Subject: SMML18/05/99VOL549 Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 00:15:33 +1000 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Polish Painting Instructions 2: Re: Warship Update 3: HMS Ocean - Information wanted 4: Re: Edmund Fitzgerald 5: Skulski's Yamato book 6: Gato or Skate?? 7: Re: USS Yorktown CV5 8: Re: Original Research vs. Regurgitation 9: Re: TC Models CMB 10: Re: Photographing models 11: Re: Lightship etching request 12: Original research - Round 2 13: Re: Original research - Round 2 14: Re: SMML across America 15: Re: photo help 16: Re: More Lionfish 17: Re: IJN stuff 18: Re: T.C.MODELS C.M.B. 19: RTV & resin casting 20: Haguro 21: Model Photography -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: Ed Grune Subject: Polish Painting Instructions >> These instructions are obviously wrong. The szalupy was definitely Zolty, not Bialy as stated. And consider toning down your Zolty with a few drops of Czarny. I've found Zolty out of the bottle to be far too dark for 1/700th models, though Drewno works out OK if you do a Bialy wash. I hope this helps. << Rob: What brand of Zolty do you recommend. I do so hope that I won't have to wait too long for Snyder & Short to come out with their chips for the Russo-Japanese War. BTW guys, when can we expect that product to hit the store shelves? Ed -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: Warship Update To answer what happened at the Warship site, apparently nothing. Rob Mackie called the other day to say Warship is alive and well. The reason there hasn't been an update in a while is it's the time of year when Rob is VERY busy at the office. He's a CPA and you know what happens there around April 15. Enough said. Rusty White Flagship Models Inc. http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: "John Rodriguez Asti" Subject: HMS Ocean - Information wanted Hi to all: I am beginning the construction of a 1/700 scale model of the british Colossus class aircraft carrier HMS OCEAN, and I would want to know how many and which type of boats had on board, as well as which type of aircrafts had in 1956. Would anybody help me? Many thanks. John Rodriguez Asti Lima, Peru -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: Jonathan Parshall Subject: Re: Edmund Fitzgerald Boy, I sure killed off that Fitzgerald thread in a hurry, didn't I? Start blathering about bulk freighter losses and everybody's eye's pretty much glaze over. Fortunately, I'm used to it! :-) jon parshall- Imperial Japanese Navy Homepage http://www.skypoint.com/members/jbp/kaigun.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: "chenyangzhang" Subject: Skulski's Yamato book He doesn't say unfortunately, just hints that there might be an update (though I could be reading too much into it. I'd go ahead with the models - I don't think any alterations would be that major, just details. Chris Langtree -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: LYRAD108@aol.com Subject: Gato or Skate?? I have chosen one of two subs to model my Lionfish after. Either the Gato or the Skate, because it's the first one I think of when I think of a Balao. I've seen pictures of Nautilus's Gato conning tower, never realized how much of a sore thumb it was. The Balao's is significantly different, being much shorter with the with a lot more equipment. I like the balao's design a lot better, for no particular reason. Also, does anyone have info on the Skate's weapons fit at around the time of the sinking of the Agano? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: Sanartjam@aol.com Subject: Re: USS Yorktown CV5 Hi SMML, I've been looking forward to the Nautilus resin upgrade for the Revell 1/480 Yorktown, but I was a bit confused by the post about it the other day. Will the upgrade be correct for the Yorktown at Coral Sea but not at Midway? If so, what were the differences in the Yorktown between the two battles? I'd prefer to build her as she was at the Battle of Midway. Thanks, Art Nicholson -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: Mike Settle Subject: Re: Original Research vs. Regurgitation >> The photos I saw today would cause most ship modelers to wet themselves...original photos of Prinz Eugen in Norway, in color. A thoughtful sailor who took pics of every ship Graf Spee sank... Never before seen private photos of Bismarck taken from Eugen...up close. Photos of radar, fire control directors, camo patterns, colors, including the 'red-yellow-gray-carmine' turret top controversy. This is original research, and in a way, it's private until it's turned it into a book. The book is the reward we receive for the work we do. It will outlast any email group, any web-page, and every last one of us. The work (books) we do will be here one, two, maybe three hundred years after we're gone. That's our reward for the time and money we spend doing this. What we ask for in return, is your money in exchange for the book, most of which goes to the publisher. Being an author of research material, especially naval subjects, is not going to win you fame and fortune, or a Pulitzer Prize. If you're lucky, you make some money and end up with a book with your name on it... << OK, so when are we going to be able to buy the book? Mike Settle -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: "Kenneth H. Goldman" Subject: Re: TC Models CMB I almost did a build up review of both the 40' CMB and the 55' one. I hate to complain about someone who has taken the time and effort to actually scratch build a master and reproduce it, and I commend Tony Collins for trying to release some obscure subjects, but I found them both to suffer from extremely poor quality control -- and these were review samples supplied by the manufacturer! The hulls were badly bubbled, which flat out ruined much of the molded detail, and for their size, 1:48, are incredibly lacking in refinement. The so-called instructions were dark photocopied photos of the built up model and were pretty much useless. From the research I was able to do, the 40 footer, at least, had many inaccuracies that might have resulted from the manufacturer's doing his research from the sole remaining one at Duxford. It has lost many of its fittings and has suffered from other modifications over the years. After spending hours making corrections to the hull of the 40 footer, I was told that the kits were no longer in production, and the review was moot. Both kits ended up in the garbage. Ken Goldman THE WALRUS AND THE CARPENTER http://www.wman.com/~khgold/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: Erwin Van Deynze Subject: Re: Photographing models >> I've been wanting to begin a photographic record of my models for a while. I have a fancy Nikon camera, an N70, but I am unable to get my 1:48 airplanes completely in focus with my 55mm lens. If I focus on one area of the model, the rest of the frame is out of focus. I understand the physics of what is happening, but I don't know how to get around the problem. << The key factor here is light and I mean lots of light. Fore and aft of the plane of focus there is a region wich is also in focus, mostly it extends about 1/3 fore and 2/3 aft of the plane of focus. This region is called the depth of field (DOF). So if you focus on a model, this is one factor to take in account. Now, the DOF depends on the distance of the object you're taking a picture of, the larger the distance, the larger the DOF. Unfortunately, close-up and macro-photography, is just that : very up-close... The only mean to enhance the DOF is by closing the diaphragm of the lens, this means you have to extend the exposure-time of the camera, or... use lots and lots of light, either by lamps or flashes (not always applicable, because of the short distances, except for some special ring-flashes mounted around the lens...) You can of course use a very light-sensitive film, but these also have a larger grain, wich reduces the overall sharpness... On 'better' camera's you can check the DOF by pushing a knob on the body who closes the diaphragm to it settings, the view through SLR-camera will turn darker, and you will exactly see what part of the model is in focus. If you intend to use so-called macro-converters (rings mounted between the lens and the body, these take away a great deal of light, enlarging the problem even further... Shortly said, you surely need the following, First: a camera tripod, so you can easy extend the exposure time to 1 sec and beyond (models are usually very static, our models anyway...). Second: Lots of light, either outdoors on a very sunny day, or artificial light (a couple of slide projectors or halogen spots can do wonders, don't forget to compensate for the color temperature with a blue filter, they give a rather yellowish light, don't use fluorescent tubes, they have a very ugly greenish light...). Only make sure you're model doesn't melt under the heat of the lamps ;-) Third: Lots of patience, sometimes turning the model a little bit can make the difference you need. Just keep searching for that 'right' picture... Fourth: A bit of inspiration, a small DOF can be used to its advantage, just by drawing the attention on that part that is interresting, maybe the face of a pilot or something. When I take pictures of insects, I usually focus on the eyes. Even when the rest of the body isn't in focus, it just doesn't matter... Good luck Erwin -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: "John S. Platt" Subject: Re: Lightship etching request Hi All Now we are talking about a proper model ship. I would like to see the following: 1. All the railings 2. All portholes 3. All Ladders 4. All stairs 5. A wrap? to make the structure of the glass light windows more realistic 6. Similar to 5. for a gantry