In article ,
"Peter Dohm" wrote:


Clearly, however, if a "full size" copy of one of the smaller aircraft was
built, then the larger craft must be the "model"...

Just my 2¢

Peter

Joshua Lionel Cowen, of Lionel Trains fame, was a master of marketing
euphemisms. Shortly after the turn of the century (uh, not *this*
century) when all toy train makers used their own track sizes, he named
his "Standard Gauge." It became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Still, I think the most audacious thing he did was to refer to the 1:1
scale engines (real trains) as "prototypes" for his models. Uh, toys.

Nevertheless, in that hobby, "model railroaders" take great pains to
distinguish themselves and their equipment from the "toy trains" that
Lionel and others manufactured. Lionel did put out some semi-scale stuff
of exceptional quality before the second big war, but most of his stuff
was always just a rough approximation, proportionally speaking. And then
that damn third rail just never did look right, although it sure makes
sense from an engineering standpoint.

This *is* RAH, right? SInce we're flying our butts around in big TOYS,
my ego isn't compromised by the idea of calling the little ones TOYS
either, regardless of their sophistication.