Subject: SMML02/08/99VOL625 Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 01:05:51 +1000 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: VULCANIZED 2: USN Measure 21 Paint scheme 3: Camouflage 4: Re: GMM 1/400 German Warship detail set 5: Re: Judging 6: CV-6 Historian 7: Re: Weathered decks 8: Re: Judging from the British Perspective 9: Heller Bismarck and GMM set 10: Judge not lest... 11: Heller Replacement Parts 12: Measure 21 / Judging 13: Re: Judging and color 14: Re: West Coast Nationals 15: Blast Bags 16: Ship color judging 17: Re: Young 18: IJN PC-102 ex USS Stewart 19: Re: Malta Museum 20: Re: Judging 21: Get well soon Jeff 22: What a bunch of Hooey! 23: Update on Jeff H. 24: Re: Heller Contact 25: Hornet at the IPMS Nats. 26: IPMS Conventions 27: The Good Part About the IPMS Convention 28: Yamato Decks 29: Bismarck's Decks -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD INDEX 1: Picpost update 2: Classic Warships Alaska 3: Re: Model Expo Sale 4: American Civil War Ships 5: Publish Your Pics at Naval Base Hobbies -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: Baker Subject: VULCANIZED With regard to the discussion of whether one can make an accurate model of any of the U.S. DIXIE (AD 14), FULTON (AS 11), or VULCAN (AR 5) class tenders from the same hull, the unequivocal answer remains that, while the AD and AS classes had the same hull form, the VULCAN class had a signficant hull sheer that began near the stern and continued right forward to the bow, while the AD and AS classes had virtually no sheer until the forecastle break. The reason for this was that the AR class needed greater hull depth (i.e. height) for a heavy forge amidships, and the other two classes did not have that feature. The difference is EASILY discerned in the plans for the classes and in photographs, where one can see significant differences between the AS/AD group and and AR in the lines of the hull plating and the arrangement of the portholes. Just to be sure, I looked up the plans and checked through a couple of hundred photos before starting this note. I also checked the dimensions for the three classes and find that my prior not was wrong; all had the same waterplane dimension (520-ft. overall by 73-ft. 4-in beam), while the ADs were only one foot longer than the AS (530-ft. 6-in. versus 529-ft. 6-in.) and the AR was 529-ft. 5-in. overall.The ARs drew about 2-ft. 2-in less than the 25-ft. 6-in. maximum for the AD/AS classes. Another visual distinction was the spacing of the stacks: on the AD/AS, they were much nearer the stern (the steam-powered ADs had higher stacks with less rake than the the diesel-electric ASs), while the forward stack on the AR class is located atop the forward superstructure. The bottom line is that, while you can build, with some modifications (and each ship differed in numerous small details, both as built and over time as they were modified over their long careers) either the AS or AD from the same hull, you cannot build an accurate AR from the AD/AR hull and would have to make significant changes to the superstructure and stacks as well. For those not familiar with these handsome Gibbs & Cox-designed ships, the ARs were the VULCAN (AR 5), AJAX (AR 6), HECTOR (AR 7), and JASON (AR 8--ARH 1 until 9-9-57); the destroyer tenders were the DIXIE (AD 14), PRAIRIE (AD 15), PIEDMONT (AD 17), SIERRA (AD 18), and YOSEMITE (AD 19)(another, the somewhat modified NEW ENGLAND (AD 32) was cancelled in 1945); and the submarine tenders were the FULTON (AS 11), SPERRY (AS 12), BUSHNELL (AS 15), HOWARD W. GILMORE (AS 16), NEREUS (AS 17), ORION (AS 18), and PROTEUS (AS 19--later lengthened long after completion to carry ballistic missiles and the only one still in service, as an IX barracks barge). Sorry about the mistake on dimensions, and sorry for those who bought the kit hoping to make an AR of it. Cheers A.D. Baker, III -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: John Sheridan Subject: USN Measure 21 Paint scheme >> I have just purchased the 1/350 Tennessee and I wish to paint it in the measure 21 scheme. Can anyone advise me what commercially available paints there are to duplicate it? I prefer to work with acrylics. << Pollyscale Water-based paints do make a not-too-shabby Navy Blue 5-N and Deck Blue color required for MS21. You might need to add some white for scale-effect so don't forget a bottle of that too! John Sheridan @ Microscale Decals http://www.microscale.com If I'm talking Decals, then i'm talking for Microscale, Otherwise I am speaking for myself. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: John Sheridan Subject: Camouflage >> I hate to enter into American disputes but John Sheridan is unfortunately wrong. Colour perception depends on many factors, for example lighting and scale effect play an enormous role. If the judges in this particular contest avoided judging by colour mix I salute them. This shows really good sense. << Of course it does. However, if you paint a model dark gray instead of light gray as called for, this is obviously, this would result in a incorrect paint scheme no matter what shades of paint you use to paint it. The model in question (BWN 1/350th USS Hornet CV-8) was painted incorrectly in accordance with MS 12 Modified as outlined in the September 1941 SHIPS-2 manual. The modeler painted the *entire* ship Ocean Gray(a dark gray) with Navy Blue (a dark blue) splotches over the *entire* model. This is what is wrong with the paint scheme! The Ocean Gray / Navy Blue should only have been carried-up to the top of the hull. Above that, the paint changes to Ocean Gray with *Haze Gray* (A medium Gray) splotches; *not* Navy Blue splotches like the modeler did on his model! Photos of USS Hornet in 1942 clearly show this difference and can easily be seen even in B&W photographs. If we were talking about whether the modeler used Navy Blue instead of Sea Blue for his blue paint, then yes, abmient lighting would cause problems with viewing the correct color of paint. But that's not what we are talking about here. John Sheridan @ Microscale Decals http://www.microscale.com If I'm talking Decals, then i'm talking for Microscale, Otherwise I am speaking for myself. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: KDur597268@aol.com Subject: Re: GMM 1/400 German Warship detail set To my delight, Loren Perry wrote: >> Subject: GMM 1/400 German Warship detail set The Gold Medal Models 1/400 WW2 German Warship set (No. 400-7) does indeed have watertight doors and cable reels, depsite the misleading text in our catalog. It also has crane bases not found in the 1/350 set. The 1/400 set is not a scale-down of the 1/350 Bismarck set, but actually closer to a scale-up of the 1/700 WW2 German Warship set with adjustments and changes made to allow for the various Heller kits (such as the inclusion of doors and reels, etc.) Also, because it is newer than the 1/350 set, a number of minor refinements have been made to the 1/400 Bismarck parts. << I'm about to order, Loren! Tell me though, is it a one-ship set? I'm doing Bismarck and Prinz Eugen at the same time, so do I need two sets? Thank you! Ken Durling -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: Growlrr@aol.com Subject: Re: Judging Oh well, against common sense and better judgement - here's my two cents (or pence depending or where you live) - Color is subjective given different lighting, mixing, age and exposure - we all know that - it leads to variation and subjective opinions. Consider the following - A hornet built waterline and underway and weathered as such (dirt, grime, rust, etc.) could well show the grays varied and faded - it is in keeping with the presentation of the model - the same kit, built full hull on brass pedastels with a flawless paint presentation should reflect absolute solid and as accurate as possible colors - again in keeping with its presentation. HOWEVER - In either case this is not a lisence to just be plain wrong. A pattern is a pattern - yes there were variations, but if you choose to build to one of them, be prepared to show that you are correct in your execution. I do not think that is too much to ask for builders competing in the US Nationals for crying out loud....If I were to paint the HMS Hood in Mountbatten pink - under the assumption that it is an RN color used in WWII and the further assumption that "Hey - the yardies drank too heavily, it was cloudy (and had just snowed) and it was captains discretion because his wife likes the color" I would still be inaccurate and wrong... By the way - this same discussion crops up EVERY year the the US Armor Modeling Nationals (AMPS) where I have been a judge every year, except last year - The rule we follow is fairly simple - We may not always know what is right, but being wrong is usually self-evident. An imperfect rule perhaps, but the best we have been able to arive at... If you want to build a "one off" or "oddball" pattern - more power to you (they are actually my favorite subjects) but be prepared to either substantiate your work or suffer for it....I'll never forget the year I brought a M4 Sherman to the convention in Periwinkle Blue - Yep the Christian Arab Militia painted them this way - BUT I brought color photos to prove it! (and I had to show them again and again and again) I now turn over the soap box and await the onslaught Glenn -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: Steve Singlar Subject: CV-6 Historian For you CV-6 groupies (of which I am one), James Rhindt is the ship's historian. His e-mail is: jrindt@excel.net. From conversations with CV-6 assoc. members, it appears the second 11' model of CV-6 will soon be ready. She will be placed in the Naval Air museum at Pensecloa (sp?) shortly. Also the CV-6 section has been moved to the main deck and significantly enlarged. Steve Singlar Pelham, NH -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: Bill Schnakenberg Subject: Re: Weathered decks We have two photos of the same ship and the same deck area taken by two of our subscribers. One being me and the other Rob Mackie. The ship is the USS Salem CA-139 and both photos were taken in August 1998. I took my photos on a hot dry day and Rob took his on a rainy day. The dry deck had not been holystoned in 40 years so the deck is a little weathered and would be a little lighter after holystoning and drying. My photo of the dry deck is at: http://www.frontiernet.net/~willshak/salem/forecastle.html Rob's photo of the wet deck is at: http://warship.simplenet.com/images/Salem/Salem35.jpg Bill - The USS Salem, CA-139. The World's only preserved Heavy Cruiser, Quincy, MASS. http://members.xoom.com/ltwes329/salem.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: "John Snyder" Subject: Re: Judging from the British Perspective Peter Hall wrote: >> I totally agree there, its difficult for you to get away for a peek at the other displays, even the ones nearby, let alone go off judging for an hour or two. << An hour or two??? Try 8 hours at Orlando, from the beginning of the Judge's Dinner at 6PM through to 2AM when we finally got out of the hall! John Snyder -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: "foeth" Subject: Heller Bismarck and GMM set >> Is the beam dimension you posted at the deck, or at the maximum beam point, below the waterline? << It's the maximum beam at the armour plating, so the outmost maximum beam you can measure anywhere on the ship, as beams are normally given. Else, it should say: beam at waterline. The Tamiya kit is a bit too narrow, but I've never inspected the Heller kit. >> Evert, what scale is it (Markus von Beek model)? << It's in civilized European 1:100. Took him 8 years, I think, and everything rotates. He's doing a Tirpitz at the moment, that can actually shoot. It can also play a german march. >> Also, Schiffer's website does not list the Herzog book. Is it OOP? << I'm not sure. I think the Naval Institute Press sells it. Yesterday Mr Perry posted something on the new 1/400 set, which is, as I understand now, not the mini-1/350 version. I plead innocence! I've tried to find a picture on-line several times, but they seem to be well-hidden. If it's a new version, no doubt the small issues in the 1/350 set are resolved, so even less to worry about. Foeth -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: crofoot@bfm.org (Crofoot, Christopher) Subject: Judge not lest... you start a petty argument! Hi all SMMLies, The discussion about the judging at Nationals reminds me of last year at this time when I saw similiar posts. Lets face it anytime somebody pours hours of labor into something they are bound to be passionate about it. However, my dad taught me life is not fair and if you want to argue over subjects such as this it will be damn unhappy as well. Judges, referees, everybody makes mistakes; but in life, just like football, sometimes the refs give you a good spot and sometimes they don't.... whatever happens you make the best of it and drive on. As far as all this argument about paint tones and shades is concerned; It is ALWAYS subjective because we all have differing colour perception. You damn well wouldn't want me judging paint colours because I'm colour defficient...not blind but have a hard time telling say yellow from white. In any case let's give credit to the winners and vow to build even better for next year. Afterall, REAL artisans build for themselves not the world. Besides it's better to argue over why Yamato would have been scrap iron had it ever met New Jersey mano-e-mano. Chris Crofoot Go Army beat Navy -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: "Robert Writt" Subject: Heller Replacement Parts Within the last year, I have recieved from Heller replacement of damaged parts for both the Admiral Scheer and Prince Eugene. In both cases the bad parts were broken, presumably during the packaging of the kit by Heller. I simply filled in the paper form, with respect to damaged parts, which is included in the bottom of the model box and mailed this form to the indicated address for Heller in France. I recieved my replacement parts in the mail (it took three to four weeks, Canada - France). There was no charge from Heller. Their customer service was excellent. Bob Writt -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: "Michael Czibovic" Subject: Measure 21 / Judging Hi everyone, I have a few comments to make on this discussion and I hope none of it is taken personally by anyone involved. I can understand if the Hornet model in question was awarded Third Place if the overall presentation was better than what ended up in Fourth place, but I don't understand how anyone could possibly defend the camouflage scheme that was applied. The only excuse for using that combination of colors would be if that is what the instructions called for...and the instructions were nowhere in sight. Photos of Hornet in this scheme have been available for as long as I have been modeling (at least 25 years) in both B&W and color. Challenge publications recycles their ship articles so often that I would be surprised if they weren't published at least once every three or four years in "Sea Classics" or one of their specials. All the builder would have needed was to have looked at the cover of Squadron Signal's "Warships Number 5" to get a general idea of the proper scheme. The camo books from The Floating Drydock are also still available. Judges are chosen for particular catagories because they have show some degree of knowledge of the subject matter and judging is done in groups because nobody can be expected to know everything. Given the amount of general information on USN color schemes that is now available, I can't believe that the proper use of Ms21 Mod. wasn't at least discussed. The problem was with the pattern and not the accuracy of the colors that were applied. It should have been noted that the scheme calls for at least three colors (four on some ships) and the combination of colors changes at either the flight deck (on carriers) or the main deck (for other combatants) and not two colors overall that were used on that model. None of that is based on tints, tones or shades or whether someone puked in the paint bucket. I have also never seen anything to justify the airbrushed pattern that was used on the island- I've only seen hard edges between colors in this measure. I would think that if one judge was not as knowledgable about some aspect of the color scheme that he would defer his opinion to another judge who was, or at least ask questions. The bottom line is that if the model placed because of overall better execution than the next one in line, fine. But don't try to defend the camouflage pattern or the colors used because of pride or ignorance. Using that as a criteria would be like awarding a trophy to a Lancaster bomber painted in a German dapple pattern based on finish. Judges SHOULD know better, that's why they're chosen as judges. I've met and talked with Jon Warneke on several occasions and I think he's a heck of a nice guy. I just think it's a mistake to continue to try to defend such a error...there is too much evidence stacked against it...and he wasn't the only judge in that catagory. Having said that, the umpires have made their calls and the decision stands, so shall we get on to new business? Mike Czibovic Corsair Armada Productions -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: dhjonespsm@juno.com Subject: Re: Judging and color I am somewhat hesitant in getting involved in this, as Shane pointed out, discussion on this subject can get a bit heated. However, there are a few statements that need to be addressed. Some of these judging problems will occur regardless of the subject area, be it ships, armor, aircraft, whatever. And, I would also state right up front, if you can't stand to lose in a contest, regardless of your expertise - don't enter!!! Having entered in and judged in many local contests and one IPMS Nationals, I believe there is no such thing as a perfect contest or prefect judge - mistakes will happen. Color: I would agree that it is very difficult to