As many of you already know I recently bought a Flair Puppeteer to have as a down the road project after finishing up my Flair Legionare and my scratch-build of the Nieuport 11. My first impression upon opening up the box and looking at the instructions is that this kit is rather more refined than the Legionaire. The Legionaire's funky typed instructions have been replaced with several large sheets of plan drawings and severel smaller sheets that serve as construction diagrams.

But what really struck me is that the Puppeteer looks to my eyes to be a bit more generic than the Legionaire which is a pretty good copy of the Nieuport 17. The Puppeteer which is intened to be a sports scale version of the Sopwith Pup -- looks a bit more like the mother (Sopwith 1 1/2 Strutter) than the whelp! And given that over 10,000 Puppeteers have been built (according to the Flair website) I figured I might as well do something a little different and try kit bashing it into the Strutter. The diagram below shows the side view of the Strutter superimposed on the side view of the Puppeteer.

The length of the fuse from cowl to rudder post is very close. Even the position of the wings and the location of the UC axle are nearly identical. It should be a small matter to relocated the gear attachment points, add the two-seater cockpits, and maybe reconfigure the rear turtle deck a bit. The wing span is a more Pup-like but I can live with that.

I'll do up a scale-shaped rudder (maybe with a 10% enlargement) but I'll basically use the kit wings and stab as is, with only some modifications to the tip shapes. Other possible alteration include the use of more scale side fairings on the forward fuse, the addition of the famous W struts (of course) and the addition of the scale air brakes of the original on the inboard edge of the lower wing. No matter what I do, it'll still end up as a sport scale model but perhaps one with a bit more jazz!

I'm thinkig of using the color scheme seen in this excellent painting by Brian Knight on the cover of the datafile (#34).

A quick comparison of the wings shows the Puppeteer's wings to be no more than 10% wider on the cord and about one rib bay shorter on each wing half. It would be easy enough to just add a rib to each side.

On the horizontal stab/elevator, the scale version is just a bit wider but at least 20% longer. If I go for the greater wingspan I'll also increase the size of the stab. Conveniently, the (positive) scale incidence on the Strutter is about the same as on the Puppeteer. I'd want to be reworking the stab seating area to be more scale as it is one of the distinctive features of the fuse and gives a bit of a curved up look. This shape allowed the incidence of the tail plane to be adjusted in flight -- which also explains the characteristic gap between the top of the stab and the bottom of the rudder fin. This arrangement was also seen on subsequent Sopwiths like the Tripe.

Does anyone happen to know how (when) the airbrakes were used? They could be cranked up to an almost 90 degree position. I assume this would be something the pilots would do after landing.

A more extensive modification, BTW, would be to split the wings in half and then build them so that each side wing cellule could be transported fully rigged. The top wing halves would attach to the central cabane struts with the 1/2 strut attached at the field. The bottom wing would plug into fixed wing roots on the fuse. this is, in fact, what was done with the original when being transported on ships. Temporary X struts were inserted to hold the wings in position.

I know that Donnie has done this with several of his models.

Well, there really isn't ANYTHING new under the sun! I just picked up the Sept. issue of Fly RC and not only did their coverage of Top Gun reveal all the "usual suspects" (P-51's BVM Sabre kits, Albatros DIII's, F-100's, B-17's, etc.) butalso a beautifully done 1/3 scale model of the Strutter (by Bud Roane) in precisely the color scheme I had been considering above!

There were a few refreshingly new models however, for example, Sam Snyder's Dornier 23G, Richard Crapp's Swordfish, George Maiorana's AEW (TU-4), and Kark Gross' Lysander.

Sometimes I feel like there are only a dozen or so WWI aircraft that are documentable to the degree necessary to pass muster at a national scale event. And so we keep seeing the same aircraft again and again and again -- maybe in new paint schemes.

Still, a guy needs to be realistic. I'm not going to stop jogging just because I'm never going to make the Olympic sprint team!

Reg, just one question. What the hell does that chick have around it's neck!!!

Darned if I know, Don.
Blowing up the Bud Rhone pictures has it looking like a book or square purse. I dont have any Strutter books to look at the original picture that showed that aeroplane.

Seriously, that's one spectacular model and one seriously large biplane! Poeple just seem to be building them bigger and bigger every year. I remember when 1/4 scale was huge and what serious guys aspired to. Now everyone seems to want to do a 1/3 scale model. For example, BUSA has just announced their new 1/3 scale DVII. What's next 1/2 scale?

Personally I rather like 1/5 - 1/6 scale. I'm not sure most larger models actually have enough visible scale detail to make these larger scales work. I mean at even 1/4 scale you should be able to see the nail heads used to attach the ply plates on the Albatros fuse. In short you need to model to the scale to which you have documented funk! Nothing looks worse that a big scale model with a few markings breaking up large expanses of undetailed surface.

Personally I like Andy and Donnie's attitude of thinking of these models as canvases to be painted on -- even if the painting takes a few liberties to achieve an artistically emotive scale effect.

I plan to practice this skill on both the Flair Legionaire and Puppeteer. I like your idea of doing a wash with thinned stain. I might even experiment with this on the silver solartex to try to impart some impression of character to it. That perfectly opaque silver is unrelentingly dull. I plan to seriously dirty it up along structural lines. I'm intregued by Donnie's technique of using only Humbrol enamals for the markings AND weathering!

I'm like you in the size of model issue. 1/3rd scale is full of logistic problems due to size. I prefer 1/5 & 1/4th scale which you can get lots of detail on.
If you plan on competing to win then you are very limited in aeroplane choice. I am not interested in conforming my modeling to rules other than my own although I give full admiration to the gents that go that route.
The really good artists have documented a lot of their techniques on different forums and displayed their talents for us all to see. I really like Dietz's paintings at the Aerodrome.com, Mark Millers art at wwi-models.org, Andy Hutton articles in the old Brit sccale magazines, Donny W & other artest's at RCscalebuilder.com. Lots to learn from these gents!

I think it's a camera. Note the observer in the plane leaning over the other side apparently photoing something.


Don't hear any of you arguing that the plane should be over all doped aluminum VS CDL!

tom

HeH, argue about colors?
I leave that to the "Experts"
PC10/12, Lozenge Camo,Nivo, actual unbleached linen[sm=drowning.gif]
Your opinion is as good as mine at this distance in time. Glad your here MajorTomski.

'
they look like dog tags.

Does anyone else remember a cartoon series on TV ? Dick Dasterdly and Mutley in "stop that pigeon" ?

I seem to recall the carrier pigeon had a pouch tied round his neck to carry the mail

Says Mutley "HeeeHeeeHeeeHeeee"

A classic! BTW, another entirely reasonable suggestions is that the chick is sporting a pair of binoculars.

BTW, another entirely reasonable suggestions is that the chick is sporting a pair of binoculars.