Paul Thompson

I found the assembly sequence a little unforgiving until you figured it out. It's one of those kits where you ideally build one without concern for screw-ups, then build one for real armed with the knowledge of just where it's all meant to go. that said, it came out okay in the end. Rule of thumb, if you're having trouble fitting something, then it isn't meant to go quite like that. Deep breath. Like many others,I too, have shaky hands (always have, one of the reasons I make models, to beat it down). Everyone varies but for me if stillness is essential then I can subdue it for a short while by breathing in deep, exhaling it all, and quickly doing whatever is being tricky before the next breath. Plus being prepared to do things over far too many times, and always using the least aggressive adhesive that will suffice for the job in case of pear-shapedness. Paul.

For French and some British props, a painted finish is what they had, so no laminations usually visible on an airscrew in good condition. Now, unless you model in 1/2 scale or above then any wood grain will also be invisible, but the eye expects to see something, same as with plywood fuselages like Albatrosses and Sopwith turtledecks. For a prop I paint a deep brown colour then several coats of translucent clear, usually a Citadel wash of a sepia nature. The real things may have suffered some weathering if they lasted long enough, but since they're just unsightly blotches I ignore them, unless I have a photo of the specific aircraft and it needs reproducing. Some British props were laminated from wood of very similar colour, which in 1/72nd I feel you could ignore, but in 1/48th I've masked and painted nearly the same colour strips before the sepia wash. Looks better than a plain brown colour anyway (although that might be more in keeping with reality). Making and applying really thin masking tape is not my favourite task though, but it isn't hard, just boring, and I do it normally for props that do show laminations well. Oh, just re-read the OP. I brush paint the sepia, just to work in a bit of faux texture in lieu of grain. Plywood on fuselages shows coarser grain patterns, so I do do that on the above named types, but only because it's expected, as I said before. Seeing photos of the real thing is essential, and I keep various sheets of plywood around the house to remind me. Light base coat, then if the grain is pronounced I draw the stuff on lightly with a dark brown watercolour pencil, if not then I dry brush a suitable pattern with an acrylic brown. The translucent overcoat is essential to smear things out a bit. Done right it the result is like using oils but dries much faster. Paul.

'Appen. Paul.

If they did (KP), it would be a plastic version of the CMR kit almost certainly, which is how they've done most of their recent biplanes. There may be no detail under the CMR wings, but at least the decal sheet is very good (the one I built had decals and PE, I don't recall if there was an earlier release without). Paul.

It's do-able, though. I'd just built one when another arrived in the post courtesy of Windsock for having a letter or photo published (I forget which) when it was all shiny and new. Won't be doing another though............... Paul.

Being before 12 noon on April 1st I was going to say you've got the position lights the wrong way round, but am not a naturally cruel man, and there are limits. Lovely job. Paul.

Hi Bob. They're still there, in these latter days. Pretty old-school webpage, but serviceable. https://www.internetmodeler.com/scalemodels/ Paul.

I'm glad people like it. Tempted to restart something else I parked a couple decades ago - a Starfix Freedom Fighter. I'd got as far as cutting out a hole for the Scarff ring then was distracted, probably by a blue car but it might have just been life. Anyway, I've calmed down a lot since then. Paul.

Someone gave me this . Not to build it would have been rude. So, for your delectation, an Albatros 109 (Very Early), license built by Messy-Smith. I left off the rigging. Ostensibly 1/48th, but who cares, really? Paul.

The DH4 was re-released two years ago in collaboration with Grand, who added decals, PE and resin to allow conversion to British or Greek Puma engined DH4s (and no, that does not make of it a DH9). Latest re-release is the early version SE5, which has new decals and a pair of vacformed canopies. I did an in box review in the GWSIG newsletter (1st one this year) and built it, which will be in the next newsletter. Also built and reviewed the DH4 conversion. The SE5 was always harder to build due to a meeting of limited run technology with rather complex but unavoidable parts breakdown due to the nature of the beastie. Built it anyway, and if I can then I'm sure others can. The DH4 is a nice and well thought out conversion, and it helps that the original kit fits together better and was already designed with lopping the nose off in mind. Anyone interested further in either of those PM me and I'll send links to the reviews. Paul.

Pegasus were produced over many years, and improved out of all recognition in that period. Veeday, less so (and Merlin went the other way). IIRC the Jenny and Dolphin are on the early side - later kits were boxed, had good decals, decent metal accessories, and either metal or extruded cut-your-own struts. Fairly accurate, but very limited run and needing much refinement, as you'd expect from kitchen table-top injection machinery. I have buil;t most of the Pegasus WW1 kits and rather like them. The post WWII types tend to being much more challenging, and the Spitfire variants are really rather rough. And I also have several interwar types which look as if they'll work out okay. But you do have to allow for the age. Shouldn't be hard to find online reviews. I'd start with Modeling Madness. Paul.

Unfortunately, this is one of those pedantic 'it depends' answers. If the cabanes are single struts as opposed to eg Ns like the Albatros above, then I only put them in first if they have no forward stagger, or only a little. Those on the Biff, for example - they're very nearly vertical in side view, so I can use a fastish polystyrene cement like Revell Contacta to get them to the point they're firm but not solid (takes about 10 minutes), then invert the model, drop glue in the top wing holes, and lower it carefully into place,poking the struts as needed and stopping any movement with bottles, coffee cups etc. After another 10 minutes you can turn the model over without the wing coming off, and jiggle it into the final desired position before again immobilising it. I call it the heart in the mouth technique, but it works. Give it a couple of hours and you should be able to spring the interplane struts in place with no problem. Something that has N cabanes can be done the same way, but without worring about the forward/backwards position of the wing. Just make sure it's central. Easiest to look from the front (so if not already on the undercarriage then jack the lower wings upto be level with your desk), and from the top, judged against the fin position, and lining up top and lower ailerons if it has them. If not sure of strut height, or if the cabanes have a lot of forward rake, then the surest but most time consuming way is to use a jig. You can build one easily enough from Lego and cardboard, but I use an Aeroclub jig which you can't get any more. Similar things are available, but not IMO quite as good. This allows you to locate the top wing in exactly the right positon before gluing anything, then you can adjust and trial fit all the struts as you go. Since everything is fixed securely you can even rig as you go, which makes accessing the central space much easier. If the interplane struts are Ns, then I always put those in first, checking the wing gap against plans before fully set. Think Fokker D.VII. One good reason never to use CA unless you can help it. If the kit is resin or the struts are brass then I use epoxy to glue, for the longest wibble time. Something like a Strutter, it depends on how good the kit engineering is. Ideally the W cabanes go in first, then the interplanes, but I've built a few Toko/Rodens in 1/72nd and 1/48th and they all needed adjustment. After the first Toko kit I changed to interplanes first, a simple Lego stop to prevent the top wing moving forward while the glue dried, then cut the W's apart and trimmed and fitted as needed. TBH the easiest setup I've found is where the cabanes are actually a cabane, i.e. a trestle where the top of the struts meet at the wing centreline. Usually you can get these on the fuselage easily enough, symettrical from the front, then glue to the top wing. Prop the end level while the glue half cures, then spring in the interplanes. In all the above cases it may help once something is definitely in the right place to reinforce the joint with a little thin CA applied with a pin. It needs precision if you have pre-drilled rigging holes to avoid zapping them. And after nearly 60 years of doing this I still have the odd total failure. You just have to be prepared for it, and it's often correctable with varying amounts of gnashing of teeth, wailing, etc, so long as you notice soon enough. HTH, Paul.

Also nice Hart/Audax by Aeroclub, AZ/Amodel and Merlin (shutupPaul). And lots of very expensive full kits and conversion bits from Kora. Paul.

Glad you found that - I don't have a list that matches serials to engines and didn't find a photo either on line or in the few books I have so wasn't able to say. I'll keep an eye out and let you know if anything more useful from a modelling point of view crops up. Cheers, Paul.

5 or more victories are attributed to him into SE5a D6922 according to https://www.europeansineastafrica.co.uk/_site/custom/database/default.asp?a=viewIndividual&pid=2&person=14054 . I've no idea how reliable that is, but D6922 is recorded as piloted by 2nd Lt Frank Edgar Bond when brought down (POW) on October 5th 1918 in a list of 74 Squadron casualties at https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/307841-74-squadron-creditsvictories-and-lossescasualties/ . The same site has this about Carlin: '1-Sep-1918 - Capt Sydney Carlin (Pow) - S.E.5a D6958 - last seen west of Lille in combat on patrol; Uffz Siegfried Westphal, Jasta 29, 2nd victory [east of La Bassée at 18:45/18:45] ?'. Both serials could be correct if he flew more than one SE5a of course. Likely, even. Paul.

Impressed. Paul.

Some of my oldest EZline has now perished. So has one reel of old Aeroclub thread, which was thicker and whiter than the usual one (which I still have and is okay). Recently finished re-rigging an Aeroclub FE2b (sorry, ot rf the original post) that had been done with the whiter stuff, don't want to do that again. Normally these days I use a combination of modern elastic rigging coloured dark silver with a sharpie, invisible thread/fishing line coloured the same way, Albion Alloys 0.1 or 0.2 mm nickel wire, stretched sprue, rolled copper wire (very old, so weathered to a steel grey) and if I absolutely have to some Uschi stuff. I suppose it might have been quicker to say 'everything'. For RAFwires I tried the RB flat PE that was available a few years ago, but couldn't stop it sagging or bowing with small movements of the wings, but that was 1/48th and 1/32nd. Recently I tried some of the new bespoke sets by SBS model, one for an SE5a in 1/72nd, the other for the 1/48th Roden Gladiator, and they worked very well, but need substantial dulling down to look the part. Paul.

4598/18 was OAW built, and according to the Windsock Datafile Anthology (no.1) was (probably) photographed in September. The serial is from the mid production range, although from the louvre pattern. it looks like a late production aircraft. Problematic, then, unless the panels were retrofitted. The radiator filler cap appears to be central, which is mid production, the late one being on the port side. Quite complicated variations, covered in the various Eduard kits. The datafile has a page illustrating cowling panels and radiators, with serial/production ranges. Holler if you'd like a scan. Hannants have two boxings of OAW Fokkers in both 1/72nd and 1/48th, but they don't have decals for Mai so you'd have to sort it yourself (although even if they did, you'd probably have to paint the striped yourself. Since the serial isn't visible, at least to me, in the photograph, the easiest route is to assume it belongs to an earlier aircraft he had, and just build it with the late production features. IIRC all the relevant bits should be in any of the OAW boxings. Finally, although I've built several of the Roden 1/48th kits I can't recall if they do a late OAW. The early and mid are separate boxings. Good kits, but idiosyncratic. The 1/72nd offerings aren't so goo,with poor lower winf and axle wing fit - Eduard is better in this case. Paul.

Been there, done that - first time was a dome for a little balsa UFO from that new Gerry Anderson series. Paul.

It's still a good idea to know the minimum thickness you can use to produce a workable moulding. Paul.

Each of those holes sits above one of the extra fuel tanks on the Alcock and Brown machine, so I think they're to access the filler caps. The photo I'm looking at is one from the Science Museum, port side, with the side fabric stripped away. Can't tell if there are holes the other side as well, but if not then I think I'm probably right. Presence on the kit doesn't guarantee presence in reality, but now I'm looking for it I can't find a clear photo of the starboard side of the real thing to check. Paul.

Tell me about it. My wife is a linguist, mostly historical and english. But she's Dutch, and her perspective can sometimes dislodge me from my orbit.. Probably speaks my language better than I do, but occasionally something slips through due to being unconscious for a native speaker and hard to codify. Doesn't help that my first language is Silly. Sometimes lapsing into High Silly (I should get out more often). Paul.

What was wrong with the old window men? Paul.

......and now you are truly at one with the plastic. This is the way. Paul.

2nd non WW1 post in the WW1 area in two days. Maybe the titles should be larger.................... (Not really bothered, I know it can be easy to mispost now and then, but you reduce the chance of getting an informative answer). Paul.