[RKic]

Hello folks,

Having looked at their site, and read several reviews, I'm somewhat interested in purchasing a Wingnut Wings kit. The problem is that I have never (successfully) built a biplane before. To be honest, I've only tried it once, many years ago.

Those kits aren't cheap, and I don't want to get myself into a project I won't complete, so my question is which would be a good one to start with? I'm particularly concerned about the rigging.


My favorite biplane of all time is the RE 8, but that one looks like it might be harder to rig for a biplane newbie

[Miccara]

RKic, on 28 April 2011 - 08:58 PM, said:

Hello folks,

Having looked at their site, and read several reviews, I'm somewhat interested in purchasing a Wingnut Wings kit. The problem is that I have never (successfully) built a biplane before. To be honest, I've only tried it once, many years ago.

Those kits aren't cheap, and I don't want to get myself into a project I won't complete, so my question is which would be a good one to start with? I'm particularly concerned about the rigging.


My favorite biplane of all time is the RE 8, but that one looks like it might be harder to rig for a biplane newbie

i just finished my first ever biplane a few weeks ago. It was the Wingnut Wings Albatros. I had never done rigging either. It's not that bad they are EXCELLENT kits. I ordered "Bob's Buckles" and that made the rigging easier (and they're pretty cheap). Go for it... you wont regret a WW kit!

[MoFo]

There's a few ways to look at it

First and foremost, the difficulty of bipes is largely overstated. Back in the day, when you were looking at vac form kits where you had to scratch your own strutting and stuff? Yeah, lots of room for disaster. Now that they're mainstream, engineered kits? Not an issue.

Added to that, the Wingnuts kits I have are all cleanly moulded, well engineered and fit pretty much flawlessly. Think: Tamiya. So in terms of *construction*, yeah, there's a slight added wrinkle of lining up the struts and adding the top wing, but pretty much any intermediate or better modeller should be able to do it.

Rigging is also overblown. You may need to try a technique or two to find the method you're most comfortable with, but that goes for pretty much anything - liquid glue vs. ca; acrylics vs. enamels; Polly Scale vs. Gunze; bondo vs. mr. surfacer; lower wing to fuselage vs. completed wing to fuselage, etc. Some people like monofilament, others like elastic, others still prefer wire. There's pros and cons to each, but the basic technique is pretty much the same no matter what you use: drill pilot holes, then glue your lines. Basically, the only 'issue' with rigging is that it will take some time to drill all your holes. Half an hour of mindless work in front of a TV and you're done. On more complicated aircraft it can be a bit of a spaghetti factory once you start installing your rigging lines, but as with most things you've just got to test fit and double check before you commit to glue - if you're using monofilament, for instance, run all your lines through the lower wing and pull them snug(ish) to make sure they're in the right holes, and nothing's twisted, snagged or wrapped.

Basically there's a couple of new techniques involved, so there *is* a bit of a learning process, but they aren't particularly difficult to master and the WNW kits are among the best places to start.

---

Which kit is kind of up to you. The Albatros and Pfalz *will* be the easiest mix of struts and rigging - German planes have simpler rigging, and the N/V strut layout means you've got less to glue, and less chance of misalignment. The Pup and Re8 are probably the two easiest RFC planes - individual struts (meaning more parts to line up) and twinned rigging lines (more holes to drill and easier to get mixed up) - but they're still single bay and fairly straightforward. The Roland, LVG and DH.9 would be next (two-bay, individual struts so more alignment and rigging; not harder, just more). I'd probably avoid the Gotha and Brisfit until you're more comfortable: the Gotha because of its size, and the the Brisfit because of the complexity of the struts (plus: both have a bunch of rigging). I'm ignoring the W.29 and Junkers because of their lack of rigging.

So if you want to start out on a lower rung, go with one of the German fighters. Or cheaper still, get a 1/48 Eduard Albatros or Pfalz (or Nieuport) - even a weekend kit - since you'll get the same experience with struts and rigging. On the other hand, if those subjects don't do anything for you, you probably won't enjoy the build much and that can sour the whole experience. In which case, go for the Re8. It may be a little bit more challenging, but your interest and enthusiasm should compensate for that. Then again, since it WILL involve some new techniques, there will be a bit of a learning curve, and your first bipe probably won't look as good as your umpteenth prop or jet. So if you love, love, love a subject and want to produce a masterpiece, you may want to get some practice under your belt. It just depends what you like to get out of the hobby.

[Dave Williams]

I would consider starting with one of the kits that don't require rigging, like the Junkers J.1 or the HB W.29. You can test out some techniques on the few control wires on the aircraft without having to worry about full blown rigging. Also, the W.29 is a monoplane, so you don't have to worry about aligning two wings, although the WW kits are pretty foolproof for getting things aligned right.

[RKic]

Good advice, all of it.

I'll probably forgo the monoplane, as it isn't particularly to my liking, I'll have a closer look at the German fighters though.

Still, RE 8 .... so tempting

[MoFo]

You could go the W/29 or Junkers route if you want to take baby steps, but IMO, it's a bit of a waste. Doing a monoplane won't really teach you anything new - there's no real difference between a W.29 and a WWII prop apart from the floats... and if you've done a WWII floatplane, there's none at all. The Junkers would be a bit better as it's multi-wing, but it's also got a couple of niggles construction-wise, the struts are actually trickier than an Alby/Pfalz, and you'd still be looking at something else to learn rigging. Might as well get them both out of the way on the same build. Particularly since neither multi-wings nor rigging are *hard*, they're just new techniques, so it really only takes a bit of practical experience to figure them out.

Again, if someone wants to ease their way into a WNW kit via a cheap and easy build, I'd go with an Eduard D.V, Pfalz or Nieuport. The Weekend kits can be found for $10, fit nicely, and will give your enough practical experience with struts and rigging to let you tackle most other subjects without being overwhelmingly difficult.

At the end of the day, though, it depends on the individual. If you're really nervous about multi-wings, by all means take the shallower slope. If you're "damn the torpedoes", then don't. If you dig the Junkers, start there. If you hate it, you're probably better off building something you're more interested in, even if it is a little more challenging.

[RKic]

Ok MoFo,

I took your advice and went searching through my stash for where I knew I had some kind of Eduard Biplane. Turns out I was correct. An Avia B.534

I hope it will be a good one to learn on. I also got some elastic thread.

So when would be a good stage in the construction sequence to begin fiddling with wires?

[MoFo]

The Avia will be slightly different as the rigging terminates in the fuselage, rather than through the wings, which in some ways makes it more difficult (at least, depending on your method).

Step 1 will be to decide which method to use. Wire is pretty easy - measure and cut to length, then fit in place - but adds no real structural strength. Elastic forgives handling and adds some tension, but it's a little tricky to install. Monofilament adds tension and rigidity to the model, but you need access to at least one end of the line, and will have to touch up the resulting holes - for WWI planes, access is easy, just drill through the lower wing (anchor into the upper wing, feed the line through the hole in the lower wing, CA, trim excess, sand and touch up); for something like the Avia, it's tougher, as you may be fishing lines through the fuselage (pull out the cockpit opening or spinner hole to tension). Or you could go with scale turnbuckles, which would be a decent option here.

(personally, I like using monofilament, but in this case, I'd lean towards wire, or buckles)

You can drill your pilot holes any time during construction. I tend to do it as a first step, to get it out of the way. If you're using turnbuckles, I'd attach them before painting. Paint the model *before* you attach the struts/upper wing. With turnbuckles, elastic or monofilament, I'd glue your lines to the (painted) upper wing first, then attach the upper wing to the aircraft and secure the lines at the bottom. With wire, you'll want to add the upper wing, then measure and install your wire lengths.

Nice build that also explains how to use buckles on this kit:
http://www.hyperscal...iiserierf_1.htm

[Cobrahistorian]

I've been reading with a great deal of enthusiasm here! I'm in the middle of my first biplane in fifteen years (Lindberg JN-4D with Lone Star cockpit) and the questions I've had about rigging have pretty much all been answered in this thread. I've got my pilot holes drilled in the fuselage and lower wing (will get to the upper wing and tail this afternoon), but I've been trying to figure out when to paint vs when to rig.

I'm going to be doing a Wingnut Wings Pfalz and a Hobbycraft SPAD fairly soon, and I'm really looking forward to the doing a Wingnut Wings kit after everything I've read.

[11bee]

Can't go wrong with WW, they rock. Check out the new releases:

http://www.hyperscal...itpreview_1.htm

I'm 60% of the way through an Albatros DVa and am on the fence regarding the next one. I like the Pfalz DIII, also like the looks of that seaplane (can't remember it's designation).

Wish they would release some 1/35th helo kits of the same quality, they really should be an example for the rest of the industry on how to do things right.

[RKic]

Thanks Mofo for all the help

[Gene K]

MoFo, on 30 April 2011 - 09:07 PM, said:

personally, I like using monofilament,...

Is there a particular size and brand you can recommend - for 1/72, 1/48, and 1/32?

Thanks,

Gene K

[The Artilleryman]

Thank God you model in the 21st century. I built all of the Airfix and Lindbergh 1/48 and the Revell, Frog, and Airfix 1/72 biplanes in the 60s & 70s with tube glue, pins, shims, templates and jigs. Back in the day superglue was unknown to me. Happy Building. Adios, Larry.

[MoFo]

Geez... been a while.

Sizes? I'm not massively specific - whatever looks right to my eye - it's more of a visual thing

For 1/48, I pretty much just use standard, sewing store invisible thread. It happens to be about .12mm, but I really just use it because it looks 'right'. I'll sometimes leave it unpainted, too; natural reflections off the clear line give a "silver" look, but it makes the lines look finer to the naked eye.
For 1/72, I tend to use some fine fly-fishing tippet (.1mm Orvis - 2.5lb test). Pretty much just went to a fly shop and looked for something I'd like in 1/72.
1/32, I use a mix of the invisible thread and some larger diameter fishing line (which I can't find ATM, so can't caliper) Wingnuts' instructions cite .15mm for rigging diameter, so you could go with that.

But then, I'll also mix things up, using heavier lines to depict larger diameter cables, or lighter lines if I need to make use of their flexibility.

[Graham T]

GO FOR IT! There was a build article in SAM a few months back of the WNW RE8 which inspired me to have a crack at a WNW kit. I ordered the DH9A Ninak from Hannants & the Re8 direct from WNW in NZ (I'm in the UK). I'm working my way through the Ninak & it's the best modelling fun I've had in years. I'd not built a biplane since I was a kit knocking together the Airfix range. I cut my teeth late last year with a Silver Wings Woodcock which has some pretty basic rigging so nothing too demanding. They (WNW)really are superb kits. Never tried a wood grain finish? No worries - an acrylic tamiya desert sand base,some burnt umber oil paint with a small piece of sponge & a little practice on a plastic sheet was all I needed before I felt ready for the real thing. Thge rigging matter does weigh heavily on my mind I must confess; I used nylon thread on the Woodcock with reasonable success but plan on using Eezee Line on the Ninak. The engineering of WNW is astounding plus the instructions are like a "walk around" of the real thing - lots of pics etc. They are high price - about £90 in the UK for the Ninak & Re8 but spread across the build period & I think it' good value (imagine spending £60 or so on a Hasegawa 1/48 Phantom that you can knock out in a couple of weeks & which would still need a shed load of AM to bring it up to a modern standard & the cost becomes relative). Still a long way to go with the Ninak, the Re8 awaits, plus I've just ordered a Bristol Fighter. May have to sell off my stash of jets!

[sinatra61]

RKic, on 28 April 2011 - 08:58 PM, said:

Hello folks,

Having looked at their site, and read several reviews, I'm somewhat interested in purchasing a Wingnut Wings kit. The problem is that I have never (successfully) built a biplane before. To be honest, I've only tried it once, many years ago.

Those kits aren't cheap, and I don't want to get myself into a project I won't complete, so my question is which would be a good one to start with? I'm particularly concerned about the rigging.


My favorite biplane of all time is the RE 8, but that one looks like it might be harder to rig for a biplane newbie

I know exactly what you mean!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[kinnies]

For what it's worth, I think that the Sopwith Pup is a great first WW kit to build. I would also strongly recommend looking at ww1aircraft.com. This site is truly a gold mine of information and tips, especially regarding rigging, detailing, shading etc.
John