Knights of the Sky (2 Viewers)

[Obee]

EASY

Hansa-Brandenburg W.12 Early and its a kit made by WINGNUTS

More pictures here : http://www.wingnutwings.com/ww/productdetail?productid=3114&cat=5

Looking forward to see this seabird 'hatch'

John

 

[lancer]

The upper wing brace gives it away.^&grin -- Al

 

[mestell]

I would love it if JJD would produce and offer WWI British and German float planes. I really think they would be a big hit and well received by the collecting community. I known I would collect them. Ever since visiting Alaska, I have been fascinated and enamored by float planes and with my interest in WWI its a no brainer for me . . . a match made in "heaven" so to speak . . . . . .
:smile2: Mike

 

[ivanmoe]

I would love it if JJD would produce and offer WWI British and German float planes. I really think they would be a big hit and well received by the collecting community. I known I would collect them. Ever since visiting Alaska, I have been fascinated and enamored by float planes and with my interest in WWI its a no brainer for me . . . a match made in "heaven" so to speak . . . . . .
:smile2: Mike

2016 may be a really interesting year from JJD in respect to it's models. Either the replicas fly, or the Great War goes in the trenches!:wink2:

-Moe

 

[lancer]

I would love it if JJD would produce and offer WWI British and German float planes. I really think they would be a big hit and well received by the collecting community. I known I would collect them. Ever since visiting Alaska, I have been fascinated and enamored by float planes and with my interest in WWI its a no brainer for me . . . a match made in "heaven" so to speak . . . . . .
:smile2: Mike

I would think this is doable if John is willing to go that large. He has certainly proved he can do float planes, and adding another wing shouldn't be that big a deal. Besides, the Hansa-Brandenburg W.29 only has one wing.:wink2: The big thing, literally, is the size of most of the floatplanes. They are mostly all multi-seaters and correspondingly on the large side in both wing span and fuselage length. Add on the pontoons and you have a rather awkwardly large aircraft in all dimensions. It would be a rather expensive proposition, I should think. Still, the W.29 has only the one wing, and there are some smaller single-seaters like the Sopwith Baby, Albatros W.IV, and the Maachi M.5. So it is doable, if John wants to and feels interest is there. -- Al

 

[ivanmoe]

EASY

Hansa-Brandenburg W.12 Early and its a kit made by WINGNUTS

More pictures here : http://www.wingnutwings.com/ww/productdetail?productid=3114&cat=5

I really admire WW-kits, but they scare the heck of me. More than anything else, my concerns grow out of its paucity of instruction for rigging a biplane model. In fact, it's not uncommon for WW to mention rigging only after the kit is completely built. Consider the following, its Sopwith Triplane offering:

I'd really like to build this tripe, BTW. So, I went looking for WW's tips on the rigging regime. Here are its thoughts on the process:

Note above, step 1, line 1, "Drill out the rigging holes to 1mm to 2mm depth which will remove the paint etc and provide a better surface for the glue to bond to the rigging thread." I don't know about anyone else, but I can see myself with thread glued to each one of my nine fingers and a model suspended in mid-air between my hands!

However, my favorite tip comes from Mr Alexander's final comment in the last paragraph, "we recommend viewing the opinions expressed by self proclaimed internet experts with a healthy dose of skepticism." Yikes, I'm no expert, internet, or otherwise. Save us John Jenkins. I need more models, and I need them before I destroy too many a finely molded kit from Wingnut Wings!

-Moe

 

[Jack]

The upper wing brace gives it away.^&grin -- Al

Al

You are the guru of this thread!

Jack

 

[Jack]

I really admire WW-kits, but they scare the heck of me. More than anything else, my concerns grow out of its paucity of instruction for rigging a biplane model. In fact, it's not uncommon for WW to mention rigging only after the kit is completely built. Consider the following, its Sopwith Triplane offering:

I'd really like to build this tripe, BTW. So, I went looking for WW's tips on the rigging regime. Here are its thoughts on the process:

Note above, step 1, line 1, "Drill out the rigging holes to 1mm to 2mm depth which will remove the paint etc and provide a better surface for the glue to bond to the rigging thread." I don't know about anyone else, but I can see myself with thread glued to each one of my nine fingers and a model suspended in mid-air between my hands!

However, my favorite tip comes from Mr Alexander's final comment in the last paragraph, "we recommend viewing the opinions expressed by self proclaimed internet experts with a healthy dose of skepticism." Yikes, I'm no expert, internet, or otherwise. Save us John Jenkins. I need more models, and I need them before I destroy too many a finely molded kit from Wingnut Wings!

-Moe

Moe

My father always is wary of what people write about rigging in online discussions. There is almost an inverse relationship between skill and length of description. Those modellers who can do it tend to write 'then I rigged it' as though they are wary of giving away secrets. Then there are some who claim to have done things with the rigging that the model does not appear to allow. A strange world ...

Regards

Jack

 

[Jack]

EASY

Hansa-Brandenburg W.12 Early and its a kit made by WINGNUTS

More pictures here : http://www.wingnutwings.com/ww/productdetail?productid=3114&cat=5

Looking forward to see this seabird 'hatch'

John

John

Impressive work!

Jack

 

[Jack]

Getting there!

 

[Jack]

A few early snaps by Jack Senior.

 

[Jack]

 

[Jack]

 

[TomNT]

Very nice bird Jack, congrat's to dad!

Tom

 

[lancer]

My gosh, that bird turned out really beautiful. A real piece of art, and very nicely displayed in the dio. Neat pictures. A very fine job in all aspects. I'm glad to see DUAF (Down Under Aircraft Factory) is still hitting on all cylinders.^&grin -- Al

 

[ivanmoe]

Great looking model, Jack! Your dad is an awfully fine modeler. And I see that you've put the Jenkins GGC sets to good use with your new floatplane. Hopefully, WW will continue to manufacture these lesser-known types.

-Moe

 

[ivanmoe]

Back in the day, I posted a review of Jenkins' first SPAD model. "ACE-16" was a replica of an aircraft flown by Eddie Rickenbacker. It's subsequently become very hard-to-find, and, when it does show up on Ebay, it's pretty dear $$$-wise. Well, today, ACE-22 touched down and I got out the camera to take some insurance pics. Normally, I don't post a ton of pictures of models that I've looked at here before. However, I realized as I was viewing the images that ACE-22, the Guynemer SPAD, appears to be a completely new model. I'll post some notes at the end of the image stream, and attempt to explain why I believe that to be the case. Enough yapping, though, here are some images of the model as viewed on a shelf:

I mentioned above that I was going to comment on the particulars of the model at the end of my exposition. However, I want to focus briefly on the "9 o'clock" view above. The fuselage on ACE-16 struck me as being somewhat fuller than the actual aircraft. Also, the Rickenbacker model had what struck me as a bit of an elongated "comb" behind the pilots headrest. Well, not on this one. ACE-22 strikes me as being much more svelte than its predecessor, and better proportioned as well. Finally, before moving on to the detail pics, I need to note that the upper-wing has been squared off as is appropriate to the type flown by Guynemer. ACD-22 is off to a good start, oui?

Detail pics below...

 

[ivanmoe]

Now, some close-ups:

Lot's of good stuff above. In particular, I'd focus on the addition of fuel-pipes and additional cabling between the cabane struts, items that were absent from ACE-16.

I've chosen to focus on the cockpit above, because it's demonstrative of the extent to which Jenkins' has upped its game when it comes to rendering these spaces. Gone are the "black hole" interiors of the past. I really like the inclusion of detail like the shoulder harness and instruments. I consider what's shown above to be worthy of the term "fine scale model."

Finally, I always try to take a look at the tail assemblies on JJ models. I do so because Jenkins has demonstrated such mastery of these surfaces in the past. Let me note another nice addition to ACE-22 at this point. The manufacturer has included simulated, external rudder-cabling on the model. Nice touch there. I believe that the cabling for the elevator was all-internal on the SPAD XIII, BTW.

In closing, let me cite a list of improvements and/or differences between ACE-16 and ACE-22:

-Added control surface cabling
-Added bracing in several areas of the model
-Improved cockpit detail
-Added fuel-pipes between the upper and lower wings
-Modified wing-tips
-Overall improved fidelity of the fuselage shape

AND, something that we haven't seen before...

-Jenkins has changed the material that it uses for cabling and bracing. I'm not sure how obvious it was in looking at my pics, but the material appears to be somewhat finer than that found on earlier KotS replicas. Also, John has managed to source the material with a brown-tint that honestly strikes me as being more believable that the fishing-line that many of us have grown accustomed to. Two thumbs-up on the change.

My list of upgrades is in no way definitive. If our readers are aware of additional improvements, feel free to comment.

My verdict on ACE-22? Well, I'll put it this way. As popular as the Rickenbacker SPAD proved to be, I believe this new iteration to be far superior. It's just a better scale model when viewed in terms of its particulars. For that matter, I had planned on this being my last JJD SPAD XIII. However, the "all new and improved version" has me champing at the bit for more. I began my comments in my post above by stating that I believe that this model is a completely different rendering than ACE-16. I truly doubt that the older model's fuselage could have been modified to bring it into better accord with the actual aircraft. Because of that, I believe that Jenkins went back to the drawing board on this one, a move that I view as bordering on the heroic. Hat's off to John and thanks for delivering such a great model to collectors.

Send us more SPADs!

-Moe

 

[lancer]

Fantastic review, Moe, and great close-up photos to illustrate the review. Mine should be showing up next week and I can hardly wait for it. The model is simply brilliant looking in detail and I really love the paint job. I haven't even received mine yet and I already have a new, favorite JJD aircraft. ^&grin -- Al

 

[mestell]

Truly a very nice and helpful review Moe. It certainly reinforces my overall good feeling about purchasing this beauty (mine should be delivered on Monday) in the first place. Thank you very much . . . .
:smile2: Mike