Subject: SMML25/12/98VOL405 Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 00:06:27 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Season Greetings 2: Re: Revell Factory Display Models 3: Re: Navy Log 4: Re: Inclining Article 5: Re: Revell factory display models 6: Re: Titanic Exhibit 7: Re: Navy log 8: USS Hornet 9: Re: Navy Log 10: Re: Revell Factory Displays 11: Response- The Naming of HMS Hood 12: Re: French ship kits 13: Sea-Line Kits (and a request or two for Lester Abbey) 14: Re: HMS Hood 15: Email problems -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: Alberto Rada Subject: Season Greetings I propose a toast To all the members of the list That have shared your wisdom and your humor and the kindness of your hearts Enjoy these wonderful days in the company of your loved ones, and all the very best for the year to come SALUDOS Stella, Michelle and Alberto -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: Rick Lundin Subject: Re: Revell Factory Display Models I seem to remember that Revell did indeed have a shop at its factory that did nothing but make models for store display. This shop was staffed entirely by women because their smaller fingers and greater patience were thought to be more efficient at model building. The display models at my local supermarket certainly proved that they were a lot better than I. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: Ives100@aol.com Subject: Re: Navy Log >> I also seem to remember that the beginning or end of the show included film footage of a GUPPY surfacing at something like 60 degrees from the horizontal! << I think that may have been the opening to another '50's show, The Silent Service, produced by Thomas Dykers, WWII skipper of the submarine Jack. The show was about submarine exploits in the Pacific during WWII. The SubCommittee is presently trying to 'liberate" episodes of this show from NBC. We know they still exist, as episodes are shown at the Bowfin Museum in Pearl Harbor. We are presently writing letters to NBC to see if we can get them onto video tape. BTW, the submarine coming out at a steep angle was the USS Pickerel, a Guppy class conversion of a late Tench class diesel. The steep angle was possible because of the increased battery power and (16 knots submerged) speed of a Guppy streamlining conversion. WWII subs usually battled surfaced at 10-12 degree angles at most, with top speeds of 8-9 knots submerged. Paul Schratz, at the time CO of Pickerel, got into a "steep angle" competition with some other skippers. He once surfaced her at a 72 degree angle. Loose items fell 2-3 compartments vertically. The powers that be then issued a directive about surfacing at excessive angles. Tom Dougherty -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: WVeigele@aol.com Subject: Re: Inclining Article Evert Jan Foeth, I am anxious to see the article and will be happy to test it for you. Again I must say that what you are attempting is a great service to many persons, not only ship modellers. Bill Veigele -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: CaptainOD@aol.com Subject: Re: Revell factory display models Per John Burch about Revell ships in 1954 era in the Washington, DC area, he is not alone in remembering them. My father was stationed temporarly at the Pentagon and we lived in the Silver spring area. There was a hobby shop there were I got some of my first model kits of plastic. I remember seeing a beautiful USS Sullivans which I remembered as being described as sprayed (airbrush?). I bought a Sullivans which I took home (and I thought their PT boat also) and painted with my father's artist oils and some lacquer paint in the garage. Needless to say the ship was a mess and nowhere as nice as the display. I also remember this because my mother in her wisdom cleaned the paint off of me with "paint remover" not paint thinner which added to my recollections of this Revell ship. Maybe we were both at the same hobby shop or they were Revell display models, I don't know, but the quality of that display lead me to finally acquire an airbrush so that I could duplicate it. Bob O'Donovan -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: louellet@uism.bu.edu Subject: Re: Titanic Exhibit Bob Steinbrunn wrote: >> ... This store is associated with the "TITANIC - The Exhibition" display in St. Paul (Minnesota, U.S.A.) at the Union Depot which runs from 1 January 99 through 30 April 99. Of the many recovered artifacts on display is a 20 ton section of the bow. (!!) Interested ship modelers desiring further information can write: << Bob, the 'Big Piece' on display is a section of outside bulkhead of an unoccupied 1st (or 2nd) class passenger stateroom that was located in the section of the ship that disintegrated when she broke apart. The exhibitors have a side profile drawing of the ship with location of the hull piece marked. It is in the white section of the hull, or where it transitions from white to black. I believe the bow and stern wreckage only makes up around 2/3 of the entire ship. The rest is in thousands of pieces of many sizes on the ocean floor. This piece was found in that large debris field between the bow and stern. The hull fragment is approximately 26 feet by 30 feet. I saw (and touched) the piece when it was display here in Boston. The Boston display had the piece held up