Thanks Tom, Ian.

Those underside wing panel colors were used on some originals, Ian...but judging by the Profile Publication...not all.  I suppose it was a matter of quick recognition for trigger-happy ground personnel...since Austrian ac were also making frequent marauding raids on Italian installations.  Nothing quite as exciting as "friendly fire."

As for the struts...all struts were of streamlined steel tubing on the full-sized ac...so some manner of corrosion-protective paint was in order (as if there would be sufficient life for them to corrode through  ).  Besides...Italians are very artistic people! 

Thanks again, Gentlemen.

Neal

Very nice! I've always liked that aircraft!
Tom

TaDaaaaahhhhh...my version of a peanut Ansaldo SVA5...any more detail (what detail?) and she'll be in the official Chubby Category.  Loaded for bear...flying prop and rubber motor she weighs in at 19.54g (do you think that if I weigh her again tomorrow, some of the "humours" may have further dissipated...resulting in a lesser weight?   ).  I could remove a percentage of those Warren truss members...and maybe cut her legs off....seems to be too much of something, somewhere.  I would have liked it to come in at 15g.  It's probably all that dope n' stuff I sloped on...love that odor.   Ok...it is what it is.  Finis.  Maybe she'll inspire others to build her likeness...she's a cuttie in my eyes.

Next build has been concurrently underway...an Aviatik (Berg) D-1 (18"ws, which turns out to be a fairly large model since the original ac had a ws of a mere 26')...love that crazy hexagonal camouflage finish...and to boot, I've had an occasion to peruse a rare genuine example of the aircraft...albeit a few decades ago!   

Neal

There is no such thing as a FAT  airplane. It is designed that way to be different

Bob

Thanks, Ian...I think I'm gonna have a fat airplane. 

Neal

Yes...I just yawned myself....

Sure Ian...unbleached muslin...and maybe some other colors as well....

Let me ask you a question...what do you think is a manageable weight for a peanut biplane...to fly effectively that is?  There must be a rule-of-thumb concerning the matter.  I know that props vary from 4" to 6" and rubber from 1/16" to 1/8"...which sounds like whatever works...use it and call it good.  But...do you know when a peanut model has officially reached the FAT (heavy) category?    Now Ian...this is a serious question!

Neal

The activity on this website is nothing short of a veritable windstorm!  Maybe we should drive a stake into the ground next to the members here...just to verify any movement?  Or maybe we can see your trail in the dust...or not?

Ok...wings n' things...all that is an airplane.  Me thinks I'm ready for some skin on those bones.

Neal

Actually Bob, fuselage is of pretty standard construction...like a dimer...only difference is that as cross-members decrease in size on top...aft of the cockpit area...the bottom size decreases even more radically.  Trick is to build the forward section first...then pinch the bottom longerons together at the tail...eyeballing things to keep some degree of equal alignment.   As I stated earlier...it's that extreme V-shaped pinch of the lower longerons that really attracted me to this model.  It makes the entire empennage seem "delicate" in my mind...bird-like.

Fuselage had no internal bracing on the full-sized aircraft and with only minimal external structural rigging, ground crew must have loved it.  It was a sturdy little airplane with a powerful 220hp engine.

The entire fuselage of the full-sized aircraft was plywood covered...which would be fun to simulate in a larger rc-type build...could really lend itself to strong rapid construction...but that was a different lifetime for this modeler.

Thanks again Bob.

Neal