make arbitrary decisions about color, but that is not an excuse for sloppiness. There is a great deal of variation possible in paint due to weathering, distance, light conditions, etc. but a medium gray is still a medium gray and if it is a scheme calling for neutral grays and the paint is blue in appearance, then it is obviously wrong. As for the HORNET - I was not there so I did not see the model. However, regardless of the colors used, if the model depicted the ship at the time of the Doolittle raid, at least three colors were used on this scheme and if the model was painted in only two - it was wrong! Setting a judging standard that disregards color in favor of construction technique is no excuse for allowing obvious inaccuracies a free ride. Setting such a policy strikes me as an excuse to avoid the real issue, that most often the people best qualified to judge a particular category are not the ones judging. Judges for the most part do the best job they can, and it is not easy. However, there is an element of ignorance involved that will always be there. Judges are volunteers and the teams must be made up from that pool of people who are willing to donate their time. It is too much to expect that they should be knowledgeable on anything other than the subjects that they like - thus when a WW II Luftwaffe specialist is tapped to judge a model of the QUEEN MARY he will inevitably resort to judging the model on construction technique, probably at the exclusion of all other factors. If the rigging is bogus, or the funnel color the wrong shade of red, how would this judge be expected to know that? There is also the problem of judges that, because of their overinflated egos, think they know a lot more than they do - but I won't get into that. The criticism of the Snyder & Short color chips (comparing them negatively to several different editions of Munsell 1929) is nonsense. For one thing, I do not believe that the person who made that statement has done so - this book is not that common so as to allow comparisons to several editions. John Snyder actually has a copy and has access to a second one - so these guys HAVE done the comparisons. If you don't agree with their findings - don't use them, but that is no reason to trash the work that has been done. They are not getting rich and they are doing us a great service. And, I suppose it is time for a disclaimer - I have no connection, financial or otherwise, to this project other than knowing both John and Randy, and my awareness of their dedication. As for the comment that these color chips are not "IPMS sanctioned" - who cares? The aircraft and armor people have had color chips and paint spec info since the 1960s and there is a general consensus of commonly accepted standards within these model fields that allows for shade variations due to external factors and still recognizes that the basic colors are correct. There is no such general body of knowledge or acceptance in ship modeling. We are just now getting the first real documentation. Ignoring this primary research in favor of relying on color photos is absurd! Don't believe it? Then take a look at a recently published book called "Today's Royal Navy In Color" by Jeremy Flack (Arms & Armor Press 1995) and try to match your model to the photo(s). Which one? They vary quite a lot - even though all depict the same shade of grey! I would think a much better approach would be to get the color chips, test mixes or out of the bottle matches, until you find the one that pleases you and is fairly close to the actual color. Then make a note of this color or mix, and use it for depicting that particular color on your models. It is not necessary to slavishly match every color chip, but it IS nice to know what those colors actually looked like, whether you use them or not. That is the real value of this color chip project - to give a documented basis for color discussion! Daniel Jones Plastic Ship Modeler magazine -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: Mark Knowlton Subject: Re: West Coast Nationals John Snyder wrote: >> The selection committee at Orlando reportedly had three contenders to consider for the next West Coast US Nationals in 2001 (Dallas has it for 2000): Seattle, San Diego, and Chicago(!) [Chicago was reportedly allowed to propose due to a dearth of proposals from West Coast cities]. << Uh John, As IPMS San Diego club president I can safely say we did not bid for the 2001 Nats. It was down to Seattle and Chicago. Mark -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: "David Lilly" Subject: Blast Bags This may be common knowledge to experienced shipbuilders but humor someone new to the hobby: how do you create blast bags for gun barrels when they are not included with the kit? I have a 1/350 USS San Francisco which I intend to build as she appeared in October-November 1942. Photographs clearly indicate blast bags for the 8" guns. An initial attempt to use filler putty looked terrible. Any help would be greatly appreciated. David Lilly -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: Burl Burlingame / Pacific Monograph Subject: Ship color judging This is the biggest can of worms on the IPMS shelf. Color is a very subjective subject (got that?) and there are so many variables involved that I always move it to last place when serving as an IPMS judge. The main thing is an attempt to get it right. There's fresh paint and there's two-month-old paint. There's paint mixed by the specs and paint mixed under field conditions. There's paint that peels, cracks, chalks or bleaches, and there's paint that's hue-stable. Warm colors are more chemically volatile than cool colors. And there's an exact match and then there's scale-effect color. One of my criteria is to stand BACK from the model instead of eyeballing it from an inch away. DOES IT LOOK LIKE A REAL SHIP FROM SEVERAL HUNDRED FEET AWAY? If not, duh. That said, color CAN make a difference in judging. There were a pair of 1/96 Tennessees in a recent IPMS convention that were splendidly