in a custom steel framework with sacrificial annodes attached and nozzles spraying some kind of water & preservative solution on it. There was only a wood post and rope line fence around it and nobody was preventing anyone from touching the hull piece. It was interesting to be able to see the overlapping plates, the rows of rivits, and especially the edges where the rivit holes show the tears in the steel from when this piece seperated from from the ship. The Saint Paul exhibit will have the hull fragment immersed in a pool of preservative, so it will be harder to see and immpossible to touch. They (RMS Titanic, Inc.) say the big piece will resemble the lifeboat davit on display once it is fully preserved. The lifeboat davit has a hard, dull black look due to the chemical preservatives used. The davit was the only artifact exhibited that was not in a display case, with the exception of the steam whistles mounted around 10 feet off the floor. The davit was displayed on a bed of sand and situated so that one end of it was only inches away from the wood and rope fence surrounding it. I just had to touch it (this was before seeing the 'big piece' at the end of the tour.) All the other items are in display cases. There is even one of the bitts on display and it is severely corroded. It is displayed is a sealed case filled with nitrogen to help prevent further decay. I thought the exhibit was worth the price, but I've been interested in the Titanic since I was a kid. The exhibit would be better if it had more artifacts on display. Larry Ouellette Quincy, Massachusetts, USA Volunteer, USS Salem (CA 139) U. S. Naval & Shipbuilding Museum http://www.uss-salem.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: CaptainOD@aol.com Subject: Re: Navy log I also remember Navy Log. It was shown overseas at base theaters on Weekends, sort of a baby-sitting series of television shows to those of us who were stationed in places where TV didn't exist. All day Saturday, they would show up to 5 or 6 episodes of current TV shows at the movie theater for all of us dependents so that we would at least have an idea of what "normal" families e.g. non-military were watching back in the States. We also got the show "Silent Service, and the Big Picture (USA)". Now does anybody remember a show called Crunch and Des about Florida Sport Fishermen and their Chris Craft boat? Bob O'Donovan -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: CHRIS DRAGE Subject: USS Hornet HI SMMeLies, Merry Christmas to you all and again a special thanks to Shane for keeping the list going so well since Greg's departure. Question from a friend of mine who's modelling USS Hornet at the time of the Doolittle Raid. What was her deck colour at that time? What paint mixes would anyone recommend to achieve the correct colour(s). Also what were her deck markings? Can anyone recommemd a good reference for Hornet at this time in her service? Hope everyone brings in the new year in the traditional fashion without the customary hangovers......if you can remember it you obviously didn't have a good time! Regards, Chris He tao rakau e taea te karo, tena he tao kupa kaore e taea te karo.... (Te reo Maori) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: "mkrumrey" Subject: Re: Navy Log Thanks to all who responded to my querry about the TV Show "Navy Log". Your responses cleared some cobwebs, and jogged my memory. Thanks for your response and thanks for the links to other sites. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year Mark Krumrey -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: louellet@uism.bu.edu Subject: Re: Revell Factory Displays John Burch wrote: >> What had occurred to me was that, at the time, I had seen what I believe were factory built kits by Revell displayed at a hobby shop and a large pharmacy/retail store. Colors and finish at the two different locations were identical. The kits were of the four ship models Revell then marketed; the FDR, the MISSOURI; the BALTIMORE; and THE SULLIVANS. All four ships were fully painted with what I now think would have been an airbrush. My questions are: does anyone else, around at that time, remember seeing such professionally made Revell ship models? Were they, in fact, factory built kits, and if so, did Revell have a team of builders assembling and painting display models for their retailers? << I don't remember seeing any factory displays when I started modeling (late 1960's early 1970's). From what I've heard, they were indeed made by Revell or under contract with Revell. >> What might have become of such display models? << Like most promotional material, some were probably thrown out in the trash, some returned to Revell, some sold or given to customers, and some went home with the shop owners. A few months back a bunch of Revell ship model displays with up at action on eBay, but they went for much more than I can afford (many in the hundreds of dollars). Happy Holidays to all. Larry Ouellette Quincy, Massachusetts, USA Volunteer, USS Salem (CA 139) U. S. Naval & Shipbuilding Museum http://www.uss-salem.