 | | Re: My favorite Adventurer sets
|
|
Joseph Gonzalez wrote (...) I have to disagree with you here, Joseph. The only thing I like about the Biwing Baron is the "rotary" engine ( a pity lego didn't make it actually rotate, though it's the work of only a minute or two to make it do so). (...) (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.adventurers, lugnet.reviews)
|
| |
| | Re: My favorite Adventurer sets
|
|
(...) --snip-- (...) That's a good point. I don't have both models in front of me right now but I remember that I didn't like the bulky wheels of the BB. My original adequate.com review of the BB also mentioned something about the tail dragging on (...) (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.adventurers)
|
| |
| | Re: My favorite Adventurer sets
|
|
If you really want to learn the comments of an aeronautical engineer (1), Both of them sucks separately. BB is much more realistic in terms of "real planes", though it really sucks with its lack of a lever, sloppy propeller connection and (...) (25 years ago, 22-Sep-99, to lugnet.adventurers)
|
| |
| | Re: My favorite Adventurer sets
|
|
(...) People keep saying this, along witht he comments about standing up to fire the rifles and such. Am I the only one that used a little imagination here and decided that the 'rifles' on the BB were an attempt at representing Gatling guns or other (...) (25 years ago, 24-Sep-99, to lugnet.adventurers)
|
| |
| | Re: My favorite Adventurer sets
|
|
(...) For the most part, I have to agree with you. Whether or not it's accurate doesn't really matter that much to me on a scale like this. They get the point across that the thing is a WWI style plane with guns. Maybe if you're an avionics expert (...) (25 years ago, 24-Sep-99, to lugnet.adventurers)
|
| |
| | Re: My favorite Adventurer sets
|
|
In lugnet.adventurers, David Eaton writes: {SNIP} (...) much (...) Being married to a WW-I aviation fan has its odd uses <grin>. The weapons were mounted above the wing in single-seat scouts (what we would call fighters) until Fokker invented the (...) (25 years ago, 24-Sep-99, to lugnet.adventurers)
|
| |
| | Re: My favorite Adventurer sets
|
|
(...) Some of the WW1 planes are "tail-draggers" On my LEGO models I add the LEGO piece thats looks like a 1x2 plate with two rods attached to either end. Lots easier on the tail : ) (...) you dont see the strings tied to the triggers? <grin> (...) (...) (25 years ago, 26-Sep-99, to lugnet.adventurers, lugnet.reviews)
|
| |
| | Re: My favorite Adventurer sets
|
|
(...) They mostly had at least a skid under the tail. I can't think of a plane that actually dragged the back end of the fusalage and the trailing edge of the tailplane along the ground like the BB does. Those WWI and earlier planes were so lightly (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.adventurers, lugnet.reviews)
|
| |
| | Re: My favorite Adventurer sets
|
|
(...) Yes , they did have a skid of some type. I put the term "tail draggers" in quotes because I think that was the nick name of the style of landing gear, as opposed to the tripod or "tricycle" style which has a wheel under the front nose and two (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.adventurers, lugnet.reviews)
|
| |
| | Re: My favorite Adventurer sets
|
|
(...) Yes, they are called Tail Draggers because it appears that they are dragging their tails, not because they actually do. Tail Draggers are harder to take off in, you have to do a series of S turns in order to actually see down the runway. And (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.adventurers, lugnet.reviews)
|
| |
| | Pontoon Plane vs. Biwing Baron (Re: My favorite Adventurer sets)
|
|
(...) Hi, Kevin. I originally gave a response here: (URL) I'll try to give some abbreviated comments again here. I guess my main gripe with the PP is that the two sets of wings are too close together (in my opinion the upper wings should be above (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.adventurers, lugnet.reviews)
|
| |
| | Re: Pontoon Plane vs. Biwing Baron (Re: My favorite Adventurer sets)
|
|
(...) Remove the pilot from the PP. Does it look better without the pilot? To me, pantoon plane is seriously undersized. Two engines just for a single-seat plane? The PP is a single seater, only for the same reason that all the semi rigs in Town are (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.adventurers)
|
| |
| | Re: Pontoon Plane vs. Biwing Baron (Re: My favorite Adventurer sets)
|
|
(...) Well, the P-38 Lightning from WWII was a twin engine single seat plane, so the concept isn't that far out there. Of course, that doesn't mean that the set isn't still undersized, but there is precedent. Adrian (URL) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.adventurers)
|
