You said: >As for how the scale model would fall - difficult, depends for a start on what the model was made of.<
That is quite correct, but I would recommend that anyone interested go further and consider the feather's shape and probable function as well. Make a habit of examining any discarded feather you find, trying to guess what part of the bird it came from, and seeing how it behaves when dropped. There are drastic differences in the behaviour of say flight feathers, tail feathers, down feathers and contour feathers. In fact, feather morphology is a startlingly complex and intriguing field of study.
Of course, considering feather behaviour in the absence of the bird is in some ways as artificial as considering bird behaviour in the absence of feathers. A roast chicken for example, whatever its other attractions, is in many ways a misleading object of study of ornithology. So is an egg.
Then again, I cannot vouch for the accuracy or verity of the story, but I read (in New Scientist? Not sure; it was years ago) of, I think it was Nancy Mitford's family, who bought a live goose for Xmas during the food rationing days of WWII. Apparently they were too squeamish to kill it in the traditional manner by beheading, so they (ugh!) strangled the poor creature, then plucked it (a seriously challenging job with geese, trust me!) By then it was pretty late, so they put the carcase in the fridge for more detailed attention the next morning, where they were horrified to find it cold, but conscious and functional when they opened the fridge...
Apparently they could not face the obvious alternative, and seeing that it was after all winter, and a cold one at that, knitted it a sort of cardigan to see it through till the feathers grew back. It remained a member of the family for years till it died of old age. (I doubt that they ate it even then!)
