Martyn Briggs

Thanks very much for your quick reply, Don, but I think you might be referring to the interplane struts. What I meant were the centre section struts, often referred to as cabane struts (though strictly this is incorrect to be pedantic). From photographs of several build logs these seem to be bent up from aluminium alloy strip, like the similar ones on a DB Barnstormer. It's crucial that they are the right size, because they will determine the incidence of the top wing. These are the strut dimensions I need - and I can't make out from photos if they are shown full size on Puppeteer "plans".

Hi, I've bought one of the few remaining Puppeteer short "kits", to make later ( can't start immediately, household building work going on at the moment). It seems to be a bargain, and I look forward to its arrival soon. I notice though that the short kit does not include centre section struts, and I don't think the plans, such as they are, show them at full size. I think they are different lengths/ heights too. Has anybody got some that they have salvaged from a crashed Puppeteer, or at least a full size drawing? I'm happy to pay. Edited By Martyn Briggs on 26/02/2019 10:25:23

I am but a humble aviation nerd, but I seem to understand that some much respected model flyers here are perhaps under the impression that a naval Nimrod is the same aircraft basically as a Fury. It's a different aircraft entirely - different span, much larger wing area, despite looking similar. You can't build a half accurate scale Nimrod from a Fury plan. Furthermore there were no two seat Nimrods with a rear gunner: the Hart/Hind variations were a very different aircraft again. There is, of course, a strong family resemblance between Hawker biplanes with RR Kestrel engines, but Furies in all their interesting Spanish, Yugoslav, Persian, Norwegian and different High Speed variants were all still just Furies.

I got them all too - because I own those little square "Fighters" volumes of "Warplanes of WW2" by William Green, which have read for years and years and am a super nerd. In fact I am such a nerd that I can explain why question 10 looks nothing like a Mitsubishi A5M3. It's because it's not. In fact it's a very poor artists impression of a Boeing P26, taken from a hilariously inaccurate and overconfident WW2 aircraft film for U.S. forces claiming to provide identification details for a Japanese army AND navy fighter called a"Type 96" (navy) and"Type 97" (army) - confusion between an A5M3 and a Ki 27? The horrible P26 drawing appears early in the film as the aircraft the Japanese were "copying"! Some good old American "alternative facts" here, I fancy. The film is on YouTube as"Identification of Aircraft Japanese Fighters 96 and 97" - 11.25 minutes of pure gold rubbish.

How about Kamco Kadet and Kamco Kavalier? Plans for both are available and are quite inexpensive. Both are easy to build and fly brilliantly, and there's a choice for your level of experience: complete beginner or club sports flyer level. Both would be suitable for nostalgia events without being vintage. Older modellers will remember them with affection and new models will enjoy making their acquaintance. They also have the advantage of being reasonably compact (56" and 54" span), and use economical size engines (25 and 40) or are easily adapted for electric motors. If I knew how I would post pictures!.