1) Rowan; On Wylam's Drawings I met him once, way back in the 20th century, nice gentleman. You can still get the drawings from Model Airplane News (even scale sizes). I thought the Dolphin was one of his best. By the way, He told me, the early Aurora WWI aircraft were, dead-on matches to the drawings, as they were designed to the best drawings of the 1040s and 1950s and they consulted him. Even the Gotha was based off a Wylam drawing. 2)Wouldn't is be nice if ICM or one of the other figure makers come out with a set of SEATED pilot figures for us gentlepeople, who would like to "man up" their models. Airfix "God bless them" gives us pilots. (they may all look the same, but in WWI, both sides used or captured near identical flying outfits) Now with computer mold making (as with Airfix) making a good looking pilot, is much simpler and repeatable.) Enjoy Captn Tommy

Hi Tom It was the reprint of Wylam's drawings in Volume 1 of Model Airplane News's compilations that I consulted. I love his drawings - he was a true artist and they have a degree of "life" that's lacking from most modern scale plans I've seen. @ Piotr - Nice one! I think you're really going to love the kit! All the best Rowan

Hi Merlin Yes I start to like this kit! The biggest problem I think, is in horizontal stabilizer length. Each source/drawings show different size - Big mess I see here. When I copied Sopwith Camel factory drawings from RAF Museum, accidentally I make some drawings to the Sopwith Dolphin. Unfortunately I can't find these photocopies... Maybe someone known, what is exactly the stabilizer dimension?:| All the best Piotr

Hi Piotr Yes, I noted the discrepancy over the tailplane in the review. The kit matches the Wylam drawings well, but is way off the Datafile. If you ever do find your RAF Museum photocopies, you may be able to answer which plans to go by on that point. All the best Rowan

There is a possibility that both stab Dimensions are correct. I am searching some data I have (or going to as I am in work at lunch) to see if there are differences (maybe) between manufacturers or early and late production. Let you know either way. Captn Tommy Mistakes can happen, as long as Icebergs are not involved. – T.P. Anderson

Cheers Tom I'm a long way off tackling the tail in my build, but it'd be great to pin down. If needs be, I'll make a new one, Harry Woodman-style. All the best Rowan

CAVEAT EMPTOR !!! I eagerly awaited my premium edition of the Copper State Dolphin - It is not a cheap kit over here - I paid nearly $Au100 As avid scratch-builder in a modelling market (Australia) which is significantly more expensive than the UK Europe or the US, it's always a struggle to justify spending big on something small like this but the Reviews persuaded me it was worth it. When you do a bit of ground up scratch-building reliable plans are where you start, so more out of habit than any concern I eagerly snipped the fuselage halves off their sprue and laid the plastic over the Datafile plans. At that point my enthusiasm wilted very badly. When you lay the Copper State Dolphin fuselage down over the Datafile # 54 drawings (drawn by Ian Stair and Colin Owers) you will discover, (if you accpet the accuracy of the Datafile drawings and I do), that the Copper State fuselage is very significantly under-sized. It is far too narrow - fully 3.5 mm - through the cross sectional stations from the front engine mounts right through to the rear of the cockpit. Strangely but thankfully the wing panels, both as to width root to tip and rib spacing, are true to the plans. With that rude shock under my belt, I stated looking more closely I happen to have the Blue Max kit, the Wylam drawings, (which appeared in the old Air Age Publishing collection Scale Aircraft Drawings Vol 1 WW I ) plus the original 1/72 scale Drawings by Peter Gray (published in Aircraft Archive -Aircraft of WW I - Vol 1) as well While the new Copper State kit agrees with the Wylam drawings, it does not agree with either the Datafile or the Peter Gray drawings I do not have access to factory drawings but if its a battle between the accuracy of Wylam vs Peter Gray, Ian Stair and Colin Owers I will take any of the latter three over Wylam While the much maligned Blue Max Dolphin is a fraction too wide at 1.5 mm over-size through the above-mentioned cross-sectional stations, it is actually more accurate than it's far more modern cousin. The Blue Max edition is also far more easily fixed with some judicious sanding down - the fuselage top deck will be a bit more of a fiddle to fit but then it is already. The good people at Copper State would not be the first to have been lead down the garden path by a set of Wylam drawings - The inaccuracy of Wylam's (often very pretty and heavily detailed) drawings has been well known for years. A search of the net will reveal several threads dealing with this unhappy topic. The next question is whether the problem with the Copper State kit is fixable - The short answer is that it is, but it will require some old-fashioned cunning and real modelling skill. I sincerely regret to say that this is not quite the "project" I had in mind when I shelled out $100 bucks. With an "under-nourished" fuselage you will also find the kit supplied Hispano engine is undersized ( that shrinkage was necessary to ensure the prominent heads of the engine ended up in the right position to take the exhausts. Some of the cockpit fittings and fixtures will also need a close look to ensure

David, you have a keen eye for details.

Hi Steve I hope the post was not hyper-critical of Copper State I understand how they got sucked in but not why ... I also really hesitate to criticise anyone servicing the WW 1 aircraft modelling niche ... there are as you know so many subjects worthy of attention which we may never see unless we scratch-build ourselves or a manufacturer is prepared to bite the bullet, but this effort by Copper State is a real "clanger" Having said that I recently acquired their Caudron GIV and have to say that they seem to have done a much better job of that one ! David