surrounding the lamp So far I have received 2 replies to my request for detail of lightship models, there must be more. Chris... Thanks for the info. Best wishes. John S. Platt. Brasted, UK, Kent Sunny but its going to chuck it down tonight -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: "Jeff Herne" Subject: Original research - Round 2 I've gotten a few incoming rounds about yesterday's post...some agree, most are whining and sniveling, and some think that original research is out of their realm. Nearly all have said "it's easy if you live near the source". Well, it's not rocket science. While going to the Archives certainly can get results, the real good stuff is usually in private hands. Most of the stuff at the Archives is in circulation. In the 70s and early 80s, it was guys like Alan Raven, Dave Baker, Norman Friedman and Tom Walkowiak that were rummaging through the Archives. Look at where these guys are now in the naval history community. They didn't get their reputations as experts by believing what they read in someone else's books. It may have motivated them to do deeper research, but it certainly did not make them experts. Most of these guys have forgotten more than we'll ever know. Smarter? No. Motivated? Definitely. So when they talk, don't argue, just shut up and listen. You may learn something. If you disagree, then prove them wrong. Citing someone's book is not the way to go about it. Chances are, they've already read the book. So here's some tried and true places to start looking. Contact the Archivist on many of the floating museums, many have extensive libraries onboard. Your state university, especially if your home state is Arizona, Nevada, Iowa, or if a ship is named after a town or city, ie., Lexington, Kentucky. Surf the net and contact ships' veterans groups. Most vets online are more than happy to help. Join the Navy League, you don't have to be a veteran, but you get to meet the vets with the photo albums. Find out where ship's crews have their reunions, get permission from the organizer to attend, get an ad posted in the group's newsletter, rent a hotel room at the reunion and set up your PC and scanner or your camera. You'd be amazed what you get. Many of the vets will bring their photo albums, and many are willing to give private photos to someone who cares about their former ships. Drop a letter to the Naval Historical Center, the National Archives, and former USN shipyards. Most have archives or museums of their own (Mare Island, Bremerton and Pearl to name a few) The US National Archives also has satellite sites located in various parts of the country. Most of the employees have no clue what's there, so your best bet is to visit in person. Contact the former ship builders if they're still around. Gibbs & Cox, Electric Boat, Federal Shipbuilding...you never know what you can turn up. Contact your local museums, and make friends with the curator. I run an aviation museum in NJ, but I'm constantly getting WW2 Navy vets who have ship photos, ie., "I was an aviation mechanic aboard the Lexington, and took these photos of some battleship running alongside the ship." Many vets have no clue what to do with their photo albums, and when they pass away, many family members toss them. "It was dad's old war junk" is the common story. Go to your VFW, your American Legion, get an ad posted in the newsletter, and talk to the guys. Join the Tin Can Sailors, the Cruiser Association, etc. Very rarely do you find a gold mine that's undiscovered. But gradually, here and there, you get bits and pieces. Some is real good, some can be junk, you never know. I recently was sent a package containing Xeroxs of Mare Island ships undergoing refit. Boring, seen most of them before. But the very last Xerox was of the USS Saratoga, sitting at anchor at Bikini Atoll. Nothing impressive, just a port broadside taken from a motor launch at range of about 500 yards. She was sunk a few hours later. Was it the last known photo of her before she got radiated? Who knows...but I know is was ONE of the last photos taken of her before her damage. And I have the only copy. That's what original research is all about. So go out there and do it. Most of the time, research is more fun than modeling. It gets into your blood. But remember this, time is running out. If a vet was 18 in 1941, he's 76 now. A lot of officers are already gone. A vet who was a 25 yr. old Lt. Commander in 1944 is now 80. If you're area of interest is RN or KM, your task is even more difficult, since many surface actions took place early in the war, making these vets 80+ years of age. Think about this...if everyone on SMML (800-ish Shane?) found a WW2 navy vet and got copies of 5 original ship photos, that's 4000 new ship photos. And judging by the diversity of this group...just think about it. It's not that tough. I anxiously await the next