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: Allen Frank Cont Subject: Response- The Naming of HMS Hood "Hood" is the name of a distinguished British seagoing family. Battlecruiser HMS Hood was actually the fourth ship to be named in honor of the Hood Family. As for the actual family, the most famous & most prominent members were from the mid-late 1700's. I'll cover each one briefly below: The first great Hood was Samuel Hood (1724- 1816) of Thorncombe,Dorset, UK. He joined the Royal Navy as a midshipman in 1740. His postings weren't exactly flashy, but whatever job he was given was done very well. So well in fact, that he progressed through the ranks quite rapidly: By 1756 (at the young age of 32) he had made it up through the ranks to Captain. After distinguished service during the "Insurrection of the American Colonies," he was promoted to Admiral. He further distinguished himself in action against the French during the 1780s & 1790's. For his service, he was made Baron Hood of Catherington (Ireland) by King George III. He retired to Bath in 1795. He was ultimately made "Viscount Hood of Whitley". He lived to the ripe old age of 92. The second great Hood was Samuel's brother Alexander (1726-1814). Alexander joined the Royal Navy around the same time as Samuel (1740). He too rose through the ranks quite rapidly. He ultimately made Admiral too (at the same time as Samuel). Alexander ultimately became Lord Howe's second in command. Alexander too was honored with a title- Baron Bridport. Because of his repeated successful performances as a fierce fighting Captain and Admiral, Alexander was placed in charge of the Channel Fleet in 1795. He retired from service in 1800. He died of old age at the age of 88. There were another pair of famous naval Hood brothers, also named (believe it or not) Samuel & Alexander. Their exact relationship to the first Samuel & Alexander is not known to me...I've heard that they may have been first or second cousins. Of these brothers, Alexander was the first to join the Royal Navy (midshipman in 1767). During this time, Alexander actually served under the first Samuel Hood (who was a Captain at this point). Alexander had an interesting career. He even got to participate in one of Capt Cook's around the world voyages. He ultimately made Fleet-Captain (under the now Admiral Sir Samuel Hood) and served with distinction in both the West Indies and Channel Fleets. In 1780 he was killed in action during a heated battle with a French warship. The second Samuel Hood joined the Royal Navy as a midshipman in 1776. He rose rapidly through the ranks thanks in part to his performance during the American Revolutionary War. He ultimately became a post Captain in 1791. During the 1790's he fought numerous battles against the French in both the Mediterranean and West Indies. He was even seriously wounded- he lost his right arm in 1805 during battle with the French off Rochefort. He made Admiral in 1807 and served in the Baltic and East Indies. His life was cut short by sickness and he died on 24 Dec 1814. There have been other Hoods (i.e., Adm Sir Horace Hood of Jutland), but none have topped the success of the two Samuels & Alexanders. If you're interested in battlecruiser HMS Hood, please stop by my web site- "The HMS Hood On-line Resource" at: http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Workshop/2966/ http://www.hmshood.com Sorry for the novel! If anyone has comments or questions, they can reach me at the following e-mail address: AllenFW2@aol.com Frank Allen Colorado Springs, CO, USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: MDeskin@aol.com Subject: Re: French ship kits >> I saw in a shop here in Paris three Heller kits I thought were out of production: Bismark, Tirpitz & Indomitable (or was it Illustrious?) (It was Illustrious: Shane) I think the first two might be recent re-isssues (they have the typical artwork on the box), but the Britich CV is clearly a survivor of a previous batch. << Could you tell me what kits are available for the French naval warships from the world war one, and two era???? Mikey -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: YHSAIO@aol.com Subject: Sea-Line Kits (and a request or two for Lester Abbey) Somebody asked about the quallity of Sea-Line kits. I have their Long Beach. The kit is more or less of a craftsman kit in that all the major components are provided, but completion requires four (I believe) Skywave weapons sets. Guess what? Only one of the needed weapons sets is still available, and in a different form. The molding is not Skywave/Hi-Mold, but then how many manufacturers are? The lines and details are generally accurate, but be sure to do a lot of scratchbuilding and scrounging from the spares box. Here's a request for Lester Abbey. Since you have a Midas touch when it comes to crummy kits being upgraded and you were kind enough to respond to my post, here's another kit you may consider working on: Revell's Hipper/Prinz Eugen/Bluecher, which is another pile of plastic dung (maybe I should copyright that phrase). It's been released as Hipper, which is incorrect because the bow shape is only correct for Bluecher/Prinz Eugen, and the hangar arrangement is correct only for Bluecher and Hipper. The 37 mm AA guns molded on the decks are an abomination, and what are those four triple hot dogs molded on the deck? Could they be Marders being stowed on deck (just being sarcastic). And those nasty portholes, which look like life preserverers glued to the side of the hull. I suppose AA guns and torpedo tubes can be taken from Tamiya's Scharnhorst, but it would be easier if somebody actually released a new kit. Of course the Revell kit could represent Luetzow as she appeared prior to her sale to the Soviets (that wouldn't take much effort, and it could make an interesting conversation piece). And could you also work on the Fujimi Missouri/Iowa/New Jersey and the Hasegawa Essex while you're at it? Also, a 1/700 Sumner/Gearing with a correctly shaped hull would be nice. Well, have a Merry Christmas and hope that everyone out in SMMLland gets the ship they wished for, although a 1/350 Yamato may be hard to fit inside a Christmas stocking:-). Yunchi Hsaio -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: "Douglas Martin" Subject: Re: HMS Hood Shane: Are you sure about Hood being named after Rear Admiral Hood of theInvincible? That must be a first for the UK naming a ship after a recently deceased R/Admiral, of only a couple of months? The names for the 'Admiral' class Battlecruisers were selected on 14/07/1916, being 'Anson', 'Hood', 'Howe' and 'Rodney', and for David's benefit, do these names mean anything? Douglas (Not bothering too much with a ten foot barge pole.........) Hi Douglas, Hey, it was Christmas eve & I didn't phrase it quite right :-). My quote should have read something along the lines of "named in honour of the Hood family who have given centuries of service to the RN, the latest being Rear Admiral Hood, who died on the Invincible at Jutland. Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: Joseph Divar Subject: Email problems Hi gang, I decided to leave Joe's message in it's entirety for a couple of reasons, one is so that if anyone can help Joe, they know the full problem. It's probably best to contact Joe off list, it'll help him faster. The other reason is to clear up some misunderstandings about how SMML is run. This is not an automatic list like Majordomo, Listserv etc, You email copies either to Greg or myself & we cut & paste the emails into one big email & send it out once a day. So no one is responsible for the "offending text" except maybe myself. So please, no comments about the "sarcastic part". Hope you all are having/had a wonderful Christmas Shane Dear SMML members, After much agony, toil and frustration; I still have not been able to fix an email problem caused by a SMML newsletter mailed on or about the 18th of December. Using the POP3 mail server through CServe I keep getting stuck on the 4th message whose subject line is "SMML?/12/98/Vol???". I don't have the exact date because it immediately corrupts the server (posting a new dialog box and covering up the subject window) and times it out. Are any other SMML subscribers having/had this problem. At the moment my mail is being taken here at this address and not my POP3 extension. I'm still stuck as CServe will not delete the message from my inbox at their end (privacy act stuff with the password and whatnot), unfortunately their suggestion (teleneting) is not working for me either. So here I am without access to my email. Suggestions are greatly appreciated . To the sarcastic part of this message, to the individual who generated this message, "..thanks". You've made my holiday vacation very memorable and wasteful. Once I do find who generated the offending text, "..the ship runs aground and is taken out of...", I make sure to filter that address out. I would not want to have to unsubcribe to SMML though. Sincerely, Joe Divar From: Joseph Divar Shane, Thanks for replying. I can't tell you which issue because with my reader it just displays the first few characters of the subject line, and what I can read just says SMML...... I'm just inferring since it happened a week from this Friday is that it was around the 18th. PLEASE do not send it again. My second piece of supporting evidence is when I go to the error message box, it displays some code lingo and then quotes the offending "line of code". That line reads (and I paraphrase), ".. and the ship runs aground rendering it out of commision=.." or something to that effect. From this I'm inferring that it's something in that line that's corrupting my server's ability to send/finish this message. I spent about two hours (on my own bill) with MicroSoft going through the code and error messages generated by Outlook Express and they found the codes all correspond to something in "that email" is causing the problem. The same codes appear of numerous archived cases on their databanks. In each case "if" I could just delete the email from my server "before" it downloads it, the problem will be fixed. Using Outlook, I can't do that, it dowloads the entire message and then lets me read it offline after the download. The solution, telnet to the site and delete the message without downloading it first. But I can't do that after attempting three different methods. I'm utilizing my 110055.3477@compuserve.com address now versus my POP mail account, jnmdivar@csi. The mailing list won't be affected since you're already sending the mail to the former account and I had my mail forwarded to the later account automatically. The former account is what I'm corresponding to you on right now. The POP mail account is still locked out to me until I solve the problem. The mail in that account still grows daily as I am unable to get past "the message". Merry Christmas, Joe D. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume