Subject SMML09/01/99VOL420 Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 05:23:06 +1100 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Re: Jim Shirley Productions 2: Re: Moving from modelling in 1/350 to 1/700 3: WW2-Roal Navy Battleships 4: Re: scale rigging 5: Re: Askold kits 6: Re: Jim Shirley kit quality 7: Canadian Corvette Book 8: Monitor 9: Re: Z 33 & Black Friday 10: Tamiya Yamato 11: Re: Keith Butterley's rigging problems and other thoughts - 08 January 1999 12: Coastal Motor Torpedo Boat - WWI 13: Re: Z-33 and Black Friday 14: Re: PT boat colors: 15: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: roberto.paredes@cl.unisys.com Subject: Re: Jim Shirley Productions Hi Allan, Some time ago, I made the same question and, maybe JSP is out of business, because, in 1997 I frecuently contact with them by e-mail, but in 1998, I didn't receive any mail from them. By other hand, in many internet hobby shop the JSP kits are out of production. Good luck! Roberto. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: "FERNANDO, YOHAN" Subject: Re: Moving from modelling in 1/350 to 1/700 Lee, Unfortunately, there are no real great models of the Ark Royal in 1/700 (or 1/720). I'm assuming you are referring to the WWII ship. I built the Revell 1/720 Ark and it's okay- very sparce on details, but with photoetch and some kit bashing it could turn out pretty good. FYI Fujimi also makes a 1/700 Ark (post war- early 50's fit I believe) that again is okay. It has some serious fit problems with the deck and the hull. I can't comment on the Italieri kit. For the WWII Ark, I would recommend looking to White Ensign Models for Swordfish. The Revell kit only includes six Fulmars. Another source for the Swordfish would be an Aoshima Illustrious or Victorious kit, but they wouldn't look as good as WEM. WEM would also probably have the appropriate photo etch sets. As for scale differences between 1/700 and 1/720- you're taking about a 3% difference in size. Pretty unnoticable to most people. If you really want to get hooked with 1/700, you also might want to look at some other ships with better kits out there. Unfortunately, the Ark Royal has yet to get a decent representation of her in this scale. Good luck! Yohan Fernando -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: arne.rolstad@narvesen.no Subject: WW2-Roal Navy Battleships Battleships-question: Trying to build a collection of models (1/350-1/700) of the major ships (mainly British) participating in the Bismarck-affair in the North Atlantic of spring 1941. What is the best way (or what colors) to represent the deck plancking on f. inst. "Hood", "KGV", "Rodney", etc.? How is belt armour represented in a simple way? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: DKrakow105@aol.com Subject: Re: scale rigging >> Therfore all the judges are armour and aircraft types and they seem to like the tight lines. << Keith, You are putting the cart before the horse. Reproduce exactly what you see in your reference materials and damn the judges. Dave Krakow -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: "FERNANDO, YOHAN" Subject: Re: Askold kits An observation- The Askold kits from WEM and WSW are definately an esoteric subject and welcome to people interested in that period. (I'm not one of there people, but nevertheless...) But if I was interested in an area that was not very popular, and two manufacturers decided to make a kit for that period, wouldn't it have been better to have two DIFFERENT ships modelled instead of the same ship done TWICE? I know that this is probably a coincidence, but is there something special about the Askold that made it the subject of choice for that time period for two different companies? It seems that there are so many other ships that could have been chosen considering the current selection in any scale for the pre-Dreadnaught period is well...lacking. If I was one of those people interested in pre-Dreadnaughts, I would be pretty upset. Just a thought. Yohan Fernando -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: Jim Shirley kit quality >> I'm considering a project using a kit from Jim Shirley Productions and would like to know if anyone out there has any experience with this manufacturer, product quality wise. I've replaced masts with brass rod and have placed photo etched accessories as needed, but I get the feeling from published kit reviews that with this manufacturer, more work (kit bashing) may be necessary when completing one of these kits. << I have a couple of Jim Shirley kits one of which I have built. I built the 1/700 FRAM Gearing class DD. The overall casting quality of the kit was pretty good and the model was really accurate. The bulkheads lacked detail and the hatches were visible but the details didn't show very well. The instructions were abysmal. Unclear, hard to decipher and one photo in my instructions showed a Sumner FRAM which was different from my kit. The part mentioned installed differently depending on which model you are building. Obviously, they just combined the two. One other thing you need to know. Although priced like it, you get almost no photo etch with the kit. The PE I got was for the radar, tripod mast, and a few other small items. It came with rails/helipad supports but they don't give you enough to do the model. No rails, ladders, bow rails, helopad nets etc. I was able to use a Flagship Models Knox class frigate set for all this stuff. No decals. Once the model was done it looks pretty neat. My personal opinion for what that's worth, is that the kits are somewhat overpriced. I wouldn't have any problem with the kit if it came with a complete full PE set. I could then swallow the price (as I recall almost $40.00 including tax) a little easier. I thought about getting one of his Oriskany carrier kits but after inspecting one I noticed I would have to come up with all those safety nets which don't resemble any currently available. Check out my article in the current issue of Navismagazine.com about building this kit. In short, JS produces some pretty good models but they lack a lot of the small things such as complete PE. They also must do something about the instructions. JS kits should be attempted by modelers with some experience building these kits. This was my experience a couple of years back. Maybe they have fixed those problems. I hope so because JS does some stuff that no one else does. Rusty White Flagship Models Inc. http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: "Kim Tomlinson" Subject: Canadian Corvette Book Some time ago I obtained some camouflage information which was in the form of photocopies, I have lost contact with the person who sent the original information, and all I know is the information came from a Canadian Corvette book. The pages I have are APPENDIX V, pages 89-91 and include a chart on page 91 Does any one know the title, aurthor and ISBN number? K Tomlinson. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: "Leverett L. Preble" Subject: Monitor This summer I visited Esquimalt, the Canadian Naval Base on Victoria Island. They have a 4 foot long hand built model of one of the British monitors. It mounted 2-15 inch guns AND it had the single 18 inch gun mounted to one side. I spoke to some people there and no one seemed to know much about the model. As it was a British ship they seemed to be less interested. The model really was exceptional, great detail. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: jmaine@golden.net Subject: Re: Z 33 & Black Friday Kyrre, OK, got it! I was thinking "Black Friday" referred to the ship (Z 33) but you were thinking of 404 Squadron RCAF, the "Buffaloes" (as a Canadian I guess I should be a little red-faced about missing this one). For the enlightenment of other SMMLies who may not know about "Black Friday", 11 Beaufighters of 404 Sq., joined by similar aircraft from 144 and 489 Sq.'s, and escorted by the Mustang fighters of 65 Sq., set out on Feb. 9, 1945 to destroy Z 33 as she was lying in the Forde fjord. Z 33 was moored close under a cliff and protected by flak ships and shore A.A. As the aircraft came out of the target area (having hit four ships but not Z 33), they were "bounced" by FW 190's of 9 and 12/JG 5 (the "Eismeer" fighter wing). Nine Beaufighters in all were shot down and of these six belonged to 404 Sq. which had thus lost half its strength in a few minutes (404 claimed one enemy fighter shot down and one damaged). Thereafter, Feb. 9, 1945 was known in the Squadron and throughout the Coastal Strike Wings as "Black Friday". However, 404 Sq., whose motto is "Ready to Fight", was soon back in action, scoring several successes in Norwegian and German waters, (this time flying Mosquitoes), including U-2359, a Type XXIII boat. The Z 33 survived the war to become the Russian "Provorny". John Maine -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: "Percy, John" Subject: Tamiya Yamato Recently Tamiya released an updated 1/700 Yamato. One of the improvements (I think) was a narrower bow (more correct). My question is this: did the 1/350 Tamiya Yamato have the same error (bow to broad) or is it more correct than the 1/700 used to be? John Percy -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: "Kenneth H. Goldman" Subject: Re: Keith Butterley's rigging problems and other thoughts - 08 January 1999 I have found that fine nylon monofilament mending thread works best to achieve taut rigging. It can be colored before using by pressing it to a coffee can lid with an appropriate colored permanent marker and then drawing the thread past the marker. Affix with CA. After the opposing lines are rigged, plug in a small soldering iron, move the heated tip near the sagging lines, and, presto! they shrink tight. Be careful not to touch the lines or you'll have to get out the debonder and start again. Occasionally, I've had a line go slack again after a day and have had to reapply heat. Only rarely was it necessary to replace a recalcetrant line. On projects that require cotton rigging, I first wet the line and then tie it it a weight and stretch it until dry before I use it. That usually prevents it from relaxing into a sag after you've carefully pulled everything tight. If it does say, a light brushing with water and a quick dry with a hair blower will shrink it back taut. Generally, I add a wetting agent to the water for better penetration. This can be liquid soap or detergent, Jet Dry (or other diswasher non-spotting agent), or I'll even use Microscale's Microsol decal softening solution by ityself. Regarding the judging question, you might want to display a photograph of your subject that shows less-than-taut rigging and call attention to it. As for the rigging itself, it is much easier to get a uniform look to scale rigging if everything is tight than to accurately represent the effect of gravity on the rigging. In that respect, tight is usually better, although I've put models into competition that were rigged both ways. Ken Goldman THE WALRUS AND THE CARPENTER http://www.wman.com/~khgold/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: "Kenneth H. Goldman" Subject: Coastal Motor Torpedo Boat - WWI First off, let me thank all of you who responded to my question on making rivets. I will experiment with the suggestions individually and in appropriate combination and report back on the results. Meanwhile, I want to finish another project, which brings me to today's question. I am building the T.C. Models 40' CMB, which, among its problems, is sorely lacking in detail for a 1:48 scale kit. Does anyone know what the controls arrangement looks like? The casting only gives an attachment pint for the wheel and shows two undefined gauges atop the small, plain housing. I'd also like any info on the appearance and mounting of the torpedo aiming device and on any deck mooring harware. Finally, was the grating on the cockpit deck cross hatched or simply a series of athwarts parallel strips? Thanks in advance. Ken Goldman THE WALRUS AND THE CARPENTER http://www.wman.com/~khgold/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: John Clements Subject: Re: Z-33 and Black Friday Kyrre, Thanks for explaining Black Friday. As Z33 spent most of her war in Norway, it would seem likely that her armament was as commissioned. This is given in both Lenton 'German Surface Warships vol 1' and an article in Warship magazine No2 as being 5 150cm (as she was not completed until Feb 1943, she did not carry the single gun forward), 4 37mm, and 16 20mm (2x4, 2x2, 4x1). The Heller kit will give you the two quads, but only two singles, so the rest will have to be made up. She also carried a second radar set in place of the large searchlight by the aft funnel. The extra twin 20mm guns were probably mounted on the bridge wings, but might also have been on the forecastle deck by the side of the quad mounting. The picture in Lenton, of which there is a larger version in Warship magazine, is not clear enough to determime this. Whichever position is not occupied by the twins was likely to be occupied by a single 20mm, which would account for the extra two mountings. Single 20's were also commonly placed on the aft gun deck in front of (I mean towards the stern) the upper rear 150mm gun. This would be consistent with other Z class ships. The picture referred to, which is the only one I could find too(although there is a relatively new German language book on their WW2 destroyers which has been well reviewed which I have not yet acquired - in stock at White Ensign I notice), shows a geometric design of medium and dark grey over light grey which is difficult to describe in words. It is basically a series of tapering wedges rising from the waterline, initially vertical and then inclining to a point above the front set of torpedo tubes. There is a drawing of this on the back of the dust jacket of the first edition of Whitley's 'Destroyer' book (the smaller format version). A number of other Z's wore much the same pattern. I hope this is helpful; let me know if there are any other questions you think I might be able to help on. I think the Heller kit is delightful and captures the appearance of these handsome ships very well; the lack of detail can easily be rectified. John Clements -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: HDente@aol.com Subject: Re: PT boat colors: Thanks for all the considered input. I had heard what John Snyder reported as well, which is why I asked the question. An aviation color is an interesting idea, but I doubt US navy stocks would be used. Any votes for RAF Azure Blue or AAC Underside Blue-the color used on the Desert Pink B-24s and P-40s? A special thanks to Al Ross. I have your book, Allied Costal Forces, Vol. 2, so was aware of what you related-you also mention in the book that the Thunderbolt equipped boats had the later roll off racks vice tubes, the topedoes only being on the front pads, the rear empty. The plans so graciously offered I would be delighted to see. There is only one point no one addressed-recognition markings! 4 foot red stripe on the stern? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume