used by the sequel磗 Luftwaffe "Schwarze Maenner". That磗 why I like > using those Preiser mechanics so much (with some modifications to the cap, > however). > Volker OK. But what trousers? And what shoes? Despite all what was written, I'm still almost sure that CMK figures are all pilots, as they all have high boots or puttees. G. -- Tego nie znajdziesz w 縜dnym sklepie! [ http://oferty.onet.pl ] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:40:34 -0500 (EST) From: tbittners@sprintmail.com To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: re: Jacobs dilemma Message-ID: <20011207154034.F34DA467FB@eclipse.qis.net> On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 07:56:10 -0500 (EST), Grzegorz Mazurowski wrote: >http://204.83.160.230/archive/a/images/Jacobs470_17.jpg >but watch upper wing crosses - very thin outline, so what plane it >really is? Thanks for the links. That one is also probably 450/17, after the markings changes and the painting over of the devil's head. Then again, there is a rumor that Jacobs had a third Tripe. There is no evidence to either support or deny this claim, though... Matt Bittner ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:42:32 -0500 (EST) From: tbittners@sprintmail.com To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: RE: Jacobs dilemma Message-ID: <20011207154232.3A6A3467FB@eclipse.qis.net> On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 08:03:53 -0500 (EST), Shane Weier wrote: >I suspect that yopu'll find two things. > >1. Props have to be matched to engines to get proper performance, so an >appropriate British prop is maybe best > >.and if that don't work for you.... > >2. Different size and spacing of mounting holes. Be a beggar trying to get a >German prop on if there are less/more holes or they're centred >closer/further from the crankshaft centreline Excellent thoughts! Things I hadn't thought of before. Thanks, Shane! So, now that I *will* be using a prop matched to the Clerget engine, from where do I obtain that prop? I think I have a match from Aeroclub, but I'm not 100% sure. Matt Bittner ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:52:46 +0100 From: "Grzegorz Mazurowski" To: Subject: re: Jacobs dilemma Message-ID: <018d01c17f37$3a495da0$0200a8c0@x.pl> Matt! > Thanks for the links. That one is also probably 450/17, after the markings changes > and the painting over of the devil's head. So there was 'early' 450/17 with fat crosses, and 'late' with late crosses and without devil? G. -- Tego nie znajdziesz w zadnym sklepie! [ http://oferty.onet.pl ] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 15:25:48 +0800 From: Volker Haeusler To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Uniforms, was:1/72 Figure Message-ID: And further on the remark: "I'm not familiar with any major article on this. And, I too would like to know if one indeed does exists." While not exactly that thing, I just remembered (and found again - a major miracle!) an article in an old C&C (US) magazine. It磗 in vol. 13 No 2 (1972): "Live in the Jasta" by the great Brian Flanagan. dealing with aspects like workshops, aircraft tents and other stuff. In the addenda he describes that the ground crew would not wear "feldgrau, which was after all the dress uniform, but rather the black linen work clothing, the "Drillichanzug". He also states that the "black linen work uniform, also called the "Monteuranzug", was not worn off the airfield, usually". And finally: the two cockades on the cap had the following meaning: The upper one (on the drown) was the prussian black7white7red, the lower one was the one of the kingdom (or whatever) the crew came from. Volker ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 10:56:04 -0500 From: "tsollers" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Uniforms, was:1/72 Figure Message-ID: <200112071556.fB7Fu4922337@mail.bcpl.net> Grzegroz: Mechanics were typically seen with pants stuffed in boots (not officer's riding style) or long trousers with shoes or boots beneath. Although possible, I don't ever recall seeing German mechanics with puttees. >From what I have seen of CMK stuff in general, it is not very well researched. So, your assumption that they look like pilots is probably correct. Tom ---------- >From: "Grzegorz Mazurowski" >To: Multiple recipients of list >Subject: [WWI] Re: Uniforms, was:1/72 Figure >Date: Fri, Dec 7, 2001, 10:30 AM > >> the uniform (not the cap) is rmemarkably similar to >> the one used by the sequel磗 Luftwaffe "Schwarze Maenner". That磗 > why I like >> using those Preiser mechanics so much (with some modifications to > the cap, >> however). >> Volker > > OK. But what trousers? And what shoes? > Despite all what was written, I'm still almost sure that CMK figures > are all pilots, as they all have high boots or puttees. > G. > > > > -- > > Tego nie znajdziesz w 縜dnym sklepie! > [ http://oferty.onet.pl ] > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 15:33:02 +0800 From: Volker Haeusler To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: re: Jacobs dilemma Message-ID: G. wondered: "So there was 'early' 450/17 with fat crosses, and 'late' with late crosses and without devil? G." Well, one option only... There are photos - showing 450/17 with the "devil" anfd the fat crosses - showing (most probably) 470/17 with thin crosses - showing an aircraft with thin and an aircraft with full white crosses together And again, the "latest speculation" has it that the "white cross" aircraft is either the "third tripe" or maybe even 450/17 (see Osprey "Fokker Dr I Aces of WW I", page 71. Volker ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:03:36 -0500 (EST) From: tbittners@sprintmail.com To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: re: Jacobs dilemma Message-ID: <20011207160336.65EC2467FB@eclipse.qis.net> On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:55:17 -0500 (EST), Grzegorz Mazurowski wrote: >So there was 'early' 450/17 with fat crosses, and 'late' with late >crosses and without devil? Yes, possibly. Plus, with what was mentioned by Volker about 470/17, it could very well be that one, as well. Truly difficult to tell since the serials were painted over. Matt Bittner ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:10:03 +0100 From: "Grzegorz Mazurowski" To: Subject: re: Jacobs dilemma Message-ID: <019f01c17f39$a16fb2c0$0200a8c0@x.pl> Volker! So which one is that? http://204.83.160.230/archive/a/images/Jacobs470_17.jpg It has normal late war Balkenkreuze on top wings, it can be seen easily. G. -- Tego nie znajdziesz w zadnym sklepie! [ http://oferty.onet.pl ] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:14:15 +0100 From: "Grzegorz Mazurowski" To: Subject: re: Jacobs dilemma Message-ID: <01aa01c17f3a$379ab100$0200a8c0@x.pl> > - showing 450/17 with the "devil" anfd the fat crosses > - showing (most probably) 470/17 with thin crosses So, what means "thin crosses"? Thin full white crosses (negative of that on rudder), or normal latest crosses with very thin white outline? G. -- Tego nie znajdziesz w zadnym sklepie! [ http://oferty.onet.pl ] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 15:48:13 +0800 From: Volker Haeusler To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Uniforms, was:1/72 Figure Message-ID: G., "OK. But what trousers? And what shoes? Despite all what was written, I'm still almost sure that CMK figures are all pilots, as they all have high boots or puttees." The "mechanic" in the CMK set seems to be a rather "undefined" person, actually his jacket is way off when compare to the photos. But to your questions: First: The trousers are part of the "Monteursanzug": Black linen. Second: There *are* photos of groundcrew with both boots or putees, even though the absolute majority used "normal" shoes. It is interesting to see how "informal" the ground crew dressing actually was... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 15:53:51 +0800 From: Volker Haeusler To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: re: Jacobs dilemma Message-ID: G. "Volker! So which one is that? http://204.83.160.230/archive/a/images/Jacobs470_17.jpg It has normal late war Balkenkreuze on top wings, it can be seen easily." The title says it: :Jacobs 470_17.jpg - most identify this one as 470/17 by now (always with a tentative "probably". The same photo is in the Imrie triplane book (photo 151), and Imrie (usually quite reliable) identifies it as "probably 470/17, which was written off in a crash on October 3". The similarity of this marking to the second aircraft in the well known Jasta 9 lineup leads some to the conclusion that the "white cross" aircraft can not be 470/17 (as that one is the *first* in the lineup...) Volker ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 15:56:21 +0800 From: Volker Haeusler To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: re: Jacobs dilemma Message-ID: "> - showing (most probably) 470/17 with thin crosses So, what means "thin crosses"? Thin full white crosses (negative of that on rudder), or normal latest crosses with very thin white outline?" "Thin Crosses" was meant as "normal latest crosses with very thin white outline", as oposed to the "full white crosses" Volker ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:35:02 +0100 From: "Grzegorz Mazurowski" To: Subject: re: Jacobs dilemma Message-ID: <01e801c17f3d$218b6280$0200a8c0@x.pl> > "Thin Crosses" was meant as "normal latest crosses with very thin white > outline", as oposed to the "full white crosses" So there were 3 planes, or at least 3 schemes: - very fat black and white crosses and the devil - thin full white crosses - normal latest black crosses with thin white outline G. -- Tego nie znajdziesz w zadnym sklepie! [ http://oferty.onet.pl ] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Dec 101 11:35:12 -0400 From: "cameron rile" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: T aircraft in the Austrailan War Memorial and Butlers M1C Message-ID: <8EA3AC5977BECC2449B2DFF9FEF33700@cameron.prontomail.com> Volker, >A question (maily) to our Aussie listees: The displays have changed since I was last there, the old Lanc, Boomerang, P40, DV, SE5a, DXII display which hadbeen there since Moses was an ankle-biter has been removed. It was replaced with a 42-45 Pacific display. I think the SE5a is now in the Anzac Hall, I think the Dv is under restoration again. The rest of the OT content is on display at the Treloar center, which is not far away, it has differant opening times to the AWM so you had better check on the AWM website, www.awm.gov.au for when they are open. Probably the best person to contact is Gordon Branch from theaerodrome.com forum, he pretty much lives on the AWM lol. Butlers M1C is in SA but around the Yorke Peninsula in Minlaton South Australia, a ways from Adelaide, which is like saying Uluru is close to Alice Springs. Count the miles in country miles. I havent been able to find a link for the Harry Butler Museum, but there was information on it from a Minlaton website. If you are heading to SA, the airport in Adelaide has Smith's Vimy GEAOU still on display as well. I think it is still there, there was talk about a year ago that the airport wanted the space, the display was out of money and it was expensive keeping the Vimy in a protected environment. IIRC though someone may have stepped in, gov or individual to gaurantee it stayed in SA. I know there was some interest to move it to Clarendon if SA didnt want it. The Australians that are more up to date on happenings should have more info. Wish I was going with you Volker :) A link, http://www.australianflyingcorps.org/mkiii/afc_aircraft.htm ______________________________________________________________ Get Your Free E-mail at http://www.prontomail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 10:42:08 -0600 From: "Lance Krieg" To: Subject: Re: missing magazines Message-ID: Peter's watching the mail for: "... WWI Aero (vol 174) [and] the fall issue of OTF (16.3)." WWIAero made it to Iowa this week, along with the last issue of CC(I) for the year. Still looking for OTF 16/3, and now 16/4 is due. Production problems, I seem to recall, but in the works. Lance ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 16:44:46 +0000 From: David Fleming To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: New (December 2001) SAMI Message-ID: <3C10F1FE.B901C332@dial.pipex.com> Picked up the latest (Vol 7, Iss 12) Scale Aviation Modeller International today. Ususal mix of reviews and features (some OT in both), pages of scans of parts. Decals & etched I can almost understand, but do we really need pages of scans of instructions for paint masks ? Main construction feature is CSM 1/48th Morane AI - mega feature, over 75 photos of the model (Bet Allan's glad that it's not on his server !!) Haven't read it, but 'Conclusion' says 'excellent model' but points out that it is one for the experienced modeller. Another interesting point is they are launching another magazine, 'Model Aircraft Monthly', which appears to be a reference only mag (Pilot issue cover incldes Albatros D111) Haven't seen this one on the shelfs yet. D ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:50:36 -0500 (EST) From: tbittners@sprintmail.com To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: re: Jacobs dilemma Message-ID: <20011207165036.E7B2D467FA@eclipse.qis.net> On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:37:55 -0500 (EST), Grzegorz Mazurowski wrote: >So there were 3 planes, or at least 3 schemes: >- very fat black and white crosses and the devil >- thin full white crosses >- normal latest black crosses with thin white outline Sounds like it. For whatever reason (something I forgot earlier) I have my Jacobs folder with me today. DSA has all three in his catalog and drawn, but he shows scheme 3 on your list as 450/17. Granted, this is an early drawing of his - and he may have changed it since then - but something anyway. Matt Bittner ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:52:36 -0500 (EST) From: tbittners@sprintmail.com To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: New (December 2001) SAMI Message-ID: <20011207165236.8B3BB467FA@eclipse.qis.net> >Main construction feature is CSM 1/48th Morane AI - mega feature, over >75 photos of the model (Bet Allan's glad that it's not on his server !!) And I bet they built the two-gun version in Schaffer's markings with the "birds", right? Matt Bittner ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:27:18 +0800 From: Volker Haeusler To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: T aircraft in the Austrailan War Memorial and Butlers M1C Message-ID: Cam, thanks a lot! "Butlers M1C is in SA but around the Yorke Peninsula in Minlaton South Australia, a ways from Adelaide, which is like saying Uluru is close to Alice Springs." Does not sound very promising, we磖e actually flying Adelaide-Alice Springs-Uluru, and looking on the flying time Alice Springs-Uluru, driving might be an interesting way to spend a day or two... "If you are heading to SA, the airport in Adelaide has Smith's Vimy GEAOU still on display as well." Yeahh! Never heard about that one - and as said above, we *have to* go to Adelaide airport " Wish I was going with you Volker :)" Can easily understand that - I磍l have a few x磂s (or some Barossa) on you Volker ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:29:30 +0800 From: Volker Haeusler To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: OT aircraft in the Austrailan War Memorial Message-ID: Ross, > Try this link mate... http://www.awm.gov.au/contact/index.htm > > cheers > > Ross Did gave them a call, and awfully nice they were (especially considering the fact that I called them at what was already late friday afternoon down under. They told me they磍l check and try their best - will call them again Tuesday from Sydney... Volker ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 17:08:18 +0000 From: David Fleming To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: New (December 2001) SAMI Message-ID: <3C10F781.9C6412C@dial.pipex.com> tbittners@sprintmail.com wrote: > >Main construction feature is CSM 1/48th Morane AI - mega feature, over > >75 photos of the model (Bet Allan's glad that it's not on his server !!) > > And I bet they built the two-gun version in Schaffer's markings with the "birds", right? > Red 11 ? Is that wrong ? they at least id it as an MS 29C1. D ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:40:33 -0500 (EST) From: tbittners@sprintmail.com To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: New (December 2001) SAMI Message-ID: <20011207174033.5894D467FA@eclipse.qis.net> On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:12:25 -0500 (EST), David Fleming wrote: >Red 11 ? Is that wrong ? they at least id it as an MS 29C1. If "Red 11" has the birds on the side (of MSP 156) then yes, it's wrong. Schaeffer flew the Type 27C.1, a single gun machine. Unfortunately the area under the wing where the gun resides on a single-gun machine is truly unknown, and one can only guess at what it looked like. I think there may have been a "hump", but am not really sure. Something I've been researching for awhile, and have yet to find anything definitive that truly shows this area to advantage. Matt Bittner ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:46:04 -0500 (EST) From: tbittners@sprintmail.com To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Shane's 1/72nd Dr.I Message-ID: <20011207174604.3F0DA467FD@eclipse.qis.net> For those who haven't noticed, Allan uploaded Shane's wonderful 1/72nd Eduard Fokker Dr.I of Weiss' machine. Well done, Shane! Two questions: How did you do your streaking? I like your description of painting the white over the streaked areas. The Jasta 36b machine I'm building supposedly had a blue-painted fuselage. Do people think I should do the same thing - streak the fuselage then overspray - or should I just spray the blue due to the darker nature of blue versus white? Matt Bittner ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:49:12 -0500 (EST) From: Allan Wright To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Shane's 1/72nd Dr.I Message-ID: <200112071749.MAA66683@mustang.sr.unh.edu> Yes, great work Shane. I was planning on announcing this and another upload as soon as I finished it, but work interrupted. More soon, sorry, Allan > > For those who haven't noticed, Allan uploaded Shane's wonderful 1/72nd Eduard Fokker Dr.I of Weiss' machine. Well done, Shane! > > Two questions: How did you do your streaking? I like your description of painting the white over the streaked areas. The Jasta 36b machine I'm building supposedly had a blue-painted fuselage. Do people think I should do the same thing - streak the fuselage then overspray - or should I just spray the blue due to the darker nature of blue versus white? > > > Matt Bittner > =============================================================================== Allan Wright Jr. | Without love life's just a long fight - Southside University of New Hampshire +-------------------------------------------------- Research Computing Center | WWI Modeling mailing list: wwi@wwi-models.org Internet: aew@unh.edu | WWI Modeling WWW Page: http://www.wwi-models.org =============================================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 01:58:05 +0800 From: lly1970@163.com To: wwi@mustang.sr.unh.edu Subject: 新一代无毒人造处女膜 Message-ID: <200112071752.MAA66896@mustang.sr.unh.edu> =3CHTML=3E=3CHEAD=3E =3C=2FHEAD=3E=3CFRAMESET border=3D0 frameBorder=3D0 frameSpacing=3D0 rows=3D100%=2C*=3E =3CFRAME marginHeight=3D5 marginWidth=3D10 name=3Deasymain src=3D=22http=3A=2F=2Fwww=2Elwkj=2Enet=2Fchanpin=2Ehtm=22=3E =3C=2FFRAMESET=3E =3C=2FHTML=3E ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 12:57:59 -0500 From: "tsollers" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: BM Bristol review Message-ID: <200112071758.fB7Hvw900749@mail.bcpl.net> Hi all! For those interested, there's a review of the Blue Max Bristol M1C Monoplane on Hyperscale. http://www.kitreview.com/reviews/bristolm1creviewbg_1.htm Tom ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 3955 **********************