built, a real tribute to the modelmakers craft, but the builder deliberately mis-painted colors and patterns on the ships in an attempt to make them more visually accesible for the museum the ships were going into. And he proudly documented the deliberate errors. Well, he was really annoyed when he didn't win, but IPMS is about building accurate miniatures of the real thing as much as possible. He introduced errors of commission rather than committing errors of omission. If he had simply goofed he would probably have placed. I'm not sure that deliberately building models inaccurately is actually an aid to museum patrons either. It's certainly a topic for discussion at the Museum Modeleer web site at http://www.pacifichistory.com At any rate, color is a certifiable hot-button issue among modelers, mainly because there can be no winners in the debate. Look up the best sources you can, get info from groups such as this one and then you're on your own. When you get right down to it, modeling is a solitary craft -- nothing democratic about it at all. Burl Burlingame Pacific Monograph, 1124 Kahili Street, Kailua HI 96734 buzz@aloha.net A historical interpretation company. Visit our web site at http://www.PacificHistory.com/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: graham walker Subject: Re: Young Gee Peter you smooth talker you;) young indeed uh. Well I am looking forward to jugding the builds of Caroline models in this years contest, should be easier than jugding the ship classes, seeing that I can always pop over to see the real thing;) So any help in judging the ship classes in this years nats? the Largest in the known world (Grin). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: "Michael C. Smith" Subject: IJN PC-102 ex USS Stewart Maybe I'm mistaken, but I thought Stewart was a DE - she appears to be one to me. Isn't she the ship that's one display in Galveston, Texas next to the sub Cavalla? If so, they might know something there (Seawolf Park, Galveston, Texas). Michael Smith Marshall, Texas -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: "Michael C. Smith" Subject: Malta Museum My wife and I went through a couple of museums last year when we were there, but I didn't see a naval one - just the palace in Valletta and St.John's Co-Cathedral (which I highly, highly, highly recommend). There were some displays of medieval armor, but that's all I saw. BTW the view of Grand Harbor from the Upper Barracca Gardens is very nice. Michael Smith Marshall, Texas -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: John Sheridan Subject: Re: Judging >>Well, I judged, and I expressed what was the consensus within our judging group, so now it's time to defend the consensus (BTW, it's long too...).<< Yes, please step right into the fire....... >> This is correct, but at the same time, do you know for certain that these colors were used, or is your basis for your opinion what the tech orders called for? Remember, we are dealing with a set of colors developed by the Navy, but mixed pierside from a tinting material and white base (in Norfolk I believe). Also, Ms.12 mod was a "commander's discretion" design, which meant the captain could do just about anything he wanted, including use any color he wanted (BTW, the areas above the funnel were not in 5-H, which also totally invalidates the scheme, but no mention's been made of that). << The 5-H problem with regards to the mast and higher is only outlined in MS 12. You are correct in that MS 12 Modified was very loose as to the how the ship is to be painted. HOWEVER, the general practice was to paint the Hull Ocean Gray with Sea Blue (or navy blue) splotches. The superstructure was painted Haze Gray with Ocean Gray splotches. Of course this could vary wildly depending on time and shipyard. Photos of Hornet at the time of the Doolittle raid are available and show that Hornet, at least at the time of the raid, was painted in the standard MS 12 mod color scheme. Photos clearly show that the upper hull works are completely different shades of gray than the lower works which does match MS 12 modified. See for yourself at: http://www.navsource.org/Archives/CV/CV-08_Hornet2.jpg and http://www.navsource.org/Archives/CV/CV-08_Hornet7.jpg >> Do we know for certain the the colors were matched exactly? How plowed were the dock workers the day they painted the ship (side note: Does vomit affect tonal quality?). Do we know that the black and white photos of Hornet truly reflect the colors she carried? Do the different factors that determine color reproduce in black and white? How did the colors oxidize as she transited from the Atlantic to the Pacific? There are more questions than answers. << These would only effect how the paint weathered. The paint scheme overall would not change due to external forces. That's the point of my argument; I am not quibbling about the shade of paint but the fact that the model in question did not follow MS 12 modified which is clearly documented. >> Here's another example. The recent National Geographic special on the Yorktown shows footage of her bridge area, and the Ocean grey on the bridge looks much more blue than any sample of the Munsell designation I've seen. Does this invalidate all of the work others have done on paint chips simply because footage shows it to be different? << No because you are looking at a ship that sat on the bottom of the Pacific for 57 years. At this point, all bets are off in regards to colors used. >> Also, there are pictures of ships that show a "difference" in colors simply due to reflectance of sunlight off different angles. With all of this in mind, simply disregarding a ship based on the hues of colors used is totally without merit (unless of course the colors are blatantly wrong, such as hot pink and lemon yellow). << Even with B&W photography, you can still tell the difference between Sea/Navy Blue, Ocean Gray, and Haze Gray which are all completely different in tonal value. >> In fact, if this is the scheme that is layed out in the instructions, and the modeler followed it to the letter, what judge can legitimately fault the modeler for it. << Because it is a model contest ? >> Basically, your saying that this kit should not have won anything based on your personal knowledge of this ship. As a judge, I personally cannot be knowledgeable of every ship ever built, and thus have to rely on what I have been taught to be a fair way of judging. Judging is subjective, and there have been plenty of episodes where I didn't agree with the decisions (both as a participant and a judge), but had to accept them. << No, what I am saying is that the ship should have had points against it because it was painted incorrectly. Also, if I was to build a model for a contest, I personally would go out of my way to insure that the model i'm building is painted correctly. The "correctness" is based on historical data that is readly available to most people. >> Color is a BIG subjective decision which I do not feel is a fair determinant of the quality of a model. Unless a modeler can definitely prove a color scheme (i.e. photographs, measure sheets, actual chips from each segment of a pattern, etc.), how can a judge make a determination of the correctness of the color? << Easily. Unless the model presented is really old (ie that Oregon model) the data concerning correct color schemes used is avialable to the public. Also, if I was building such an expensive kit (such as the BWN Hornet kit), I would go out of my way to insure that the model I am building is painted correctly. A little research can do wonders! >> Remember, as a judge, you have to judge with the tangible and not the speculatory. Jeff Herne and I have matched all of the USN colors to the 1929 Munsell, and so has Snyder and Short. Why are some of them different when matched to the same reference? Why do some of the colors in each set match different 1929 Munsell books, and others don't match different 1929 Munsell books? Which is right, and which is wrong (both books and chips)? Neither set above is an IPMS sanctioned standard, so which do you choose? << If the color is close to the specifications, then any of them "could" be correct. You might get slightly different results but the tonal value of paint should at least be somewhat consistant. >> Would I feel comfortable with another judge whipping out any paint chart and use it to judge my work before looking at the basics of construction? I can't answer any of these questions satisfactorily for everyone, and this is why I do not consider shade of color a determinant in judging. << The judge should have a fairly decent knowlege of what they are judging. I'm not saying that they should the ultimate experts in their field of judgement, but have a clear understanding of what they are looking at. BTW, I did notice that the model of the Hornet was very well built even though the paint scheme was incorrect. If the model was mine and someone pointed out to me that the paint scheme was wrong, I would be looking for ways to fix it while finishing the process of ripping the last of the hair out of my head..... John Sheridan -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21) From: "Shaya Novak" Subject: Get well soon Jeff Dear Laura, We all send best wishes to Jeff on a speedy recovery. Shaya Novak from The Naval Base -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22) From: John Sheridan Subject: What a bunch of Hooey! >> Hey John Sheridan! What are you getting all wrapped around the axel for? << You are correct, I was a bit cranky when I wrote that note. >> Were you a judge? If you were a judge, then bully for you! If not, maybe you should calm a little. << No, I was not a judge. >> It is after all a HOBBY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We have been reminded time and again that even the paints that are marketed as "accurate" aren't! << I get whacked with color "accuracy" lots of times. A lot of the decals that I draw are of subjects that have not existed for many years and we are confronted with "That's not the correct color" many times. I ask for their data that they based their decision on and then I tell them where we got our data from. Sometimes we agree, sometimes not, sometimes we are correct, sometimes we are dead wrong. >> Did you have any models entered? << Nope. I did enter any models because I could not stay at the convention more than 24 hours. I am also not an IPMS member (soon to be corrected). >> Let's be glad that guys are willing to judge and host a model convention. I was involved with our regional, and it is a lot of work, and judging is no fun, as there are so many excellent works. How do you divide and separate, and judge? It is tough. Give these judges a little slack, and instead of raking them over the coals, kudos and accolades for a thankless job. << I Agree with you here. Being a judge or a manufacturer is sort of like being one-in-the-same. John Sheridan @ Microscale Decals http://www.microscale.com If I'm talking Decals, then i'm talking for Microscale, Otherwise I am speaking for myself. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23) From: John Sheridan Subject: Update on Jeff H. >> Just a quick note to let everyone know... Jeff was hospitalized yesterday afternoon, seem he's suffering from severe dehydration and exhaustion.<< I don't even want to know what Jeff was doing in order to get this way. >> I asked him if there was anything I could get for him. He told me, "an X-acto knife, some superglue, and a ship kit." I guess you can't get the ship modeler out of the man, even in dire straits... << Two words: Daytime Television....... I can understand completely why Jeff would ask for such items. The thought of being stuck in the hospital and out of reach of my modeling tools is the worst thing you could ever do to me! BTW, The next time you are at the hospital, just the nurses for a scalpel, surgical glue, and the visible woman kit..... I hope Jeff is back on his feet and back to modeling soon. John Sheridan @ Microscale Decals http://www.microscale.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24) From: Allan Plumb Subject: Re: Heller Contact Peter Mispelkamp wrote: >> Keep us posted, as I am sure that all of us who belong to the dwindling 1/400 club would like to know that Heller has not lost its dedication to customer support. Now, if they would start to release some new kits, e.g. Ark Royal (WW II), Renown, Repulse, late war KGV, Gloire, Le Fantastique, Tribal class DDs, Belfast, not to mention some Iowas and Yorktowns ... but I guess I am in a state of model-wishful thinking!!! << Algerie and other French heavy cruisers. An Italian Littorio, if Tauro doesn't do it. Bearn? Some of the pre-war French light cruisers? Heck, if they'd just reissue Hood! (I have Strasbourg, Gniesenau, Scheer, Jean Bart, and Z-31, all but the last two completed. More cheerfully accepted.) But then Airfix hasn't paid much attention to us, so Heller... :-( Allan "but I can dream" Plumb -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25) From: SteveWiper@aol.com Subject: Hornet at the IPMS Nats. If I may be so bold as to point out a few points on the 1/350 Hornet entered at the 1999 US/IPMS (International Piss and Moan Society) National Convention. First off I would like to say that model entered was a nice one. I hope that the builder would take any of the unheated comments as constructive criticism. As pointed out, a model of this size is very complex, which means there are just that many more ways to not do a 100% correct build. What the "TWO JOHN's" (Snyder & Sheridan) were trying to point out was the fact that only two colors were used on all the vertical surfaces of this model, and not the correct three colors. The camo pattern on the hull looked very good, with the hard edge color patterns, but the pattern on the island was air brushed and fuzzy, and was in the same two colors as on the hull, which is not correct. The island should have used the Ocean Gray, which was on the hull, and Haze Gray, which was not on the model at all. What was used was Sea Blue and Ocean Gray, again, on all surfaces, which is incorrect. Also, the colors should have been painted with a hard edge and not a feathered, air brushed application. The "TWO JOHN's" were NOT disputing the tone or hue of the colors used, but the correct number and placement of the above stated colors. A great photo exists of the Hornet in this Measure 12-modified camo pattern. Maybe it is posted on a web page somewhere ?. The photo number is 80-G-K-439 and is dated June or July of 1942. I wish that people would actually read what is said (the same as listening), and not let their misplaced anger take control of intelligence. Hope this will clarify the dispute, Steve Wiper/Classic Warships -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 26) From: SteveWiper@aol.com Subject: IPMS Conventions After having attended the second IPMS National Convention in a row that had a severe lack of attendance from the general public, I have come to the conclusion that the IPMS National needs to have some sort of Oversight Committee to make sure that the convention is promoted properly by the hosting IPMS Club. If we want to see our hobby grow we need to get the most exposure possible, and properly advertising the convention is the first place to start. I have been fortunate to attend the UK IPMS Nat. Convention, and they put us to shame as far as attendance is concerned. They average about 7500 people, while the US is at about 2000 to 2500. Next year in Dallas for the 2000 IPMS US Nat. Convention, the people running the show have told me that they will only open the show to the public on Saturday (last day of the convention) and maybe also on Friday. As a vendor, and business operator, I know this will be bad for us vendors, as it will limit our sales potential, something we always try to avoid. There just is not enough IPMS members to support this move. I also believe that this will actually turn people away from the convention and IPMS as a whole. The idea is attract people to the show and expose them to what IPMS is all about. I believe that this move will have the opposite effect. If any of you disagree with this move by the people at the Dallas IPMS/North Central Texas Club, be sure to contact them at: Phone - (972) 203-3454 web site - http://www.ipmsnct.org I also think you should know about this as they did not bother to ask us vendors, who in one breath they say they want to get to before the public, and in the other breath said "we dont need you vendors to put on a convention" Disgusted, Steve Wiper/Classic Warships -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27) From: SteveWiper@aol.com Subject: The Good Part About the IPMS Convention I Would like to say that I really enjoyed meeting all of the folks from the SMML that were able to make the IPMS Nat. Convention, and all the rest who hopefully are now members. I also enjoy other facets of the hobby, automotive especially. There were some great entries here and Revell/Monogram's latest issues of 1/25 Renard Indy Cars is a very welcome sight. The 1/225 Oregon displayed in a waterline diorama would not quit! The real wood decking was a masterpiece of workmanship. The old Glenco kit never looked so good. The model also was cluttered with crewmen and all sorts of detail. Painted in her white and buff colors made for a very striking build. I was very busy at my tables, hustling huge hunks of resin, so I dont always have the opportunity to socialize as much as I would like. The people I did meet were avid ship modelers, so of course, there were interesting conversations about all sorts of maritime technobabble, the kind that drives wives to tears. If you have not been to an IPMS National Convention, you are missing out. Steve Wiper/Classic Warships -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 28) From: Mike Connelley Subject: Yamato Decks Howdy: A bit of minutia here. I noticed in Jon Warneke's post: >> Second was a Yamato, but the teak decks were very dark, obvoiusly not teak colored. << How was that