Reprints of Reprints: N vs I, II vs III etc
Ares has already reprinted the WWI bombers after they became hard to get.
Series 4(?) - anyway, the Moranes, DH2s, Halberstadt D.IIIs and Fokker E.IIIs are now reaching "rare" status too. I've already seen Immelman's mount go for premium prices.
A minor digression - please bear with me - we don't talk about it much, but despite the extensive historical research and quest for accuracy in the models, we have grown to accept some minor glitches in them - probably because of the superb paint jobs.
I'm not talking about the kind of compromises necessary for series production - airfoil cross-section of wings, thickness of struts, omission of rigging - either.
I'm talking about omission of cabane struts on the Br14, the lack of nacelle struts on the Gothas and Capronis, the mix of Gotha IV and Gotha V characteristics on the Gotha models, the wrong-way-round V struts on the Albatros, the lack of dihedral and vertical struts on the Hanriot,,, minor stuff, the planes look right. I won't mention the unfortunate Sopwith Triplane. Then there's the Belgian RE8's engine.
While it would be better to fix these issues, is it necessary? From the sales results of the Albatros D.Va and bombers, a resounding No!. The flaws are deemed minor. Even purists like myself prefer the excellent paint schemes on the flawed models than our own paint jobs on more accurate Shapeways models - for these have their own problems with surface texture, strut thickness etc.
Now getting back to the issue of reprints... do we want "more of the same", Morane Ns with different paint jobs, Fokker E.IIIs likewise... or would we accept, say, Morane I's and Fokker E.IIs using the same model - but (at least with the Morane I vs Morane N) different stats?
A Morane I - often referred to as a Morane N bis - is a Morane N with wings extended a few inches and a larger (110hp vs 80hp) but dimensionally similar engine. In 1/144 scale, the difference in wingspan is about a millimeter. This is far, far less than the inaccuracies we already accept in other models. It's comparable with the difference between Nieuport 17 and Nieuport 23 - a case where Nexus used the same model to represent two different aircraft types whose external appearance was similarly almost identical.
A handful of Morane N bis were used in combat by the French. Exactly 4 of them in combat as the "Morane N 110hp with 90 minute tank" by the RFC's 60 squadron.
And piles of them, at least 18, by the Russians. There's no evidence that they ever used any Morane N in combat, and may have had only one.
There is a difference in performance though. The extra power of the 110hp engine increased speed to 165+ kph with the same load as an N, but they were distinctly nose-heavy, so didn't turn as well, and were described by RFC pilots as a positive menace to land, compared with the N.
This is not an N. It's an I.
As for the E.III
80mm in 1/144 is just over 0.5mm. Wingspan of an E.II was 18cm longer - just over 1mm in 1/144. Again, the difference is miniscule. I defy anyone to tell the difference on the table. Moreover, performance was similar enough so both E.II and E.III would have the same game stats.The E.III was basically an E.II fitted with larger, newly designed wings that had a slightly narrower chord of 1.80 meter (70-7/8 in), compared to 1.88 meter (74 in) on the earlier Eindeckers, going back to Fokker's original M.5 monoplane aircraft.
So.. what think you, gentlemen? If Ares reprinted the exact same Morane N models (different and historically accurate paint schemes and serials of course) but calling them I's not N's - and with something like a V deck rather than T deck - would you be positive, negative, or neutral?
The DH2 is alas, a DH2. It would take some extensive research to find something different from the existing combinations of CDL, PC10, and RFC roundels. I've found two - one rather blue, another more gaudy one that supported Lawrence in the desert. DH2s soldiered in in Palestine into 1918 too, mostly against no aeriel opposition, sometimes vs various Turkish 2-seaters. The Middle East was a backwater for both sides, where obsolete but not worn-out aircraft often ended up. BE2s, DH2s, Martinsydes on one hand, old Aviatiks and Fokker E's and D's on the other. with an increasing handful of more modern Brisfits, Camels, SE5s, RE8s, Albatros and late-model Halberstadts.
Talking about Halberstadts... then there's the reprint of the Halberstadt D.III. Maybe a D.II? The engine and exhaust is visibly different, but not as much as with, say, the Belgian RE8 vs the others. Or even the D.V, as the only visible difference there was again a different exhaust and rounded rather than square cutout on the top wing. Research has shown that, contrary to some sources, there were quite a few of these on the Western Front. They could easily out-turn Albatros D.IIIs, were just as fast - but only had one gun, and a woeful climb rate. They had qualities the Luftstreitcrafte didn't value very much, and failings in the areas that were deemed most important.
At the time Von Richthofen used a "Halberstadt D" when his red Albatros D.III was broken, Jasta 11 had one D.II. one D.III, and eleven D.Vs. As Jasta commander, he probably used one of the better planes - but there's also the possibility that he could have used either of the two spares probably kept in reserve for when the better planes were under repair. We're guessing here, we have to.
So maybe an MvR D.V in a conjectural colour scheme - basically rustbrown/green maybe with hastily applied red bits - a Turkish D.V with a single gun from the first batch, also from March-April 1917 in similar colours (without the red) - and a Turkish D.V with twin guns from the second batch of Jan 1918 in purple/green. A worthy opponent for the Australian Brisfit - something like a Q deck, A armament. Here's Croneiss' iconic photo - note exhaust to stbd not vertical, and rounded cutout.
Or 3 D.IIs in various colours which are better documented. Including an MvR one that he flew home one day for a short break, and may or may not have used in combat.
Or of course, more of the same, straight reprints, no changes. Comments?
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by milcoll73
Well as a real lover of the early war aircraft this does appeal to me.
..jpg)
Bookmarks