Rufus

Fantastic! Great work fellas!

Yeah; I'm getting: Parse error: syntax error, unexpected T_STRING in /var/www/vhosts/eurobricks.com/httpdocs/sieg/dex/lastrand.php on line 7

Usually there are at least three people celebrating their brithday every day, but today - not one! On a site with 11,000 members - and assuming say 10% actually declare their birthdays - I think this is quite remarkable. It's probably not that unlikely statistically, but I thought it was worth pointing out! Anyone hiding the fact that it's your birthday today - declare yourselves!

First time I've posted here... 'I never harmed an onion' This appeared about the same time as the Muppet glitch. No idea what it means. 'UCS Reviewer Magnifico' Given to me on getting the RA gold badge back in March. I'd had it a long time! I suspect WhiteFang.

Super review Cloney! I've never collected HP before but am seriously considering branching out with this new wave. The figures are amazing - and I much prefer the newer, more traditional faces to the splayed-out weird features of the older ones, especially old HinckleyHagrid. The hut itself is a little plain from the outside, but I like the little features inside. Strange that the PF light-up brick should be yellow, when orange ones exist - the PF brick in my Winter Toy Shop is definitely orange. Nice pumpkins! I could live without the big spider thing though.

I don't think anyone has made this point - the display stand has a single tile on which to place the UCS sticker - no more irritating STAMPs!

Makes perfect sense to me.

You guys. Always fooling around. Oh wait ...

Thanks for the entertaining and informative review Sieggy! I too didn't know how great the alternative models are. This set has been on my radar for a while but there's always been something more demanding of my cash. You might just have made it a must-buy! As regards the colour consistency: I've found yellow to be a particular offender here. My 6745 Propeller Power has two 2x4 bricks that seem a quite dirty shade of lemon yellow compared to the rest of the bricks which are more orangey. BTW I think you have the same picture twice! This one.