barrage... Jeff -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: Shane Subject: Re: Original research - Round 2 Aw well, I think its time for me to wade into the oily muddy waters with my flame retardent suit on :-)). First off, I can see where both sides of this arguement are coming from. I also think that we're all mature enough to continue this fascinating discussion on list. Now I'll be the first to admit that the language used so far is a wee bit strong, but I've got no hassles with it so long as it stays at roughly this level. But on the topic of research, I fully agree with Jeff & Vimieraa. If you're going to say something, please be prepared to back it up with where you found it, if asked. This can only benefit the list as a whole, as the info will start to be spread around. I also agree with checking other sources, I don't know how many books I've read with the same pictures in them. In most cases, a bit of research, say at the IWM, AWM etc, will bring more photos to light. The AWM has a searchable photo database online at: http://www.awm.gov.au/awm_search/photo.asp , so the arguement about not being in the neighbourhood is a wee bit moot. I'm certain there are other photo databases online as well. Now yes, it may cost a bit to get the photos, but that's the price we pay to to get what we want. Also, no-one has ever said that research was easy or cheap, that's why we pay the prices for books & kits that we do. It really comes down to how far you wish to go. On another note, I can confirm the offer put out by Vimieraa last week, is a genuine one & look forward to seeing any results. Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: SeaPhoto@aol.com Subject: Re: SMML across America Hi Everyone, First, in reply to a comment by Charles Wegman: >> My thanks go out to Kurt who has given us a nice break from the usual Bismarck turret tops discussion. It's nice of him to include all of us in something that I for one would love to be able to have time for. << It is my pleasure to write this little reports, I hope that folks will find them of some use of they find themselves in one of these areas with some time on thier hands. >> BTW Kurt,since it's business, It's all a tax write-off isn't it. I wanna be a photographer when I grow up! << According to my last girlfriend, I never did! Anyway, I find myself in Dayton, Ohio, preparing to tour the Airforce Museum - like I said, they can't all be Naval Stops. John Sheridan and John Frohock recommended a stop here, and I figure two SMML'ers can't be wrong. Yesterday, I stopped at Gettysburg, PA on the way from Albany. Nothing to do with ships, but a moving and powerful place nonetheless. At Albany, I toured the Destroyer Escort Slater, the only one that I know that has been preserved (The other, the Stewart in Texas, was rotting away in a park the last time I saw her) The Slater has come a long way since I saw her in New York - painted and with many of the guns restored, she is a trim little ship. The tour is a topside only at this point, main deck, boat deck and bridge, but that covers just about everything most modelers would be interested in. She has her "K" gun throwers, a depth charge rack, and most of her AA guns, as well the 3 three inchers that made up her main armament. The only probelem with the ship is that it is squirreled away on the opposite side of the Hudson from Albany proper, behind a sewage treatment plant; not a spot that will get a lot of walk-by support. It would be a far better if the ship was in a more public place. Still, if you want to see a DE in good condition, this is your only choice - just about the last of the 500+ made. After the AF musuem tommorow, one more Naval stop, at Chicago (U-505) and then the long trip home begins in earnest. As near as I can reckon it, about 2500 more miles (8500 on the Vanster as of today!). Kurt Dayton, Ohio, hot, a bit muggy, possible thunderstorms brewing. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: photo help I'm not a professional photographer but I have been published many times over the years so I know somewhat what I'm talking about at least when it comes to shooting models. Model magazines reject most articles because of poor photography. This method works very well for me. You need to use a technique shutterbugs call bracketing your shots. To bracket your shots means to take three shots for each photo you want at different shutter speeds. The purpose being, one of the photos out of three should be acceptable. Your problem is depth of field, or the depth the camera can properly focus on an object. Your auto setting is focusing on the spot you're aiming at and limiting the depth of field. Set your F stop at 22. This is the maximum depth of field your camera can shoot (a tripod really helps here). Set your camera from automatic to manual. If you can't, then use it on auto and this may still work. Take a sat F-22 move two clicks up and take another shot, move up two more clicks and take the final shot. This method works very well for me. Rusty White http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: Ives100@aol.com Subject: Re: More Lionfish >> If I DID want to replace the screws provided with the kit, since we know now that the four bladed are in fact correct, does anyone know the proper size to buy and who provides them? Also, were there any external hull differences between the GATO's and the BALAO's except maybe the limber holes? << Dave- Haven't located any good source of props that won't cost an exorbitant amount (e.g., custom brass props). Still looking........ Big difference in the conning towers of Gatos and Balaos, covered in the two reviews on Warships website that I wrote on the Nautilus Conning towers. Bunch of smaller changes, like the small boat that was stored under the deck (visible as outlined area on Revell kit deck) was dleeted from Balaos. Check your anchor position for the specific boat you are modelling; Portsmouth boats had portside anchors, EB had starboard anchors. Limber holes are also yard specific, not class specific. Check your references for the correct patterns. Biggest external difference in fleet submarines was between the Balao and late war Tench class in the bow area. Tenches had a noticeably different shaped bow. And now, Lionfish question # 2: >> I have chosen to do my Lionfish as the Balao-class USS Skate, Lionfish just isn't that famous. I have also heard of the photoetch set for the kit, what's included in it? P.S. who makes 1:192 decals that would be good on this model? thanks. << Well, Bill Gruner of Pacific Front will be happy; his dad skippered Skate during the war. She unfortunately got used for the postwar A-bomb tests and badly mangled. I think she was a Mare Island boat. Haven't seen the photoetch, have to get around to calling Bill and ordering a couple of sets. I think it was reviewed on Warship's by Jim Byrd. I know that photoetch gunsights & rails are included. As for decals: if you are doing a wartime boat, there are NO decals needed. All numbers and other identifiers were removed for the duration. Watch your paint job. Early war was all black, later a more complex camo pattern of haze gray, medium gray and flat black. No red lead below the waterline, all dull black. Tom Dougherty -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: Dboykap@aol.com Subject: Re: IJN stuff Some very quick comments: Pink Haguro? At 0150 hrs.? Sunk at 0247 hrs. I think we need to know Professor Dull's source; I can't imagine it was the attacking DD's at that hour. Well researched comments on IJN CV camoflage. I believe the extension of camoflaged decks was discontinued after Leyte Gulf; there is no mention in the literature of painted camo-decks for any IJN CV still afloat at war's end. Incidentally, there is another color shot, that of the Ibuki and the Katsagi at Sasebo. Go to the USS Salem site and thru to the prompt for CV histories. Try: http://www.uss-salem.org/navhist/carriers/images/japan/kas-ibu.jpg Unfortunately, the photo is taken with the sun overhead and slightly in front of the camera so it's tough to make out the true colors . To Dave S.: Skulski, in the forward in the Fuso book dated 11/97, is making the point about the lack of complete IJN records for all of the obvious reasons. He believes that this work, along with that on the Takao, is as complete as its going to get. "... it has been impossible to find, for instance, the drawings of Fuso's engine machinery or the precise details of the hull structure." However, he has apparently received new material on the Yamato not previously available to the public, "which will hopefully enhance and develope information on Yamato and her sisters Musashi & Shinano already available in my previous book ...". That's it. No word on when, how, what, etc. I'd recommend finishing all your projects as is. You can dry mount the catapults if you really choose to believe that the new info. will pertain to catapults, for instance. There is no indication what the new info. will be. However, I do recall reading not long ago, posted thru Jon Parshall's site (actually the link/site his acquaintance in Japan maintains on his page), that material had surfaced in Kure about some of the electrical systems and light bulbs specially created for Yamato. I'll bet these additions draw in part on those discoveries. Dan Kaplan -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: Les Brown Subject: Re: T.C.MODELS C.M.B. I purchased my model of the 40 foot CMB from White Ensign. They also stock the 55 foot version and Turbinia from the same manufacturer. The casting is good with just a few air bubbles to be filled but the instructions are very weak - one page of text giving background for the full size vessel with very limited colour details plus a second page with five photographs of the model. Model Shipwright No 96 contained a two page article with a very good drawing by David White (one of their Modeller's Draught series). The only photographs I've found are in 'Fast Fighting Boats 1870-1945' by Harald Fock. Anybody know of any other sources? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: Minadmiral@aol.com Subject: RTV & resin casting Hi Shane; I have a friend who is producing 1:600 coastal craft for wargame purposes, not regular modelling. I have been trying to help him with my limited knowledge and experience with RTV and resin casting from 12 years ago when I was a partner in a D&D and other wargame figure company. Do you know of any books or online sites with help, instructions, or FAQ`s for RTV mold making or resin casting.? He is doing PT/MGB/MTB/Siebel Ferrys/ Flak Lighters / and some small DD/DE types. Plus merchant ships and armed schooners for the Adriatic WWII actions. Thank`s in advance for your help. I`m not involved financially with him, just want to improve the quality of what he`s doing cause I`m gonna buy lots from him. I already have close to 300 1:600 coastal craft to wargame, and it looks like he will boost my collection to 500 all by himself. Chuck Duggie "Et in Arcadia ego sum:. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: "Pletscher-Lenz-Schneider" Subject: Haguro Regarding the question of HAGURO's paint when she was sunk, I want to quote John Winton, Sink The Haguro, page 61: "The heavy cruiser HAGURO ... left Singapore on 9 May, escorted by ... The first indication Admiral Walker had of the cruiser ... came up at 10.30pm that evening when a signal was received from SUBTLT ... on patrol in the Malacca Strait, reporting a NACHI Class heavy cruiser, painted pink and green ... Sightings of pink and green cruisers (actually HAGURO's camouflage paint) from submarines so soon after VE Day celebrations might have been regarded with reservations in the flagship ..." On page 92 of the same book, the Avenger pilot who first found HAGURO is quoted: "She was very large and very black against a very dark monsoon cloud. An enormously imressive sight, just as a warship ought to look." Very strange indeed, but it looks like HAGURO wore a paint of something like dark Montbatten pink and maybe greenish gray. I'd like to learn more about it. Falk Pletscher -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21) From: jakloek@kodak.com Subject: Model Photography Well, I am a day late on this thread, but I could not resist the topic. Nearly everything posted yesterday was good advice. My comments are on film and light. If you are light limited, use a higher speed film. Kodak Max films are excellent (in my biased opinion, shameless plug). The 400 speed has excellent image structure, and the 800 speed (yes, 800) is also quite good. But.....and this is true for any manufacturer's film, there is a fundamental speed/grain trade off involved. That is the faster the film (higher asa number) the grainier the negative will be. Conversely, slower films will have lower grain, and produce sharper images. Which film you choose, depends on what you intend to do with the images when you get them. If you plan on making enlargements, a slower film is to be preferred if you can get a good enough source of light. If you do not want to invest in photo flood lamps, natural light will do. I do not like direct sunlight, because of the shadows. I have good luck shooting next to a window on a cloudy day (not hard to get here in Rochester) or in north facing window (Northern Hemisphere anyway). One other thing to keep in mind is that capturing the image on film is only half of the equation. Printing the image is the other, and getting good quality processing and printing is important. Color balance of the prints is just as important as what's on the negative, if you get prints back, and are not happy with the color, it may be the printing, not the negative. Take the negatives to a good photoshop and ask for another set of prints, explaining how you want the color to look. One final shameless plug, Kodak is now rolling out a product called Picture CD. If you take your film to a Kodak processor, you can choose to get your images back not only as prints, but also digitized on a CD. The CD will have on it not only your images, but also all the necessary software, etc. So if you have PC with a CD drive, all you have to do is stick your CD into your drive, and you are all set to send images via email, or print them out on your inkjet printer. You can also do some editing, zoom and crop, etc. Its a neat way to get digital images without messing around with a digital camera, and the images you catch on film will be much sharper than you can get on any reasonably priced digital camera. James Kloek -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume