It is obvious. He is conversing with his fellow mechanic, "See 'ear, you daft bugger, 'ow would you like this spanner upside your 'ead?" -- AlQuestion for you gentlemen about the following set:
What is the standing figure up to, what is he doing?
Knights of the Sky (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter MCKENNA77
- Start date
Jack
Major
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2011
- Messages
- 6,347
Question for you gentlemen about the following set:
What is the standing figure up to, what is he doing?
'The bells, the bells'.
(Quasimodo reference!)
ivanmoe
Command Sergeant Major
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2013
- Messages
- 2,959
Ah, Jack has risen to the challenge! :wink2:
Yes, the gentlemen is hunched over a bit. Apart from the RFC garb, his other distinguishing feature is the wrench in his hand (barely discernible above). Well, what is he working on? I'd assume that it's an aircraft, but what part on any of JJD's RFC replicas would require such a tool to be used so low to the ground, the undercarriage?
Or could BGC-14 be intended for use with a set that has yet to arrive???
So many mysteries, so little time...and...nonetheless...inquiring minds want to know!
Jack
Major
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2011
- Messages
- 6,347
Yes ... working with a Camel's undercarriage in your face would not be pleasant!{sm4}
Incorrigible.^&grin^&grin^&grin -- Al
ivanmoe
Command Sergeant Major
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2013
- Messages
- 2,959
Well, that's certainly a possibility. Supporting your proposition is the figure's posture, as he's been molded in such a way as to convey movement. He's off balance, and will have to complete his movement, likely upward, or "collapse!"
Then again, I'm looking for the kind of context that's likewise missing from several of the German Air Service mechanics that I've commented on before. Taken individually, it can be hard to understand why JJ even bothered with them. Taken together, as part of a larger team/group, they really are marvelous
Put another way, I'm wondering if this set will make more sense to collectors when additional sets are released. These are the first RFC ground-crew figures that can be fairly characterized as mechanics, BTW. The others are what I'd categorize as "plane handlers," the Chocks Away sets. Time will tell!
I have been examining the new Eddie Rickenbacker Figure from JJD and comparing it to the KC Collector's Club Rickenbacker. There isn't a whole lot of difference between the offerings in terms of pose or uniform, as one might expect, both being modeled on the same photo. Both are nice looking figures. Maybe a very slight edge to JJD in terms of color and overall detail but that could just be my preference in taste. What I did notice was that the KC figure APPEARS to be wearing the light blue Medal of Honor ribbon on the right side of the ribbon bar on the uniform's left breast. This is incorrect for the time and place of the uniformed figure, if meant to be wartime. While Rickenbacker was awarded the MoH for his actions of September 25, 1918, he did not receive the medal until 1930. Any photos of Rickenbacker in uniform while wearing the medal/ribbon, are post presentation. The JJD figure does not have the MoH ribbon and thus is meant to be displayed with the JJD Spad, in a wartime setting. This is just more rivet counting. Both figures are accurate, but to different time periods. I need to note that my observations are based on photos of the figures, as I do not have either in my possession. -- Al
ivanmoe
Command Sergeant Major
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2013
- Messages
- 2,959
The other day I was waxing philosophical regarding "context" as it applies to some JJD figures. In the course of my comments, I made reference to the German Groundcrew from JJD. I also stated that they don't work for me, personally, until they're supplied with said context through the provision of additional pieces. Of course, this isn't a medium that lends itself to hand-gestures, "you know." Because of that, I thought that it might be useful to communicate the concept that I was attempting to convey through some pics. See below:
Above we see four of the GCC figures from JJD. At least two of them suffer from a fairly severe case of "context deprivation," as we frankly have no idea of what they might be about. For all we know, they could be on leave and standing on a corner in Berlin, unter der lindens, so to speak. The first figure has obviously been working on something, but we have no idea what that might be. The strongest set, in a standalone sense, is likely the last one, as he's obviously tending to something that's relatively tall, an airplane perhaps.
I'd also note that the images above provide a pretty stark contrast to the RFC "chocks away" figures. I have no problem whatsoever placing most of those guys. For instance, I'm pretty positive, right off the bat, that one of them is prop-starting an airplane. Two others are in possession of wheel chocks, so they're a no-brainer. Let's not get side-tracked by the RFC, though. Back to the GCC figures, this time as a group, again absent a context to define the poses involved:
Again, IMO, we see figures that appear more or less unrelated. For all we know, they could be on audition for a movie part! Exaggerating this characteristic of the sets is the reality that each is sold separately, albeit with lots of nice ladders, chocks and other stuff as accessories. However, it's only when the pieces are used together that the individual figures really shine, as below, IMHO:
Suffice it to say, I'm relatively new to collecting TS. The context issue that I've chosen to highlight may in fact be quite common here. If I've felt compelled to comment on it, it's because the difference between the RFC and German groundcrew figures seems so stark.
Thank you for reading!
-Moe
Because of that, I thought that it might be useful to communicate the concept that I was attempting to convey through some pics. See below:
Above we see four of the GCC figures from JJD. At least two of them suffer from a fairly severe case of "context deprivation," as we frankly have no idea of what they might be about. For all we know, they could be on leave and standing on a corner in Berlin, unter der lindens, so to speak. The first figure has obviously been working on something, but we have no idea what that might be. The strongest set, in a standalone sense, is likely the last one, as he's obviously tending to something that's relatively tall, an airplane perhaps.
I'd also note that the images above provide a pretty stark contrast to the RFC "chocks away" figures. I have no problem whatsoever placing most of those guys. For instance, I'm pretty positive, right off the bat, that one of them is prop-starting an airplane. Two others are in possession of wheel chocks, so they're a no-brainer. Let's not get side-tracked by the RFC, though. Back to the GCC figures, this time as a group, again absent a context to define the poses involved:
Again, IMO, we see figures that appear more or less unrelated. For all we know, they could be on audition for a movie part! Exaggerating this characteristic of the sets is the reality that each is sold separately, albeit with lots of nice ladders, chocks and other stuff as accessories. However, it's only when the pieces are used together that the individual figures really shine, as below, IMHO:
Suffice it to say, I'm relatively new to collecting TS. The context issue that I've chosen to highlight may in fact be quite common here. If I've felt compelled to comment on it, it's because the difference between the RFC and German groundcrew figures seems so stark.
Thank you for reading!
-Moe
As there are certainly more ground crew, pilots, and other related ground paraphernalia coming from JJD, I like to think that these ground crew are perhaps taking a brief break from their labors to glance at a gathering of von Richthofen and other German Eagles. Perhaps they are gathering for a group photo or an award ceremony. All could be coming in future releases. Certainly, many of the JJD pilots lend themselves to a group portrait.:wink2: -- AlThe other day I was waxing philosophical regarding "context" as it applies to some JJD figures. In the course of my comments, I made reference to the German Groundcrew from JJD. I also stated that they don't work for me, personally, until they're supplied with said context through the provision of additional pieces. Of course, this isn't a medium that lends itself to hand-gestures, "you know."
Above we see four of the GCC figures from JJD. At least two of them suffer from a fairly severe case of "context deprivation," as we frankly have no idea of what they might be about. For all we know, they could be on leave and standing on a corner in Berlin, unter der lindens, so to speak. The first figure has obviously been working on something, but we have no idea what that might be. The strongest set, in a standalone sense, is likely the last one, as he's obviously tending to something that's relatively tall, an airplane perhaps.
I'd also note that the images above provide a pretty stark contrast to the RFC "chocks away" figures. I have no problem whatsoever placing most of those guys. For instance, I'm pretty positive, right off the bat, that one of them is prop-starting an airplane. Two others are in possession of wheel chocks, so they're a no-brainer. Let's not get side-tracked by the RFC, though. Back to the GCC figures, this time as a group, again absent a context to define the poses involved:
Again, IMO, we see figures that appear more or less unrelated. For all we know, they could be on audition for a movie part! Exaggerating this characteristic of the sets is the reality that each is sold separately, albeit with lots of nice ladders, chocks and other stuff as accessories. However, it's only when the pieces are used together that the individual figures really shine, as below, IMHO:
Suffice it to say, I'm relatively new to collecting TS. The context issue that I've chosen to highlight may in fact be quite common here. If I've felt compelled to comment on it, it's because the difference between the RFC and German groundcrew figures seems so stark.
Thank you for reading!
-Moe
ivanmoe
Command Sergeant Major
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2013
- Messages
- 2,959
Hi Al,
I'll be darned but my last pic didn't get uploaded with the others.
This one was supposed to be placed between the last two paragraphs in my last post above:
View attachment 138393
Those characters really bailed the D-7 out, BTW. It's the one KotS model that might have ended up stored in it's container were it not for the ground-crew figures. It's quite large and doesn't have the fitting for the stand that's been mentioned several times. I gotta really love something that takes up so much real-estate. The figures make the sacrifice worth the cost, IMO. Obviuously, it's the model that provides context for the figures in question.
Hope I didn't screw anything else up!:redface2:
Last edited:
Moe, interesting you pictured the D-7. I was just looking at mine the other day and was thinking that it is underappreciated. It doesn't get any chat/mention, at least not like the tripes, Spads, etc. It is a really handsome model with a very striking paint job. It's all white finish can't be hidden and really attracts the eye. I quite like the coffin-nosed beast and really wish we could get more of them. I agree about the ground crew in your photo. Makes the whole model just come alive. Just to add, I am especially fond of my D-7 because it is the model I chose to take with me when I met John a couple years ago. I was rather shameless and asked John if he would sign it for me, which he gladly did along the underside of the fuselage. It really is a fine model. -- Al
I have my JJD Spad 13 displayed next to my JJD Fokker D-7 and this side by side display allows a quick comparison in the actual sizes of these two aircraft. The fact is, the Spad 13 (and it's predecessor, the Spad 7) are really quite small aircraft. In terms of overall size, the Fokker D-7 is larger than the Spad in all the major features, length, height, and wingspan. Most noticeable is the difference in height. The D-7 dwarfs the S.13 in this respect. In point of fact, the real life measurement of height puts the S.13 at 6.89 ft. while the D-7 is 9.19 ft. The D-7 is also 2.6 ft. longer and 3.1 ft. wider in wingspan.
All of this doesn't mean anything but I just was struck by the size difference in the 2 models. I had always thought of the S.13 as a big brute, when it actually is quite small. Even the Nieuport 17, often described as small, is taller in height and wider in wingspan than the S.13. The Se-5, not considered a large aircraft, also outsizes the Spad by quite a bit in all 3 dimensions, being over 9 ft. tall and 29.4 ft. in span.
Just interesting that what I always thought of as a large aircraft, the Spad 13 is actually diminutive in relative terms to it's contemporaries. At least the Spad is longer in the fuselage and wider in the wingspan than the Fokker Triplane, although losing, once again, in height by over 2.5 ft.
Ultimately it just becomes necessary to realize that WW1 fighter aircraft were not very large.:rolleyes2: -- Al
All of this doesn't mean anything but I just was struck by the size difference in the 2 models. I had always thought of the S.13 as a big brute, when it actually is quite small. Even the Nieuport 17, often described as small, is taller in height and wider in wingspan than the S.13. The Se-5, not considered a large aircraft, also outsizes the Spad by quite a bit in all 3 dimensions, being over 9 ft. tall and 29.4 ft. in span.
Just interesting that what I always thought of as a large aircraft, the Spad 13 is actually diminutive in relative terms to it's contemporaries. At least the Spad is longer in the fuselage and wider in the wingspan than the Fokker Triplane, although losing, once again, in height by over 2.5 ft.
Ultimately it just becomes necessary to realize that WW1 fighter aircraft were not very large.:rolleyes2: -- Al
Today John Jenkins announced his latest KotS release, the Fokker Triplane of Lt. Werner Steinhauser. It is aircraft #464/17, assigned to Jasta 11 at Cappy in the April-May, 1918 time period. The model is very attractively done and will be on my 'buy' list (now, there's a shock:rolleyes2 as soon as I can swing it. Steinhauser was born 6/29/1893 and served in the artillery before moving to airplanes. He was initially in FA261 where he and his observer scored a victory over a balloon on 8/20/18. Steinhauser then moved on to single-seaters and was assigned to Jasta 11 in December, 1917. On 1/13/18, he scored his 2nd victory, another balloon. He would score 8 more victories (a total of 10) before being KIA while flying a Fokkker D-7 at 0800 on 6/26/18, over Neuilly. Of his 10 victories, 2 were balloons, 5 were two-seaters, and 3 were single-seat fighters, including a Camel and 2 Spads. -- Al
as soon as I can swing it. Steinhauser was born 6/29/1893 and served in the artillery before moving to airplanes. He was initially in FA261 where he and his observer scored a victory over a balloon on 8/20/18. Steinhauser then moved on to single-seaters and was assigned to Jasta 11 in December, 1917. On 1/13/18, he scored his 2nd victory, another balloon. He would score 8 more victories (a total of 10) before being KIA while flying a Fokkker D-7 at 0800 on 6/26/18, over Neuilly. Of his 10 victories, 2 were balloons, 5 were two-seaters, and 3 were single-seat fighters, including a Camel and 2 Spads. -- AlMy apologies for the error, but the date of Steinhauser's 1st victory should be 8/20/17, not 1918. :redface2: -- AlToday John Jenkins announced his latest KotS release, the Fokker Triplane of Lt. Werner Steinhauser. It is aircraft #464/17, assigned to Jasta 11 at Cappy in the April-May, 1918 time period. The model is very attractively done and will be on my 'buy' list (now, there's a shock:rolleyes2
Jack
Major
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2011
- Messages
- 6,347
That's a shame. I was about to order one based on his skill in shooting down a balloon two months after he was killed!
Well, a pilot did have to have special skills to be picked by von Richthofen to join his Jasta. :wink2: -- Al
ivanmoe
Command Sergeant Major
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2013
- Messages
- 2,959
Jack's SE-5 got me to thinking about the JJD aircraft that have been produced. We have multiples of the triplane, N-17, Camel, Albatros, and I know another Spad is on the way. That leaves us with single productions of the D-7 and the SE-5. The D-7 single production is understandable because of color scheme problems relating to the lozenge camouflage that the D-7 carries. What I don't understand is the single SE-5. Along with the Camel, the SE-5 is the most important fighter that the RFC/RAF flew during the war. There are dozens of famous flyer/marking schemes among the SE-5 that could be done, yet we only have one, the Mannock version. The SE-5 done by JJD is, in my opinion, the finest model that JJD has done to date. The detail is simply second to none. I would love to see some more SE-5's come out of the JJD production facilities. Just for starters I would like to see James McCudden's SE-5 #B4863, with his 'G' letter marking that he was flying with B Flight of 56 Squadron when the engagement with Werner Voss occurred in September, 1917. Not having McCudden represented by a JJD aircraft is a huge hole as far as I'm concerned. Other well known aces include such names as Beauchamp Proctor, Dallas, Bowman, McElroy, Rhys Davids, Springs, Jones, and the list just goes on. Some more versions of the excellent JJD SE-5 would be 'must haves' for me. ^&grin -- Al