Knights of the Sky (2 Viewers)

All beautiful shots Moe. Can't decide which I like best, maybe the first (from top to bottom). Nice display, partial, of your collection. Chris
 
lancer said:
Great shots, Moe. I really like the first shot, the low angle pic of the Camels. It is an unusual POV and really sets the Camels off. And the Nungesser N-17 is gorgeous. Something about that all-silver finish and the red/white/blue stripes and roundels makes it a real looker. The airfield is also excellent. Nice job. -- Al
Click to expand...

Terp152 said:
All beautiful shots Moe. Can't decide which I like best, maybe the first (from top to bottom). Nice display, partial, of your collection. Chris
Click to expand...

Thank you both, Al and Chris, for your generous comments.:) Based on your feedback, the first pic is gonna get the nod for the display.

View attachment 190518
Click to expand...

I think that I'll approach this one as a sort of "sandbox project." In addition to the models and building facades, I want to try and work in all of the BGC figure-sets, a modest supply-cache and the Britains' lancers that my G-daughters gave me for xmas. It's gonna get pretty crowded down there, but I'm itching for a display challenge. No grief, no gravy!;)

-Moe
 
Moe its always enjoyable when you drag your planes out for a photo session,cheers mate for posting.
 
Well, I spread everything out on the mat and took some pics. I tried to think things through before placement, so as to have as many sets visible as possible. Because of the depth of the display, I'm afraid that I was only partially successful. In the process of perusing my work, I also encountered yet another "mystery of JJD." More on that in a moment. First, here are some pics of my "Camel Base" display, eye-level and overhead:

View attachment 190532

View attachment 190533

I don't know if you've ever asked yourself, "exactly how many KotS sets can be packed into a square yard of space?" Given the visuals directly above, I'd suggest that the answer is quite a few! And while quality may have suffered in some regards, not so much, IMO, that it's no fun to give it a go.

Below, I've posted three pics of Jenkins' classic "British Ground Crew" sets. They are the chocs-away set, the plane handlers, and the maintenance sets. There are several other BGC sets, but these mesh so tightly that it's hard to believe that John didn't intend for them to be used, together, as pictured.

View attachment 190534

View attachment 190535

View attachment 190536

Now, for the mystery that I referenced earlier. To elaborate a bit, note the second pic above, the overhead view. Note also, that the Barker and Brown Camels appear to be parked awfully close to each other. However, when you look carefully at the first and third pics it's obvious that's not the case. In fact, they are close to two inches apart. Why the discrepancy? What accounts for the visual distortion?

Well, I got to looking at the model and doing some measuring. Not only are the wingtips on the Barker Camel somewhat lower than those on the Brown and MacLaren versions, the wingspan is also about half an inch shorter! I've had these models for about three years and never had a clue that this was the case. I believe that I was once told that the Barker version was Jenkins' first. If that's the case, then I supposed that the manufacturer could have modified the model for later production. That's absolutely all that I can offer in the way of an explanation. Anyway, how about them apples!;)

Thanks for looking,:D

-Moe
 
Moe, this is an absolutely outstanding depiction of a RFC aerodrome. So much going on, it's hard to pick where to look first. 2 Camels on the flight line, one of which is about to go and 1 being prepped. 1 Camel being hauled off. Love the Padre blessing the Brown Camel.
Interesting about the difference in the wingspan of the Camels. My MacLaren Camel is in storage, so I couldn't measure/compare to my other Camels but the 3 I have out, the Brown, the Barker, and the prototype Naval 10, are all identical in wingspan and in height. There is no variation whatsoever. The order of the Camels released, if memory serves me was Brown, MacLaren, and Barker last. The Naval 10 Camel, which had a prototype wing material and never proceeded to production, was either made prior to the Brown or prior to the MacLaren as John experimented with his materials. I don't know how to explain the variation in your Barker Camel. It is certainly a mystery. Regardless, your display is most impressive and a joy to view. :salute:: -- Al
 
lancer said:
Moe, this is an absolutely outstanding depiction of a RFC aerodrome. So much going on, it's hard to pick where to look first. 2 Camels on the flight line, one of which is about to go and 1 being prepped. 1 Camel being hauled off. Love the Padre blessing the Brown Camel.
Interesting about the difference in the wingspan of the Camels. My MacLaren Camel is in storage, so I couldn't measure/compare to my other Camels but the 3 I have out, the Brown, the Barker, and the prototype Naval 10, are all identical in wingspan and in height. There is no variation whatsoever. The order of the Camels released, if memory serves me was Brown, MacLaren, and Barker last. The Naval 10 Camel, which had a prototype wing material and never proceeded to production, was either made prior to the Brown or prior to the MacLaren as John experimented with his materials. I don't know how to explain the variation in your Barker Camel. It is certainly a mystery. Regardless, your display is most impressive and a joy to view. :salute:: -- Al
Click to expand...

Thank you, Al!:D

I decided to take a couple of more pics, as it may be years before some of these sets come back out of the cabinets. Before doing so, I rearranged the models to the other configuration that I had experimented with:

View attachment 190538

View attachment 190539

Regardless of the quality of my pics (or lack thereof), KotS is a great range for collectors interested in aviation.^&cool

My Barker model is an interesting set, indeed. That said, I exaggerated the difference in wingspan a tad. It's actually 3/8 of an inch shorter than the Brown and MacLaren models. Also, it's got a bit of a parasol-like shape to it. In digesting that comment, envision the wings on the Nieuport. This characteristic may be partially visible in my pics, BTW. The shape of the wingtips is also slightly different, more rounded on the trailing edge, Finally, the distance from the outer-rib to the wingtip is a slightly further outboard on my Barker version. Oh, and the Barker version has the fitting for mounting a stand. Like I said, "mysteries of JJD.";)

Anyway, thanks again for your kind words,:cool:

-Moe
 
More great shots, Moe. The Camels are really quite impressive on the flight line, like so many period photos one sees. I also like the way the red-nosed Brown Camel grabs the eye, in between the 2 silver-nosed versions. John mentioned to me that the red-nose Camel out sold his silver-nosed versions. Seems like buyers like the splash of color. -- Al
 
Wonderful action shots of the flight line to see this morning! You really captured the feel of getting the aircraft ready for launch. Well done! Chris
 
Really like the 3 planes. Looks like an airfield. I always thought the Jenkins's planes were outstanding!

Brad
 
wayne556517 said:
Moe its always enjoyable when you drag your planes out for a photo session,cheers mate for posting.
Click to expand...

Thank you, Wayne. I actually bought the farmhouse to use with my German planes and pilots. You can look for some of those here and on the KC forum in coming weeks/months.

lancer said:
More great shots, Moe. The Camels are really quite impressive on the flight line, like so many period photos one sees. I also like the way the red-nosed Brown Camel grabs the eye, in between the 2 silver-nosed versions. John mentioned to me that the red-nose Camel out sold his silver-nosed versions. Seems like buyers like the splash of color. -- Al
Click to expand...

You know, Al, I can see why collectors would prefer Brown's model. To tell you the truth, it didn't really stand out that much, to me, until I looked at it in the pics. Pretty little bird!

Terp152 said:
Wonderful action shots of the flight line to see this morning! You really captured the feel of getting the aircraft ready for launch. Well done! Chris
Click to expand...

Chris, I realize that single-model displays are, without a doubt, the norm. While it's true that a collector can always simply build multiple kits to create expanded scenes/displays/dioramas for aircraft, figure support for anything "truly deep" simply isn't there. The result are displays that tend to be sort of anemic in terms of figures and accessories. Need I explain further why I so adore Jenkins' models and figure sets?:)

Thanks again for your encouragement and support, fellas,:D

-Moe
 
mikemiller1955 said:
Moe...these are nice...you should send John these pics...he would love them...
Click to expand...

Mike, JJ deserves most of the credit. His models and figures are such exquisite little works of art and craftsmanship.:cool: I just set them up and take some pics.

braddinpa said:
Really like the 3 planes. Looks like an airfield. I always thought the Jenkins's planes were outstanding!
Click to expand...

Brad, it's the "airfield look" that really got me interested in Jenkins' model and figure sets. Hope he keeps them coming!:D

Thank you both for your kind comments,:)

-Moe
 
Your airfield sure got busy over the last 24 hours !

Amazing the way everything works together.

Great ideas and photography.

Thank you.
 
I'm particularly looking forward to the release of the French ground crew.....

Ground crew.JPG

The aircraft are brilliant.......but the pilots and ground crew figures really help to set the displays off for me.

Pete
 
You stage your sets and take great pics Moe!
Ray

ivanmoe said:
Well, I spread everything out on the mat and took some pics. I tried to think things through before placement, so as to have as many sets visible as possible. Because of the depth of the display, I'm afraid that I was only partially successful. In the process of perusing my work, I also encountered yet another "mystery of JJD." More on that in a moment. First, here are some pics of my "Camel Base" display, eye-level and overhead:

View attachment 190532

View attachment 190533

I don't know if you've ever asked yourself, "exactly how many KotS sets can be packed into a square yard of space?" Given the visuals directly above, I'd suggest that the answer is quite a few! And while quality may have suffered in some regards, not so much, IMO, that it's no fun to give it a go.

Below, I've posted three pics of Jenkins' classic "British Ground Crew" sets. They are the chocs-away set, the plane handlers, and the maintenance sets. There are several other BGC sets, but these mesh so tightly that it's hard to believe that John didn't intend for them to be used, together, as pictured.

View attachment 190534

View attachment 190535

View attachment 190536

Now, for the mystery that I referenced earlier. To elaborate a bit, note the second pic above, the overhead view. Note also, that the Barker and Brown Camels appear to be parked awfully close to each other. However, when you look carefully at the first and third pics it's obvious that's not the case. In fact, they are close to two inches apart. Why the discrepancy? What accounts for the visual distortion?

Well, I got to looking at the model and doing some measuring. Not only are the wingtips on the Barker Camel somewhat lower than those on the Brown and MacLaren versions, the wingspan is also about half an inch shorter! I've had these models for about three years and never had a clue that this was the case. I believe that I was once told that the Barker version was Jenkins' first. If that's the case, then I supposed that the manufacturer could have modified the model for later production. That's absolutely all that I can offer in the way of an explanation. Anyway, how about them apples!;)

Thanks for looking,:D

-Moe
Click to expand...
 
Ivanhoe said:
Your airfield sure got busy over the last 24 hours !

Amazing the way everything works together.

Great ideas and photography.

Thank you.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Ivanhoe. The great thing about digital imaging is that it's a lot less expensive than collecting TS!:D

chalklands said:
Moe,
Superb display...well impressed!

Pete
Click to expand...

Thank you, Pete, and thanks for everything that you've done over the years to help promote KotS.:salute::


nmrocks said:
You stage your sets and take great pics Moe!
Ray
Click to expand...

Hi Ray, thanks and glad that you enjoyed the pics!:):cool:

-Moe
 
Here are a couple of close-ups and "a closer" on a tall stand:

View attachment 190855

View attachment 190856

View attachment 190859

View attachment 190857

View attachment 190858

Simply put, the pics are what they are. That said, I'd point our readers to the fourth image from the top above. It may look a lot like the first pic in this post, but it's different to the extent that I've tried to highlight the cover over the engine compartment. The part is a perforated screen that appears to be made out of photo-etch. I don't want to make too big a deal out of this, but the fact is that you and I can't buy a pro-built model of this quality, in this scale, for what Jenkins is asking. No way. It's not going to happen. Move over, Elvis, John Jenkins has entered the room.:cool:

Thoughts?

-Moe
 
Last edited:
Congratulations, Moe. It is absolutely gorgeous and your photos, superb. I have a new favorite JJD aircraft, and I don't even own one yet!^&grin The detail is unbeatable. I really like the detail of the screened cooling panel as opposed to the louvered and less detailed vents of the earlier Spad models. The livery is just about the best I have seen, both in color shades and the details of the markings. I should have mine within the week and then it will go along side the Rickenbacker Spad. What a fantastic display they are going to make. -- Al
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2024 XenForo Ltd.
Back
Top