Well Team, if I may call you Team,
The matter of airfoils has caused me much thought and introspection.
A little background here. I am pretty sure the subject of just what the word 'models' means has been discussed to infinitum on this and every modeling forum in the civilised world. While I am in awe of the stunningly fantastic mechanical replicas I see here, and elsewhere, I mself am of another pursuasion. That is I see models as an artistically idealised representation of the subject at hand. Keeping that in mind, we come back to airfoils.
For this aeroplane I intend to simply fold the top to the bottom surface and glue them together, inner surface to inner surface, incorporating the airfoil curvature in the gluing process. Yes I know this is not 'technically correct', but I like the looks of it, and I build the models to please me, not somebody else. Besides, 99.99% of the people who will look at my models wouldn't know a correct airfoil if it bit them in the nargus. They see the curvature of the top of the wing, and the concave of the bottom of the wing and get the correct impression of the thinness and fragility of these kites. As a side note, that's how I buil 1/48 vacuform aeroplanes, with single surface wings and tail planes. The effect is quite good. With the early birds, 'too thin' is always much better than 'too thick'.
So to sum it up, for me the impression of the salient points is more important than accurate fidelity to every detail. That's a 'model' to me.
This DH-2 will be mostly paper, with bamboo tempura skewers for booms, O rings for tires, spares box (Roden SE-5a) for the machine gun and propeller, and hopefully a Vector Gnome, if they ever get around to doing their Gnome in 1/32. All in all, things and techniques are not set in concrete, so it will change, as it always does.
Mike