Knights of the Sky (1 Viewer)

[lancer]

Just based on the photo you have posted here, I would think the scale may be right on. The ambulance driver depicted is slouching against the ambulance, yet his head reaches the cloth canopy over the driver's compartment. If he were standing straight up, and if you factor in the base under the JJD pilot figure, I think the height of the figure in comparison to the model ambulance would not be too far off the height of the real driver/real ambulance as depicted here. Apparently the ambulance was tiny in real life. I wonder how many casualties were commonly placed inside . . . I doubt if more than two would have fit, probably only one.

I think I read somewhere (how's that for vague:rolleyes2 that the initial model of the ambulance could carry up to 3 stretcher cases, or 4 patients, if seated. These were SMALL vehicles. They were only 11 feet long and 5 and a half feet wide. The 4 cylinder engine produced about 20-22 HP and a maximum speed of 45 mph under optimum conditions. They also weighed only about 1200 lbs. Just as a matter on interest, the Model T ambulance was a relative bargain at about $550 each. -- Al

 

[Combat]

Just based on the photo you have posted here, I would think the scale may be right on. The ambulance driver depicted is slouching against the ambulance, yet his head reaches the cloth canopy over the driver's compartment. If he were standing straight up, and if you factor in the base under the JJD pilot figure, I think the height of the figure in comparison to the model ambulance would not be too far off the height of the real driver/real ambulance as depicted here. Apparently the ambulance was tiny in real life. I wonder how many casualties were commonly placed inside . . . I doubt if more than two would have fit, probably only one.

Looks as though it could hold three patients. One litter would have been suspended with the ends or handles sticking out the back. Some excellent pictures of the interior from this restoration:

http://www.ww1history.com/WW1_Model_T_Ambulance_Proje.html

 

[Louis Badolato]

Looks as though it could hold three patients. One litter would have been suspended with the ends or handles sticking out the back. Some excellent pictures of the interior from this restoration:

http://www.ww1history.com/WW1_Model_T_Ambulance_Proje.html

Thanks for the link!:smile2: That really was a tiny little vehicle. The more I look at photos of the real thing, the more I think John's scale is right on. The photos show a stretcher would stick out about a foot out the back. Putting a 54mm stretcher next to the JJD model vehicle, it appears to stick past the box of the vehicle about the right amount.

 

[Combat]

Thanks for the link!:smile2: That really was a tiny little vehicle. The more I look at photos of the real thing, the more I think John's scale is right on. The photos show a stretcher would stick out about a foot out the back. Putting a 54mm stretcher next to the JJD model vehicle, it appears to stick past the box of the vehicle about the right amount.

The height still bothers me a bit. Most pictures show people about half a head below the top of the ambulance. The pilot figure looks as though he could look over the top. That's all conjecture though if someone can come up with the actual dimensions and compare to the model. I haven't found the dimensions of the Model T ambulance listed on the Internet. One interesting note though is that the Model T chassis was shipped to Europe in a wooden crate which was then broken down and used to assemble the vehicle. Somewhat ingenious. John indicates in his release that the ambulance could easily be picked up when it got stuck. So it was very light.

 

[MapleLeaf]

I second ur motion Louis
I have one comming with my maple leaf freind Maclaren and his Camel F 2137
From what i see i agree with u that looks like the real thing
if not it's darn close to it.
Great info Combat
Maple Leaf

 

[lenswerks]

You can get some feel for the height with these tube shots...not sure if they have been mentioned yet or not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHPC6nFFCs0&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=rIzAohfLWOM

 

[lancer]

Just curious about about what other collectors think about the JJD aircraft so far. I am very, very, pleased with them. The models are accurate, well made, and superbly painted. I have managed to get them all, so far. The LvR yellow tripe is, IMO, the best looking plane so far but the Bishop N-17 is a fantastic looking piece, too. I really like them all and find that I am now constantly looking forward to the next release. I have always wanted larger scale WW1 aircraft but until JJD jumped in, there were no real choices in the pre-finished market (with one or two real expensive exceptions). JJD has answered what was my most fervent collecting wish. Also want to thank JJD for furnishing the iconic Richthofen red tripe in correct colors and markings and for having the attention to historical detail to correct the initial cross marking error on LvR's uellow tripe. This JJD line is a really impressive effort. -- Al

 

[Combat]

Couple of shots of my triplanes:

 

[lancer]

Couple of shots of my triplanes:

Great shots of your tripe staffel. The planes are quite impressive lined up and the wonderful figures just add to the scene. The details on these planes are just outstanding and must be seen first hand to be really appreciated. Nice collection{bravo}} -- Al

 

[lancer]

Like the looks of the new JJD Fok.D-VII. Will be adding it to my airforce ASAP, even though this aircraft had no victories to it's credit. Prior to taking command of JG-1 on July 8, 1918, Goering had been flying with Jasta 27. He flew two known D-VII's (#324/18 & #278/18) and scored victory numbers 19, 20, 21 while flying these D-VII's with J27. Taking command of JG-1, Goering scored his last victory (#22) on July 18, 1918 in D-VII #294/18. Goering is also known to have flown two other D-VII's while with JG-1, #'s 4253/18 and the famous all white 5125/18. While the all white 5125/18 (the JJD model) is iconic and Goerings most famous aircraft, it probably saw little action and he had no victories in it. Still, it is a striking livery and, along with the excellent figure of Goering in the Heinecke parachute harness, will be an essential buy for me. I am very impressed with the detail on this Fokker. -- Al

 

[lancer]

Like the looks of the new JJD Fok.D-VII. Will be adding it to my airforce ASAP, even though this aircraft had no victories to it's credit. Prior to taking command of JG-1 on July 8, 1918, Goering had been flying with Jasta 27. He flew two known D-VII's (#324/18 & #278/18) and scored victory numbers 19, 20, 21 while flying these D-VII's with J27. Taking command of JG-1, Goering scored his last victory (#22) on July 18, 1918 in D-VII #294/18. Goering is also known to have flown two other D-VII's while with JG-1, #'s 4253/18 and the famous all white 5125/18. While the all white 5125/18 (the JJD model) is iconic and Goerings most famous aircraft, it probably saw little action and he had no victories in it. Still, it is a striking livery and, along with the excellent figure of Goering in the Heinecke parachute harness, will be an essential buy for me. I am very impressed with the detail on this Fokker. -- Al

Got a little more info on the D-7 for those interested. First off, there were 3 manufacturers. The Fokker factory at Schwerin and 2 licence factories, Albatros Werke at Johannisthal (Fok. D-VII(Alb)), and Albatros at Schneidemuhl (Fok. D-VII(OAW)). The JJD is a designated Fokker D-VII F, the F standing for a BMW engined version built at Schwerin, the F being the first letter of Frietz of BMW. The D-7's were supplied with 3 different engines during the production runs. Initial productions came with the Mercedes D.IIIa (160-180hp) engine. Improvements led to the Mercedes D.IIIau (180-200hp) engine. The best engine was the BMW D.III (185hp) which possessed superior performance at altitude, in climbing, and speed. The BMW engined D-7's were much in demand by German pilots and it was the BMW engine superiority that made the D-7 so deadly. The Mercedes engined versions were good and no slouches, but it was the BMW that put the D-7 over the top. -- Al

 

[lancer]

Got a little more info on the D-7 for those interested. First off, there were 3 manufacturers. The Fokker factory at Schwerin and 2 licence factories, Albatros Werke at Johannisthal (Fok. D-VII(Alb)), and Albatros at Schneidemuhl (Fok. D-VII(OAW)). The JJD is a designated Fokker D-VII F, the F standing for a BMW engined version built at Schwerin, the F being the first letter of Frietz of BMW. The D-7's were supplied with 3 different engines during the production runs. Initial productions came with the Mercedes D.IIIa (160-180hp) engine. Improvements led to the Mercedes D.IIIau (180-200hp) engine. The best engine was the BMW D.III (185hp) which possessed superior performance at altitude, in climbing, and speed. The BMW engined D-7's were much in demand by German pilots and it was the BMW engine superiority that made the D-7 so deadly. The Mercedes engined versions were good and no slouches, but it was the BMW that put the D-7 over the top. -- Al

A note on the new JJD Fokker D-7 compared to the new KC D-7. JJD has caught the rear edge detail on the lower wing correctly, whereas it appears that the KC version is wrong. The rear edge of both wings should be slightly scalloped, as on the JJD model. The KC version has the scallops on the upper wing, but the lower wing appears to be a straight edge, which is incorrect. -- Al

 

[chalklands]

Interesting to be able to compare both manufacturers models. The lower wing looks VERY different on both manufacturers' offerings. There also seems to be more small details on the JJD aircraft, maybe K&C will add this come the time they are released? The wing struts also look very different.

I don't know why the colour schemes are so simliar.......There were so many varied schemes on these aircraft, it seems a shame to me.

 

[lancer]

Interesting to be able to compare both manufacturers models. The lower wing looks VERY different on both manufacturers' offerings. There also seems to be more small details on the JJD aircraft, maybe K&C will add this come the time they are released? The wing struts also look very different.

I don't know why the colour schemes are so simliar.......There were so many varied schemes on these aircraft, it seems a shame to me.

As you note, KC seems to have gone with a straight rear edge on their lower wing, which is incorrect. The JJD D-7 is right. The wing struts and fuselage struts, on both models, are very thick and heavy in appearence, but especially so on the KC models. The struts should be very thin, especially when viewed from the front or back. The wings struts should be almost 2 dimensional when viewed thus. Again, JJD is much closer to correct. You will also notice that the KC models have troughs for the struts to fit into where the struts meet the wings, this is also incorrect though may be needed for the strength of the model. This is also a feature that JJD didn't opt for, again correct. As to the colors, D-7's had great variation in color schemes. KC chose some good ones although I find the choice of the Jacobs D-7 odd as it is the same scheme as the JJD Jacobs tripe. The only real question I have about the chosen color schemes is the lack of lozenge camo on the wings of the Raben and Auffarth aircraft. It is obviously simpler and cheaper for KC to paint the wings a solid color than solve the complicated lozenge camo problem. I don't blame them for this, just pointing it out. -- Al

 

[chalklands]

I'm no expert on aerodynamics, but wouldn't a squared off lower wing edge effect (or is that affect) the ability of these aircraft to even fly!? The upper wing is tapered, so why not the lower!?

I like the pilots though. It also looks like there is also going to be some groundcrew to go with those pictured on the JJD caption contest.

 

[45thdiv]

I prefer the look of Jenkins planes over the K&C planes due to the better researched and detail of them. And it's the little detail that always catches the eye. The new K&C planes look like toys where as the JJD planes look like scale versions of the real thing.

Just my two cents.

Matthew

 

[lancer]

I prefer the look of Jenkins planes over the K&C planes due to the better researched and detail of them. And it's the little detail that always catches the eye. The new K&C planes look like toys where as the JJD planes look like scale versions of the real thing.

Just my two cents.

Matthew

I very much agree with this. To add to the accuracy and realism of the JJD models, JJD also has a reasonable thickness to the struts used on the models. Maybe because of the material used, the struts on the KC models are way too thick in proportion. KC has also opted to use "troughs" where the struts meet the wings. If you look at the joints on the KC models, they are easy to see. They are unsightly and inaccurate. JJD has realistic strut/wing joints, without the troughs. Troughs are an old modelers technique to simplify fitting the struts into the wings. It is the reason I never purchased more than a couple of the great looking Corgi WW1 aircraft. They used troughs and other short-cuts for wing/strut construction, too. As you point out, it's the little details, and those KC troughs are bad. Add the terrific paint job that JJD has done and it becomes an easy choice for me to go with the realistic look over the clean, unused look of KC. -- Al

 

[chalklands]

I very much agree with this. To add to the accuracy and realism of the JJD models, JJD also has a reasonable thickness to the struts used on the models. Maybe because of the material used, the struts on the KC models are way too thick in proportion. KC has also opted to use "troughs" where the struts meet the wings. If you look at the joints on the KC models, they are easy to see. They are unsightly and inaccurate. JJD has realistic strut/wing joints, without the troughs. Troughs are an old modelers technique to simplify fitting the struts into the wings. It is the reason I never purchased more than a couple of the great looking Corgi WW1 aircraft. They used troughs and other short-cuts for wing/strut construction, too. As you point out, it's the little details, and those KC troughs are bad. Add the terrific paint job that JJD has done and it becomes an easy choice for me to go with the realistic look over the clean, unused look of KC. -- Al

I agree....IMO Toys v models. I collect models.

 

[lancer]

If there is a collector out there on the fence about purchasing this excellent series, take a look in the For Sale classified section. A member is offering his aircraft at $125 per plane. An excellent price for an excellent product. If I didn't have them all, I'd be on these yesterday. -- Al

 

[lancer]

Just musing here, but if JJD were to continue with his issue of Canadian flown fighters, there are two Camels that absolutely need to be done. The most famous Camel of WW1, (and the Camel with the most victories credited to it), is serial # B6313 belonging to Major William G. Barker, VC. Barker claimed 50 victories, 46 in Camel B6313, while flying with three different squadrons in Italy. Barker later was awarded the VC for an action in France while flying a Sopwith Snipe. If ever a Camel needs to be done, B6313 is it. The second Camel is serial # D3417, the mount of Lt.Col. Raymond Collishaw while with 203 Squadron. Collishaw claimed a total of 60 victories, 22 while flying Camels. 19 of the 22 were in Camel D3417. Great aces, great Canadians, and great Camels.
Also, if JJD were to continue with the Fokker Triplane issues, the tripe of Werner Voss absolutely needs to be done. Voss' tripe was serial #F 1 103/17. It was one of the first two tripes (technically prototypes) issued in September, 1917. The other went to von Richthofen. It was in this tripe that Voss fought the war's most famous dogfight, with 56 Squadron on Sept.23, 1917, and was KIA as a result. Voss was a 48 victory ace at the time of his death, second only to von Richthofen. This triplane would be in the Fokker factory camo, with a possible yellow or olive green nose, with Voss' famous kite face applied. The only change to the aircraft other than the paint, would be the removal of the wing skids. A famous aircraft and pilot that deserve to be done. -- Al