Often credited as the most famous World War I warplane, the Fokker Dr.I Dreidecker became renowned as the aircraft of German fighter ace Freiherr Manfred von Richthofen, in which he made his last twenty kills. The triplane was introduced in 1917 in response to the Allied Sopwith triplanes which were proving superior to the German fighters; triplanes have increased lift and a narrower wingspan, making them more manouevrable than biplanes, but were slower in level flight. The Dr.I itself was dogged with problems, including directional instability and wing failures, and with only 320 ever built (compared to over 5000 Sopwith Camels) its fame is perhaps a little surprising. Review: 10024 Red Baron Lego released their version of the Dreidecker in 2002, a year after the 3451 Sopwith Camel, which is perhaps its natural enemy. Although named 'Red Baron', it is worth noting that 'Red Baron' is the nickname of 'Baron' (a rough translation of Freiherr) von Richthofen, who used to paint his aircraft red, rather than the aircraft itself. Foreword All through this review, I will make reference to the 3451 Sopwith Camel. It would probably be better to read that review first: Official pic courtesy of Peeron Name: Red Baron Number: 10024 Theme: Sculptures Year: 2002 Pieces: 670 Minifigs: 0 Price: Originally £39.99 | US $50 Now Used $90 | MISB $225 Links Brickset ... Bricklink ... Peeron The Box Swooping through the fluffy clouds, the Red Baron plane dives to attack its enemies. Other than the name, number, and set itself, the box art is identical to that of the Camel; there is however a small 'choking hazard' warning - unusual in the UK - which makes me wonder whether this particular example was intended for the US. Considering I bought it from Shop@Home at the same time as the Camel, which doesn't feature the choking warning, this is a little odd. Note the piece count - nearly 100 pieces more than the Camel, for the same price - and the set number 10024. I presume the Camel (3451) preceded the introduction of 10000 'exclusive' sets, which also appeared in 2001. Some close-up shots of the set's various features grace the back. It's an improvement over the Camel here, but I still get the feeling Lego weren't going to go to town on this box as most purchases would have been online and by AFOLs of TFOLs. The Instructions The cover matches the box art. The instructions are easy to follow, with piece call-outs but no inventory, adverts or Win Gagne Gewinne. The final step is on the back page. Neither are we patronised with warnings not to sort the pieces on the back lawn. The right-hand page steps are pictured against an artified photograph of the Dr.I in silhouette, with a backgound that might be meant to be sepia but looks kinda pinkish. The left-hand page features a similar picture of a landed plane: Sadly, we are not given the plane's performance specifications like we were in the Camel's instructions, so I have done a bit of research and posted the same information here: Wing Area: 201 sq ft Empty weight: 895 lb Max weight: 1292 lb Engine Power: 110 hp Maximum speed: 115 mph at sea level Service ceiling: 20000 ft Endurance: 1 hr 30 mins The Sticker Sheet This decal sheet is mostly black and white; the smaller black and white Luftstreitkräfte crosses are intended to go over white areas on the fuselage and tail; for the latter this requires placing over multiple pieces. The larger crosses are placed onto tiled areas on the upper wings; they are the right size to match with white pieces at the front and rear. You might just be able to make out in the picture above (click for a high-res picture) that the larger crosses are split to allow placing over the step in the upper wing. The Parts There's a whole heap of red plates in this set, although there aren't so many unique pieces. The six red 'Tiles 6 x 16 with Studs on 3 Edges' are unique to this set in this colour; the many red and brown wishbone arms appear in one other set each. The smaller pieces aren't too exciting: There are a large number of technic pins, but their use isn't too taxing on the thumbs. Note the four printed tiles (one is spare) - we'll see their use later. The Build Engine We start with the engine block. The build process is rather similar to that of the Camel, at least initially. Half-pins and ball joints are placed strategically into Technic beams; these will secure the undercarriage. The block is built up with bricks ... ... and the engine core is added via a Technic axle. Some 2x4x2 grey blocks with side studs hint at some SNOT technique to come. The engine core is identical to that of the Camel: Megaphones are placed in a sandwich of brown belt wheels; secured at the bottom with stud pins. Now, the undercarriage is attached, in a manner identical to the Camel's. This is the fiddliest part of the build on this set: it's a squeeze to place the steering arms onto the ball joints at either end. It is, however, a very effective technique, and surprisingly rigid with the cross-beams. I also like the use of steering wheels with radar dishes to recreate the solid wheels on these early aircraft. You can see also the series of three mini-radar dishes that represent the cylinders of the rotary engine. True to life, the whole engine spins on the crankshaft. If you look closely at the right-hand picture above, you'll notice the axles at the base of the undercarriage protrude from the rear half-bushes. This is to allow the attachment of a 'table' onto the undercarriage: The engine cowling is wider than that of the Camel, enclosed at the top but not the bottom. This is attached, SNOT, to grey stud-pins on the engine block; the two grey stud-pins on top of the cowling connect with a 4x4 mostly-tile plate at the top: Some SNOT wedges bulk out the sides of the engine, and the propeller is added, and the engine section is complete. Base & Tail Next we build the base of the aircraft. This is mostly brick-on-brick. The blue cylinders you see will be hidden in the final model; note the Technic angle at the rear, the use of which we'll see in due course. At the rear is a cone piece attached via an axle to a 1x2 axle-hole brick. I'm not quite sure why it's there; perhaps to hold the fuselage sides apart, though I'm not sure it's entirely necessary. You can also see the seat base, made from window panes on jumper plates, and the 1x8 plates with side ridge that will slide into the engine block. The fuselage sides are walls of brick and plate angled with hinge bricks. Two strings with stud ends will attach to the rear elevators, and represent control cables. At the rear, there is a 2x2 studded area, and a 1x2 Technic brick for attaching the tailplane ... ... which are built thus: You can see some hinges there. We'll revisit them later. The tail fin is attached solely via the black hinge pin into the 1x2 Technic brick mentioned above. It's not nearly as flimsy as you might think. Now the plane starts to take shape. The tail and base are joined, and the lowest wing completed. The last is embellished with ridges consisting of 1x6 tiles and 1x4 plates; the plates aren't connected underneath, sitting only on the tiled area of one of the large 'mostly tile' plates. If you compare this to a similar stage on the Camel build, you might agree with me that the Baron looks a little stubby and toyish at this juncture. It's got a wider body, and a shorter wingspan. Things will improve. Cockpit & Wings Now follows my favourite part of the build. The cockpit front is a vey well-designed subsection, with macaroni pieces providing a nice curve, and rounded parts adding a smooth contour to the front of the fuselage. These pieces are an imaginative way of recreating the gun barrels. The Technic beams at the sides will secure the centre wings ... ... which, like the bottom and top wings, are nicely shaped and have the brick and plate ridges at regular intervals: Note the 1x2 holes toward the outboard edge of the wings. These will accommodate the brown struts (right-hand picture) that interconnect the wings. This is a lovely use of wishbone pieces; the brown is a great surrogate for wood. I could imagine these might be useful in shipbuilding or steampunk MOCs. It's a bit of a struggle to thread them through! You can see why they're called wishbone pieces in this picture of the underside of the top wing: The rearward panels are hinged; these, true to the real plane, are the ailerons, which are only present on the top wing. Putting the sections together It's all done bar the shouting. The wings are attached to the fuselage; the top wing is only connected via the wishbone pieces, but it's very strong. We just have to slide on the engine block. The grey 1x8 plates with ridges ... ... slide into the grey grooved bricks visible here. If you've read the Camel review, you may be struck by the similarity in the build order and details, even down to the sliding mechanism for the engine blocks. It's as if the designer was so happy with his blueprint for the Camel, he thought he'd apply it again. I'm sure, if allowed to continue, we'd have a whole squadron of propeller fighters! The Complete Set Here's the complete beauty in all her scarletty goodness: She's more curvaceous than sleek, and quite tall with that third wing. From this front view, you can see how the wings differ in length: shortest at the bottom, widest at the top, true to the real thing. As I mentioned above, the top wing is secured only with the four pylons of wishbone pieces. I'm not so sure about those 'eyes' at the front; they look a little cartoony, but they are indeed authentic - at least on this replica. From the side, her chunkiness is very obvious - the taper towards the rear is far more pronounced than on the sleeker Camel. Also from the side, you can see the footplate which is a little 'stuck on', being attached only with one of these, and the minifig shovel that the tail drags on. She looks particularly imposing from this rear-oblique view: The wings look huge! Overall, I'd say this plane is built on a slightly larger scale than Camel; you can see on the reference picture below how the real thing is actually quite slight and delicate: Ok, this is a replica: unfortunately, no original Dr.Is survive. The decals, however, are accurate, as you can see in this photoshopped version: Only the tail stickers here are STAMPs (STickers Across Multiple Pieces), but I still couldn't bring myself to apply them. From beneath, the grey hinges that hold the rear elevators are apparent. The underside is a little flat and uninteresting. I'm not sure what the little brown minifig spears are doing there, and I couldn't find a reference picture, but given the attention to detail in this set, I'm sure they're not put there wantonly. The enormity of the upper wing, and the huge expanse of red (which I agree is crying out for the decals to applied!) dominates this view from above ... ... but I'd like to draw your attention to the neat lines of the fuselage and tail, and the smooth curves of the wing edges. Features Unlike the Camel, the Baron is packed with little working features. The ailerons - located on the upper wing only, true to the real thing - both tilt on hinges beneath. A nice design feature is that the little black pronged sticks also move with the ailerons. Sadly, they only tilt downwards. Likewise, the rear elevators tilt, but only downwards. Doing so slackens the control cables (the black strings) in the reverse of what you'd expect. The black prongs here are for decoration only. The whole tailfin moves from side to side, to act as a rudder. Overall, these features are a lovely touch. As I've mentioned, the whole tail rests on a single brown minifig spade: I'm a little worried about this. Though the feature is correct - taildraggers in those days didn't have a tailwheel - there is a lot of weight resting on the spade, and mine has already bent somewhat. If the model is displayed for a time, I'd recommend removing the spade: the clearance behind is small, and it doesn't much change the angle the plane rests at. The Baron's cockpit is beautifully laid out: The control stick and seat have the same design as the Camel's; however, the shape of the cockpit opening is nicer; the inside is roomier; and if you look closely you can see two dark grey slopes either side of the yellow brick that represent rudder pedels. There are also a number of gauges: I'm amused to see that you apparently need a Citroen car key to start this plane! Enfin, another shot of the engine and undercarriage. Note again that, true to life, the whole rotary engine spins - cylinders and all. On the right is another look at the smoothly curved engine canopy, with its realistic machine guns, and the attachment points for the wishbone struts. Conclusion & Scores Engine starts, propeller spins, and the German equivalent of 'Chocks away!' Off to shoot down those pesky Brits! Again, the surprising thing about these wonderful WWI replicas is not their incredible beauty and accuracy, but that they were made at all. Lego has traditionally shied away from the machinery and personnel of real war, but perhaps WWI is long enough ago that these are unlikely to cause much upset. Alternatively, perhaps we should view these as a tribute to the brave airmen and their aircraft, pioneering man's venture into the skies in the uncharted frontierland of the early days of flight - a view that is upheld by Lego's release in 2003 - the centenary of powered flight - of the first one to go there, the Wright Flyer. On the Baron itself: she's a beautifully crafted rendition of what some say is the most famous fighter of WWI. Lego have built upon the fantastic blueprint of the Camel, and now included some nice working features which make this a useful educational tool as well as an attractive display set. She's fun and interesting to put together, though if you've built the Camel first you might find the process a little too similar. I've you've strong arms you can even reenact countless dogfights over the scarred and debris-strewn landscape of the bedroom Western Front! Design: 10 Superbly recreated. I cannot think of anything I would have done differently. Build: 8 Some great SNOTwork, and despite the large amount of RED, the piece shapes are varied enough to keep it interesting. I would recommend sorting first, however! There are a few tricky bits and it's worth taking your time over this one. Parts: 7 This isn't quite the treasure-trove of rare parts that is the Camel, and there certainly isn't the colour variety. There probably won't be much call for large mostly-tiled plates for MOCcing. Playability: 9 It's meant for display, but you can swoosh it around (though it's a little more nose-heavy than the Camel, which is nicely balanced) and move the control surfaces (if only down!) Price: 10 This seems like a bargain looking back - nearly a hundred pieces more than the Camel, for the same price (if I remember correctly). If you're a plane fan like me, it's well worth getting hold of a set. Overall: 88%. I give it 10/10. A wonderful tribute to a pioneering WWI fighter, superbly recreated in Lego, and a great talking point for the shelf. I hope you enjoyed the review! Please leave your thoughts and comments Rufus Resources My Brickshelf Folder AcePilots.com for general information about the Fokker Dr.I Wikipedia for general information FokkerDrI.com for Specifications Bonus! - Which is your favourite of between the Baron and the Camel? Vote for your favourite of the two sets. Both are realistic sets of a similar size, though the Baron has slightly more pieces. The Baron is curvier where the Camel is sleek, and has working control surfaces; the Camel is more colourful and has nicer balance for swooshing; in addition it has a much more interesting parts selection. If you haven't read the Camel review yet, now's a good time!

Introduced to the front line of the First World War in July 1917, the Sopwith Camel F.1 is probably the most well-known biplane fighter in history. Over 5,700 Camels were produced, the majority in service with the Royal Flying Corps, the forerunner of the Royal Air Force, and were responsible for 1,294 victories – more than any other fighter in World War I. It was powered by a 130 horsepower Clerget Rotary engine, and fitted with two Vickers machine guns; these were coupled to a synchronisation gear to allow firing through the propeller arc. This machinery, fitted to the upper surface between engine and cockpit, gives rise to the distinctive ‘hump’ that inspired the biplane’s name. Review: 3451 Sopwith Camel It is unusual to see a warplane rendered in Lego. Lego’s version of the Camel was the first of a series of three aircraft ‘sculptures’ released at the start of the decade. Its natural enemy – the 10024 Red Baron – followed a year later; in 2003, released to celebrate the centenary of powered flight, came the 10124 Wright Flyer. As a sculpture set aimed primarily at adults, we can expect detail and accuracy; read on to see how well the set compares to the real thing. Official picture courtesy of Bricklink. In this official picture, you get a nice idea of the overall set. Note the slackness in the strings between the wings on this model - we'll look at the strings in more detail during the review. Set Information Name: Sopwith Camel Number: 3451 Theme: Sculptures Year: 2001 - 2003 Pieces: 577 Minifigures: 0 Price: Originally GB £39.99 | US $50. You can buy a boxed secondhand set for around £60. Links Brickset ... Bricklink ... Peeron The Box The relatively sparse box features the set against a blue sky with a few clouds. Whoever put this set together did a better job than on the Brickset picture: the strings are taut. Unusually for the time, the piece count is featured; this set is recommended for ages 12 and up. Measuring W380 x H285 x D70 mm, it is identical in size (and design) to that of the Red Baron. I'm not so keen on the choice of font - it looks a little too futuristic for a historic set. The back: Just imagine ... ... they'd spent more time on the box art. Just three views of the set here, against badly photoshopped 'clouds'. They might have added some close-ups of the little details. Instructions Surprisingly, the instructions artwork is totally different to the box, and in my view much nicer. Each page features the drawn model against a faint photograph of the real thing, and some schematics of the plane with dimensions and features. I also prefer the 'stencil' font to that used on the box, and the colour scheme is more military. I bought this in 2003; I wonder if the set was originally released with a box to match the instructions, which was then changed to match the Baron; however, I haven't been able to find any evidence of this. This page demonstrates one of the problems with the instructions: yes, colour differentiation causes problems again, this time between old grey and dark grey, shown here on the engine block. However, there aren't many places where parts can get confused. Note the schematics visible behind the drawing: This is a lovely touch. The same is present on all right-hand pages. The dimensions are: Height 8ft 6 ins; Length 18ft 9 ins; Span 28ft. That's the real plane, not the model! The left hand pages feature a plan view schematic, and the Camel's vital statistics: The statistics are: Anyone for a game of Top Trumps ? The Sticker Sheet At face value, this is a delightfully colourful decal sheet. Mine has withstood the passage of time rather well. The large RAF roundels have been split in two to allow easier placement over the large flat wing tiles. The tail sticker features the set number cunningly disguised as the aircraft designation; the large '1' and smaller 'c' will be explained later, along with one of the major gripes with this set. Click the picture above for a high-resolution version; or head to PICSL for a scan of the decal sheet. The Parts Looking first at the larger parts, we see a very colourful selection, with old brown, old dark grey, tan and red forming the main colour scheme. The set is a hive of rare and unique parts (mainly the brown ones): 30357 3x3 plate with corner round 30503 4x4 plate without corner 3705 Technic axle 4L 3707 Technic axle 8L (one other set) 32293 Technic steering link 9L (one other set) x136 Technic wishbone suspension arm (one other set) 6205 6x16 Tile with studs on three sides 6180 4x6 Tile with studs on three sides 6179 4x4 tile with studs on edge 3933 & 3934 Wing pieces Among the smaller parts are a number of technic pins, which is only to be expected for such an intricate set. Note again the variety of colours, particularly among the 2x1 plates (bottom left). Note also the strings with studs at either end: these may be familiar to many as the Luke-danglers from the recent Star Wars AT-AT sets; here you get to see them fulfilling their intended purpose. 'Old brown' was replaced in 2004; presumably to allow for the two shades of 'Brown' and 'Dark Brown'. Here is the original colour (left) compared to its successor (this piece from the Sandcrawler). The newer colour isn't much lighter than the old, but it is significantly redder. The Build For a set aimed at AFOLs, you might expect the build to be interesting and technically challenging, perhaps requiring a degree of patience. On the whole, however, this set is fun to build: the process is smooth with minimal repetition, though some areas are tricky and the instructions aren't always easy to follow. We start with the engine block. At its core is a 4x6 technic frame; under this sit some half-pins and ball joints. The position of the ball joints is important, as we shall see. At the front are two stud pins in 1x1 axle-hole bricks that will help hold the engine cowling; nowadays of course they would have used these. The second picture shows the core of the rotary engine - a nice use of megaphones! The core is a little fiddly to build - you have to ensure the axle holes line up. The engine core is mounted via a technic axle onto the block, and the Camel's 'hump' is built up. The shot from the back (left) demonstrates the 1x4 bricks with groove that form the mechanism for attaching the rear of the plane. The second shot, from the front, shows the finished 'hump' with the machine guns mounted, and the two forward struts that attach the top wing. Next up, we attach the undercarriage, and here things get a little tricky. Two wishbone pieces fix the axle to the aforementioned half-pins, and a steering arm forms a brace between the grey ball joints on the axle mounts and the black ones on the engine block. Pushing the steering arms onto the pins takes care and patience. The process is repeated at the front. There isn't much room between the wishbone struts and the steering arms; mounting the second steering arm is a headache! The finished undercarriage is remarkably sturdy. The wheels themselves are formed neatly from a steering wheel and a radar dish, giving an authentic look of a solid wheel. There is a little gap between the wheel rim and the dish; you can remove one of the two 1x1 round plates that separate them, but then the studs don't marry properly - probably an 'illegal' technique. Finally, lots of little radar dishes form the cylinders, and the cowling and propeller are added. True to real rotary engines, the whole engine spins on the crackshaft; though if you haven't taken care in the construction the cylinders have a tendency to snag on the cowling. Now we move onto the tail. Firstly, the base is built upwards. This is mainly brick on brick: At the front, you can see the two black 1x8 plates with rail that will slide into the grooves on the engine block, and the bricks with pins that will attach it securely. The unsightly red cylinders will be well hidden in the final model; they are there to support the top of the fuselage. The base of the cockpit is also taking shape: the seat is made from two brown window pieces attached via jumper plates; the joystick is one of these: The tan technic beams - attached at the moment only via string - get in the way a little. It's best to stick them temporarily onto the nascent wings. The tail itself consists of two walls of dark grey that taper with hinges in a manner reminiscent if the UCS (and later System) X-Wing's nose. We start with the rear: There's a little anomaly here: the white and dark grey 2x2 bricks with pins each attach to a blue 1x2 technic brick. I can see no structural advantage to this over using three simple 2x2 bricks in white, blue, and dark grey. Here we see the tapering walls. Note the strings that simulate the control cables for the elevators, and the jumper plates that will attach the tail fin. On the underside, plates are used to 'step' the walls upwards toward the rear. A 2x2 plate with towball is all that the rear of this taildragger plane will rest on when on the ground - we're before the days of tail wheels. The tail is attached to the base, and finally the plane starts to take shape: The 'roof' of the fuselage is built from a few roof tiles and supported by long bricks; these will sit atop the red cylinders visible in the picture above. The two dark grey roof tiles are attached at there bases by only one stud, but are held in place from above by plates. You don't notice this potential weakness on the finished set. We're getting there. The lower wings are completed, and the outboard wing struts are added, so finally the cables are stretched: You can see a 'ring' of brown around the cockpit that is meant to represent the padded cockpit rim. It might have been better done in black. Now we build the tail fin, and parts of the centre wing struts. The tail is nicely shaped; look at the rear: this is one of the few sets I've seen where a 2x1x1 curved brick is placed inside a 3x2x1 curved brick - showing how well these pieces are designed. The fin would look nicer with the stickers applied; more on that story later. The grey jumper plates on the wing struts are necessary for attaching the top wing - they sit at a slight offset. When first put into position, the cables from these struts are slack: This is solved by placing the black studded end of the sting one stud further back on the technic beam. In this shot you can also see the minor greebling at the front of the cockpit - binoculars and grille tiles. The top wing is a bilayer of plates, with centre cut-out authentic to the real thing. You'll get to see the top later. Lastly, the engine block is slid onto the plates with rails, and the forward struts marry up to the centre supports. What is not clear from the instructions is exactly where to attach these centre supports on the top wing; it can take a bit of fiddling around to get it right, so long as the outboard supports are attached first. The Complete Set And there we have it, the greatest fighter biplane rendered in Lego. Looks good, doesn't she? I like the use of mostly-tile plates to give the wings a smooth finish (and allow the placement of decals). From the front, we can see the genius of design that produces the accurate-looking wing cables, and how, unlike in the hastily built Bricklink picture we saw at the start, I have made them taut (mostly because I've built it correctly. If you have time on your hands, compare my version to the Bricklink version to spot the error.) There is however a deficiency in the design. Notice how the lower wings are parallel to the upper. Now compare to this picture of the real plane: The real Camel's lower wing has a pronounced dihedral - upward angle between the wings. This might have been quite easy to recreate, and is certainly moddable. Notice also that the aluminium engine cowling is enclosed, unlike Lego's fence-piece version, and there are no cross-braces to the undercarriage (though in Lego these are necessary for rigidity). Apart from these points, Lego's version is a pretty accurate representation, if perhaps a little longer: Here you can see the Camel dragging its tail, and you get a nice view of the tailplane. Sadly, despite the cables, and unlike her 'rival' the Red Baron, she doesn't have working rudder or elevators (or ailerons, for that matter). The tailfin is nicely shaped, and looks great with decals applied. From the side, the forward-slanting wing struts are apparent. You might notice the grey footplate in the side of the fuselage, another accurate detail. The large and smaller white panels on the side look a little incongruous without the decals, but they are accurate, as we shall see. A closer look at the cockpit, shows it to be a little cramped, at least in comparison to the Red Baron's. It's nice to see an instrument panel, but this one would be more at home in a sports car! There's not much to say about the underside - it's a little flat: The bottom of the fuselage looks 'open', but the effect is hardly noticeable, even if you plan to 'display' one of these by hanging from the ceiling. You might notice that the rear cables of mine aren't quite taut; it is possible to correct this by moving the rear end in and back by half a stud. A close-up of the undercarriage: The brown struts look so like wood, and the design so realistic, that it's almost a pity there aren't the crossed bracing struts on the real plane. This is a masterpiece; exactly the same technique is used on the Baron. Here's the Baron herself for comparison: Actually, this isn't the best shot for comparison - the taller Baron overshadows the longer, sleeker Camel and it doesn't really do her justice. Camel Stamps There's a good reason why I haven't applied the decals to my Camel. Look again at Bricklink's badly built example: This is one of the major drawbacks to this set. Take a look at the tail fin, the '1', the 'c' and the roundel on the side of the fuselage. These are all STickers Across Multiple Pieces - apply them, and you can never break the set without destroying the stickers. If you check out the Eurobricks Glossary, you'll see that this very set is the epitome, the archvillain, the very definition of STAMPs! Ok, I'm exaggerating (and it's worth noting that the wing roundels are not STAMPs, being separated over the two plates), but it's such a shame that having to cover many pieces will deter many from applying them, as I'm sure you'll agree they look fantastic. I hope that one day Lego will produce waterslide transfer decals - like you find in Airfix and Revell model kits - which are thin enough to allow brick separation after the decals have been applied. The following picture, of Canadian fighter ace Major William George Barker's Camel, shows how the decal designer got it right: This may well be the reference model the designer used. The markings match those of No. 28 Squadron; the '1' is the plane's designation (later replaced with a letter), and the 'C' means that this plane was the flight commander. While we're at it, you can again compare the general shape of the model: the tail, while not perfect, is pretty good; the colour scheme is as good as can be done - the brownish tint of 'old' dark grey is pretty close to the camouflage green of the real plane (I'll ignore the red engine block; some Camels were painted red and white chequers); even the footplate is authentic. Great job Lego! Conclusion This is an unusual set in many ways. Firstly, it is clearly aimed at adults; in 2001 we were right at the beginning of the AFOL era with very few sets before this having been targeted solely at the adult market (the SW UCS X-Wing and Tie Interceptor spring to mind). Secondly, whilst Lego have produced an uncountable number of aircraft based on their own designs, this - and the two that followed - are to my knowledge the only 'scupltures' of aircraft that have been produced. (Ok, so there's the Boeing Dreamliner, but that's a Licensed set). Perhaps the most intriguing point is that the Sopwith Camel is, and always has been, a military aircraft. Traditionally, Lego have shied away from all things military, at least where real vehicles are involved; fighting is ok in mediaeval, Star Wars or Indiana Jones sets (and for the last, Russians are ok but not Nazis ), but heaven forbid they produce anything that might remind people of a real war. Perhaps the First World War is far enough ago to be safe? After all, this is no different in principle to a Lego rendition of a Spitfire or Messerschmitt (and how I'd love to see that!). Whatever you feel about the philosophy, I do hope you'll agree that this is a fine set. Sure, there are design inaccuracies, and the STAMPs problem is a major flaw, but the overall impression is instantly recognisable as the finest fighter biplane. Design: 9 Superbly rendered in Lego, the fighter is as true to the original design as possible, even without the impressive decals. I've docked a point for the lack of dihedral on the lower wing, which could have been fixed; short of producing waterslide transfer decals, I don't see how the STAMPs problem could be overcome. The undercarriage design is superb . Build: 10 It's interesting, with minimal repetition; though fiddly in parts, I'd consider this merely challenging as befits an adult-orientated set. The final result is very rewarding. Parts: 9 There's a good selection of parts, in many colours; if you're after rare parts in Old Brown then this is the set for you. Playability: 8 This is a set meant for display. Nevertheless, it is very swooshable, and the landing gear enable you to re-enact a few dodgy rookie-pilot take-offs and landings! If you have the Baron, a bedroom dogfight awaits! Price: 10 Even at today's secondhand prices, the Camel represents good value. The 577 pieces are mostly quite large, and often rare; I'm sure in a price-to-weight analysis it won't be found wanting. If it were still available for £40, it would be a no-brainer. Overall: 92%. I give it 10/10. This is a superb, and underrated, AFOL set that should appeal to any fans of aircraft. If you come across a copy in reasonable condition, buy it - you won't be disappointed. I hope you enjoyed the review. As ever, comments and criticisms are most welcome Rufus References: Aviation-History.com for statistics and general information History in Illustration at cbrnp.com for WG Barker and 28 Sqn Sopwith Camel on Wikipedia My Brickshelf Folder, with high-resolution images Now you've read this, head over to the read the Red Baron review - including a chance to vote for your favourite of the two sets: The Red Baron

Happy Birthday Etzel! Have a great day! And to KDog, and the rest... and a special mention to 'Wobo lhi', who apparently is 99 today

Some superb entries. My favourites, 1 point each: 11) Jungle Explorer Entry (Build by Diidy) 22) Vampire Entry (Build by lisqr) 32) Vampire Entry (Build by Cecilie)

Wow, so many great entries, it's really tough to choose. My favourites, 1 point each: 8) Robot & Jungle Explorer Entry (Build by lisqr) - superbly conceived and executed. 10) Robot & Jungle Explorer Entry (Build by Darkblane) - beautiful clean lines and tiling. 19) Skater Boy & Spartan Entry (Build by Etzel) - fantastic design and great technique on the architecture.

Thanks for the top-notch review, Oky! It's great to see such an in-depth analysis and comparison. I love this ship - kinda funky and retro. It's what I'd imagine would happen if SAAB made spaceships. I hadn't thought there was much wrong with the old Lego one, but now I can see the new one is much more like the real thing (and of course Grievous is a great improvement). I haven't got this one yet, so I can't compare, but I liked the clicky-slidy cockpit on the old one - a great technique.

Super review of a super set! Nicely done, as ever, Cloney! Like you I can't really find a criticism of this set - so packed full of charm, and gorgeous figures . I've never bought a Harry Potter set before, but I've been thinking about starting, and having seen your review I now know where to begin. Edit: I've no idea what Felix Felicis is - some Happy spell? - but I voted for it!

Superb! I too am in awe of the cheese slope windows, but the overall look is fantastic. If there's one criticism it's that there are are few antistuds from the bottom of a plate poking through the gaps in the first shot, but it's a very minor point.

Impressive MOC, Jipay. It must have been hard work placing all those floor tiles. This looks like it could be the bottom floor of a 'modular tomb' - perhaps this could be a new line for TLC exclusives?

It's a nice idea, but not one that I'd really want to pay for.

Happy Birthday, Stash! Hope you have a great day.

Nice! I love seeing alternative models from sets. It appeals to my obsessive-compulsive never-mix-sets nature! It's also good seeing a rather humdrum (but underrated) Creator set getting a bit of limelight. Your N1 engines look a bit small, but it's a difficult set to much with, and the overall shape is immediately recognisable. Interesting technique with the 1x6 plate at the rear!

Work permitting, I'll be there, and hopefully Mrs R too.

Heard them on the radio the other day; I meant to and buy the CD but forgot all about it. Thanks for reminding me!

Cool - Ringmaster, thanks! I've already expressed my appreciation for the contest, but no harm in repeating. Thanks to the organisers, this was great fun - I looked forward to the next clue every day. Can't wait for the next one!

Fantastic contest - great fun! Kudos and thanks to WhiteFang and Siegfried and the other unnamed organisers! I managed to get most without any trouble, though I had to resort to Google for the weightlifter. The Spartan gave me the most trouble: though I knew to look in the Action Figures forum, it seemed to be that the 'closest Lego set to a Spartan action figure' would be one of these guys: But neither has a review. The actual set it was (eventually) found in didn't look that much like a Spartan to me. Still, it would have been no fun if they'd all been easy. I like the idea of the next mystery hunt having more 'involved' clues.