Yamato anyway? What scale was it? According to the Skulski book the deck of Yamato and Musashi (and also Nagato and Mutsu I believe) had decks of cypress rather than teak, with a grey tint. Not being a woodworker I cannot comment on the color difference between cypress and teak. Cheers Mike -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29) From: jmaine@golden.net Subject: Bismarck's Decks Ken Durling was certainly right-on in his assessment of Markus Van Beek's model of the Bismarck - it's a superb-looking effort. The pictures themselves are of course sitting on an equally impressive website that is dedicated to the "Battleship Bismarck". What I am wondering is this: both the Van Beek model and the website's colour profiles of the ship show much of the aft superstructure decks (aft of the catapult) to be in the same "natural wood" finish as the main deck. Some of the upper decks of the forward superstructure are also shown in this finish. Is this correct for Bismarck during Exercise Rhine? I still have the (admittedly old and out of date) Profile Publication on Bismarck which shows practically all decks above the main deck painted dark grey. I'd appreciate hearing from anybody who can confirm the finish on the upper decks as I am presently taking a break from an old Eagle Altmark to tackle an almost-as-old Airfix Bismarck (both in 1/1200 scale). The latter, incidentally, is a particularly horrible kit, being a kind of scaled-down version of the old 1/600 kit except much worse. It's probably the main reason why Airfix *hasn't* re-issued the Naval History series - sheer embarassment (although some of the others I've seen, to be fair, aren't too bad). Anyway, it would be good to feel that I am at least approaching this project with the right paint scheme. All help much appreciated, John Maine Kitchener, Ontario -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: Shane Subject: Picpost update Hi gang, The picpost page has been sorta updated with some new pictures, courtesy of Ed Grune. But somewhere along the track, it looks I've stuffed up & the actual page can't be accessed. But you can still access the new pics at the root directory: http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/4712/pics/ A few months ago when the research thread was going on, Ed posted in Vol 553 that he had contacted the USS Oberon Assoc & had got some pictures of her, from the crew. They are as follows: Oberon_56.jpg is the USS Oberon while she was designated AK-56. Rather messy isn't she? I make the date to be late summer to early autumn 1942. She was commissioned in June 1942 as AK-56. After her initial shakedown she went to the Solomons Islands operation area. She returned to the States and was part of the North Africa invasion force which departed in October 1942. I use this information along with the white summer uniforms to infer the date. Oberon_14.jpg is the USS Oberon in Norfolk, VA. Note the dark winter uniforms on the crew. There are several possible dates for this photo. In February 1943, while at sea in the Pacific, she was redesignated AKA-14. She returned home and passed through Norfolk in March 1943 on her way to Boston for refit. She left Boston in April and went back to the Norfolk area for training workups and cargo loading for the invasion of Sicily, departing in May, 1943. The third date is December, 1944. She loaded cargo in Rhode Island and was dispatched down the US Atlantic coast to transit to the Pacific via the Panama Canal. Note the weapons configuration; two pair of twin 40mm mounted fore and aft, a 5"/38 gun on the fantail, and 12x20mm Oerlikons on the deckhouse. There are LCVPs nested inside of LCMs on each of the hatches except the foremost. The LCMs are mounted cross-wise. At the foremost hatch there are only LCVPs that are stacked lengthwise the ship. The above pictures show the benefits that contacting these organisations can provide. Ed also has contributed a rogues gallery snapshot from the recent IPMS(US) Nats. I shall refrain from stirring too much, except to say that I'm disappointed John Snyder isn't in uniform (but it doesn't beat the pic CC took of you ;-þ ). SMML_lunch.jpg consists of the following SMMLies: Left to right: Mike Czibovic, Ed Grune, Mike Quan, Hugh Letterly, David D'Angelo, John Collins, Duane Fowler, John Snyder. My apologies to Ed for taking so long to post the USS Oberon pics. Remember that the picpost page is there for you all to use, if you choose to, I may take a while getting them up, as I'm concentrating on the backissues, but they will get posted. I am also considering moving the SMML page to another server, that has more space, but I'll update you on that, if it happens. Regards, Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: John Sheridan Subject: Classic Warships Alaska Check-out Classic Warship's website at: http://www.classicwarships.simplenet.com/ The Alaska is displayed under "New Releases" and under the 1/350th Scale models. John Sheridan What I do to Spammers: http://microscale.com/images/N2.jpg I am not a Member of the Lumber Cartel (tinlc) and I am not Unit #631 Fight Spam! Join CAUCE! http://www.cauce.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: Conan35@aol.com Subject: Re: Model Expo Sale Model Expo, Inc. has just put all the Summer Doldrums Sale on the web site. Including Revell PT109 and Arizona at big discounts. http://www.modelexpoinc.com Best Regards Rob Finley Web Site Mgr. Model Expo, Inc. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: "Shaya Novak" Subject: American Civil War Ships The Naval Base carries almost a 100 Civil War ships. Resin, wood and pewter goto: http://www.modelshipbuilding.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: "Shaya Novak" Subject: Publish Your Pics at Naval Base Hobbies Display them with pride! If you would like your pictures of your built ships to be displayed with your name on it on our website email us either a .gif or .jpg file to: shaya@erols.com Thanks, Shaya -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume