Subject: SMML05/11/99VOL720 Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 00:14:50 +1100 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Thank you 2: Re: SAM KOTLIN CLASS 3: Re: RMS Mauretania. 4: Re: On Resin vs. Plastic kits 5: Re: SAM Kotlin's 6: Re: Resin vs Plastic Kits. 7: Re: On Resin vs. Plastic Kits 8: Cases for models 9: Re: Destroyer escorts 10: Re: Resin vs Plastic 11: KOTLIN CLASS DESTROYERS 12: Re: HMS Emerald - surreal camouflage 13: HMTS or HMHS Maretania? 14: A/C colors 15: Re: SOVIET SAM KOTLIN DESTROYERS 16: Re: Judging ships 17: Re: Cases 18: Re: MODELS IN CASES 19: Re: MODELS IN CASES 20: RN Camouflage 21: Re: AFFORDABLE MODELS 22: Really anal USS PRINGLE (DD-477) questions... 23: GMM PE Supplier 24: On H-R Fittings and Re: Pine Island 25: Re: Resin vs Plastic kits. 26: Plastic vs Resin 27: Resin vs. Plastic 28: Help 29: Squadron's Light Cruisers in Action 30: Sackville Book 31: Re: Resin vs. Plastic 32: U S S Lexington camouflage 33: Re: Derek and his California BB 34: Re: On resin vs plastic kits. 35: USS California c.1944 36: Re: Resin vs Plastic 37: German paint schemes -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD INDEX 1: SMML website update 2: NEW ARRIVALS 3: Hungarian customer's order can't be sent 4: Seaplane Tenders, Larger Straight & Angled Deck Essex Carriers, & GMM parts -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: "brian lawrence fawcett" Subject: Thank you Hi Guy's, What an amazing group of people you are. I find it very difficult to put into words the emotion felt by my wife and I, caused by the number and content of all the email's and cards that you have sent to us. It came as quite a surprise, upon my return from hospital to find over 50 message's waiting on the internet. I would like to thank you all very much for your kind thought's and word's. Yes I will do as I am told by the doctor and hopefully will be back to full fitness soon. Thank you again, Brian. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: Les Pickstock Subject: Re: SAM KOTLIN CLASS Somewhere in the stacks I know I've got some 1/600th scale drawings of the KOTLIN class from an old Scale Model mag. If you contact me offlist I'll try and find them and send you a copy. Les Pickstock. PS: The drawings I have are for the KOTLIN HELO and AAA version but contact me if your'e still interested. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: "J. London" Subject: Re: RMS Mauretania. The most noticeable difference between the Airfix kit and the ship in WW 1 would be the number of lifeboats. The kit (at least the one I have) shows her as built with 16 boats whereas, after the Titanic disaster new regulations required enough boats to carry everyone on board. Boats were added amidships and others were double banked. One would have to refer to photographs for her appearance in the war as the number may have been modified again for trooping purposes. Mike London -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: "John Sheridan" Subject: Re: On Resin vs. Plastic kits >> Is our hobby not large enough to support plastic kits of some of the subjects now available only as (expenisive) resin ones? << No it is not large enough to duplicate the current resin market. >> I have nothing but respect and admiration for the effort the resin producers put into their products and the quality of the products themselves. They have filled many, many holes in the list of available ships. However, I cannot afford most of them. And limited runs make it impossible to acquire many of those I can. << That is a real problem. One solution is to build in 1/700th or 1/1250th to cut-down costs. Creating a Resin kit from scratch is a time-consuming and expensive process. Also, alot of Resin kits are of more obscure subjects and therefore sales will be low. The manufacturer needs to take this into account when creating a kit or its bankrupcy time! >> Certainly, I understand why resin kits cost so much, and I don't begrudge their makers proper return on their efforts. But it seems to me that we have proven there is enough demand for more ship models to induce the injection-molding companies to give us more variety (and larger scales) than is currently the practice. << Traditionally, sales of inject-modeled shipmodels has never been a brisk business compared to armor, aircraft, and autos. The tooling to create a injection molded kit is also extrememly expensive and the manufacturer needs to sell *lots* of kits to recoup these costs. This is a major consideration when decieding whether to create kit that sells 100,000 kit vs a kit that will only sell 1,000 kits. >> Where are the plastic Alaskas, tinclad treaty cruisers, interwar destroyers, just to use US examples? Where are decent plastic versions of the fleet carriers, the standard BBs, the 'phibs, and the auxillaries? Surely there are enough of us to support economically viable runs of these things in plastic. << Its a popularity contest in which kit gets made. Tamiya did the Fletcher kit because they figured its a popular type of ship and would generate lots of sales. Sure, they could have done a Bagley class DD but it would not have generated much in sales; hell, it probally would not have payed for the tooling! >> Am I being unrealistic about wishing for "odd" (really, they are "odd" only in not having been done yet) AND affordable kits? << Yes, I'm afraid you are being unrealistic in your expectations simply because you probally do not understand the underlying costs of creating a model kit from scratch. I personally like to build 1/350th kits. Unfortunately, 90% of the kits I want are in resin. I just save my pennies until I can afford the kit that I want. Sometimes, my VISA card takes-over my brain and demands that I buy that new kit on the shelf for 2 bizillion dollars, but hey! I'm addicted to my hobby so it's expected....... John Sheridan Visit my USN Ship Camo site at: http://home.earthlink.net/~jrsheridan/ I am not a Member of the Lumber Cartel (tinlc) and I am not Unit #631 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: Pieter Cornelissen Subject: Re: SAM Kotlin's >> Can anyone suggest where I could perhaps find scale drawings,also details of the wasphead radar and guns. Any help would be very appreciated. << AFAIK there are no detailed, western style, scale drawings available of post WWII russian ships. SAM Kotlin's (Project 56K) merit one drawing (approximatly in 1/1000) and one photograph in Warships of the USSR and Russia by A S Pavlov. This drawing may be useful for building a model in 1/700. There are some other photographs in western publications. The SAM system and radars of these ships was also used on project 58 (Kynda) and project 1134 (Kresta 1 cruisers), project 61 (Kashin) and project 57 A (Kanin) destroyers and the Angara radar was used on just about every Soviet warship built between 1960 and 1975. It should therefore not be hard to find good photographs of these systems. Skywave includes a 1/700 Volna (SA-N-1) missile system in its Soviet Weapons set, strangely mislabeling it as a Shtorm (SA-N-3). Pieter Cornelissen Delft, The Netherlands -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: Lisa and Bill Wiseman Subject: Re: Resin vs Plastic Kits. Steve, I have often lamented the same thing, not only in ships, but my other love, Armor. I was talking to someone from Tamiya and the following was explained to me. I order for one of the major kit manufacturers to justify the cost of a new set of tools for a kit they have to sell something like 7,000 units retail. By way of example, The Tamiya Dragon Wagon, their big armor release last year, cost them $300,000 in research, tooling costs, planning and so forth. At about $100 retail per copy they would have to sell 3000 units retail just to cover costs of start up. To cover shipping, raw plastic, labor, boxes and so forth another 4000 units had to be sold. The kit didn't make a whole lot of money and that's a kit that most armor modelers have been aching for. To do the tooling for, say, a 1/350 Battleship would cost on the same order as the Dragon Wagon. I would love to see more Auxiliaries, Transports, Mine sweepers, Tin Cans, and patrol craft kits in plastic. But I don't see the USS Frigate Bird (a little ex-YR minesweeper) selling 7000 copies. I don't see the USS Boulder LST 1190 doing it either. Thankfully, the resin kit manufacturers like JAG, ISW, Cottage Industry, and so forth have stepped in to fill the holes in our miniature fleets. It is unfortunate that the costs associated with resin kits are so high. There are many resin kits I would love to build "...but the lord and my wife wouldn't take it very well". (I doubt the mortgage company would like it either.) Just my opinion, Doc Wiseman -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: "John Snyder" Subject: Re: On Resin vs. Plastic Kits Steve: I'm quite sure you haven't stepped on any toes, and that you'll get more cogent replies from others, but here's mine. In short, the costs to tool up to produce injection-molded plastic kits are enormous. It takes a LOT of kit sales before they break even, much less make a profit. As much as we might like to think otherwise, the shipmodel market just isn't as bit as the aircraft, armor, or car markets. As an example, Mike Czibovic/Corsair Models produced a resin kit of USS RANGER (CV-4), a kit for which many of us had been clamoring for a long, long time. This was a limited run of, what, 100 kits? Mike introduced the kit at the 1998 IPMS/USA Nationals at Santa Clara; I was with him when he sold the last at the Orlando Nationals this year. Now, sales of 100 kits/year isn't going to even pique the interest of the plastic kit makers to start machining molds, much less doing the research to produce an accurate model. And speaking of accuracy, that's almost a religion with the makers of resin kits, at least those that I know. The plastic kit manufacturers seem to have a "close is good enough" attitude. Think about the Tamiya 1/350 FLETCHER, a subject for which there is voluminous material available. Yet the kit's gunhouses lack a very distictive knuckle, and the 5" guns are incorrectly centered in the mounts rather than being offset. I won't even go into such kits as Aoshima's BISMARCK.... On top of all else, there is the reality of the interests of those who run the companies. The resin ship manufacturers are interested in...SHIPS! Mr. Tamiya happens to be an armor enthusiast. Would a plastic 1/350 ESSEX from Tamiya sell? You bet, but don't count on seeing one; yet another mark of a Tiger tank is far more likely. No, for now I'd suggest buying those resin kits of more obscure subjects that you can afford, in the hope that some of the less obscure subjects may one day see the light of day in plastic. Of course, you could always sell your first-born to white slavers and buy 'em all. (I won't tell you which I've done.) This was supposed to be a short post. Sorry 'bout that, and one to someone else. John Snyder Snyder & Short Enterprises The Paint Guys -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: Bruce Burden Subject: Cases for models First, let me state that as an IPMS/USA Nationals qualified judge, I cringe any time I hear another IPMS/USA Nats judge stating that models "must" be picked up. I prefer to say that the possiblity exists, and some handling is almost unavoidable. This is more true with tanks and planes that figures and cars. (The figure and car folks kindly provide bases as a rule. The military side is still struggling with that concept. :-) ) >> made some excellent points and got me thinking some more. If the only way IPMS judges can judge models is to pick them up and turn them over, what happens with dioramas? << What happens with dioramas is that construction is only part of the criteria. Storyline is supposed to be the biggest consideration, with construction and being the other factors to consider. >> If they are to be consistent, then they should be prying the aircraft and tanks off their bases, so they can look underneath. << Obviously you have to accept that there will be limitations. Besides, I have never had to pick up a tank to look underneath it. A flash light and getting down at table top level has always worked for me. "Picking up a model" is generally an excuse for a bad back, bad knees, laziness, all of the above or other excuses. (Yes, I know there are exceptions. Still, I rarely see judges on their knees examining models). There are very few airplanes, cars, figures, sci-fi, etc. that I am not able to look under if I make the effort. And, yes, dioramas too. Usually. :-) Besides, I prefer modellers put their models on a base. It is a lot easier to re-categorize models if they are on a base, as well as being able to slide the base around of the table to look at all aspects of the model. Not to mention moving the model from the center of the table to the edge so it can be examined to begin with. No, I don't assume they are attached! >> Then again, if they can judge the component parts of a diorama without tearing the thing apart, why can't they judge a ship model in a transparent case?! << 1. glare 2. distortion 3. finger-prints Glare should be self-explanitory. Distortion may or may not be a factor. Plastics and glass, are, after all, liquids, and all will flow to some extent. Is that mast really crooked, or is it the case? Is that railing really straight, or does it wander? Railings can be a real pain if they happen to fall in an area where a case edge screws things up. And finger prints/smears/smudges/etc. are all self-explanitory. I look forward to the time when we can discuss how the judges "blew it" judging models in the case. :-) Bruce -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: SCALSHPYRD@aol.com Subject: Re: Destroyer escorts >> I'm looking for model of a destroyer escort BUTLER series at lest 20" in size. Any info would greatly be appreciated Thank You Kenneth clausen << Ken: The Scale Shipyard offers a fiberglass hull and cast fittings for the 306' DE classes in 1:96 scale which makes a 39" long model. This is not a kit so the modeler needs to fabricate the decks and superstructure. For further information and instructions on how to order our 1999 catalog you can send an E-Mail to: scalshpyrd@aol.com Lee Upshaw The Scale Shipyard -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: Resin vs Plastic >> Where are the plastic Alaskas, tinclad treaty cruisers, interwar destroyers, just to use US examples? Where are decent plastic versions of the fleet carriers, the standard BBs, the 'phibs, and the auxillaries? Surely there are enough of us to support economically viable runs of these things in plastic. << As far as popularity with the general public goes, (and that's the target audience for plastic companies) ships rate at the bottom of the list. Sorry, but it's true. This fact alone is exactly why the big plastic companies don't invest money in nautical subjects. The major plastic companies need thousands of kits to be sold before realizing a profit for the company. There just aren't enough ship modelers to justify the expense. The resin industry is a result of supply and demand. They can produce less popular subjects at far less expense than their plastic counterparts. The tradeback is smaller quantities and higher prices but better (sometimes WAY better) quality. I hate to say it, but that's just the way it is. Rusty White Flagship Models Inc. http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ "Yeah I want Cheesy Poofs" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: "Leslie Brown" Subject: KOTLIN CLASS DESTROYERS The Scale Models Magazine of March 1972 included a 1/600 scale drawing of these vessels together with some larger scale detail drawings. If Gary (or anyone else) would like a copy, please contact me and I will respond as soon as possible but I must warn you that I'm about to go abroad on business for two/three weeks so there may be some delay. Regards Les Brown -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: "Kenneth H. Goldman" Subject: Re: HMS Emerald - surreal camouflage Okay, John, now you've done it. A Salvador Dali camouflage job? Intriguing idea (also tempting to try). Consider the affect on a U-boat skipper - especially after a depth charge pounding - who ups scope and sees that! It sounds like something Wild Bill Donovan would have conceived. Ken Goldman THE WALRUS AND THE CARPENTER http://www.wman.com/~khgold/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: Duane Fowler Subject: HMTS or HMHS Maretania? Hello Chris, Good show on doing the Mauretania! I haven't gotten the kit yet and so I do not know what differences, if any, there are between the kit and the WWI ship. My big question is: Where are you getting the port side dazzle pattern from? All the photos I have seen are of the starboard side. I have several sets of plans for the Mauretania and they all show that the decks were reinforced to take a line of deck guns (up to 6") to make her an auxiliary cruiser. However, none of the photos that I have show that any were installed. I will look closely tonight and respond tomorrow if I find anything different. The Olympic had several different configurations during the war of up to six deck guns of 4.7" and 5.7" sizes. Although she never hit an enemy vessel with her guns, she did sink a U-boat by ramming it. I think that a particularly interesting - an good looking - version would be to do the Mauretania as a hospital ship with the white hull, green stripe, and red crosses. She served in that capacity for a short time and had a distinctly tapering green line at the stern - rather unusual. Best regards, Duane Fowler -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: A/C colors I am currently working on a 1/350 Classic Warships Indianapolis kit for a client. I need to know what colors the Seahawk float planes are. I suspect they are intermediate blue over white but I have nothing to confirm this. I have the CW USS Indianapolis book but nowhere does it specify colors for the aircraft. The illustrations don't help since they are printed in grayscale. Any help would be much appreciated. Rusty White Flagship Models Inc. http://warship.simplenet.com/Flagship.htm "Yeah I want Cheesy Poofs" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: "FCR" Subject: Re: SOVIET SAM KOTLIN DESTROYERS Hello Gary >> Can anyone suggest where I could perhaps find scale drawings,also details of the wasphead radar and guns. Any help would be very appreciated. << You are talking of Soviet Navy Project 56A of 1969-71 or Kotlin SAM destroyers. I can scan to you the profile of those ship's from "Warships of the USSR and Russia - 1945-1995" of A. S. Pavlov. It brings all the profiles of conversions for this class and I believe that the plans are at 1/700 scale. They aren't much accurate but it's already something. It brings too a few pictures them and many information. Contact me off-line if you want this. Happy Modeling Filipe Ramires PORTUGAL -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: Judging ships >> If the parts that cannot be seen are not as well finished does that really matter so long as the model looks good when viewed with ordinary vigilance. And that means one doesn't turn the model belly up to look for faults. Examine any piece of furniture or equipment in your home, your car. The surfaces are well finished only where they are noticeable. << Talk about apples and oranges. I fail to see the comparison of assembly line produced furniture and cars to hand crafted works of art (models). I'll bet if you go to a furniture building contest (if there is such a thing) you'll see the judges looking everywhere (including underneath) for quality of construction to distinguish the winners from the losers. Same goes for cars. Go to any custom car show and you'll find every crack and crevice is immaculate due to the competition. >> As for covers on ship models, frankly I am more impressed with exhibits with covers. They look more valued and finished. And these models look as if they are meant to be viewed and enjoyed for a long time. << It's obvious you lack national judging experience. That's not an elitist statement, so please don't take it that way. Plain and simple, the competition is so advanced we must be nit picky to separate 1st from 3rd. We judge the whole model and that's as it should be. If you're going to enter a contest (you say you don't, and that's okay) it boils down to who makes the fewest mistakes. If we have to look for these mistakes in unlikely places, too bad. That's our job as IPMS judges. >> The best judge of the worth of a model is the general public and I believe their judgment is usually correct if you care to hear their comments and also observe the number of viewers around interesting models. When you get complaints about unfair judging its usually from other contestants and this is where nit picking comes in -- like not having an equally good paint job in areas un-noticed by anyone else and the judge didn't notice it because of the cover. << If the public was judging the models (which they do in the Most Popular Model category) I would have no problem with it. Most of the public that views these models has no idea how to technically (and fairly) judge them. That's why IPMS/USA has a group of proven, trained judges. They (we) build what they are judging and are familiar with what to look for. In IPMS/USA competition we don't judge the bases or cases as part of the model. Mostly because it isn't part of the model (unless it's in the diorama categories). I have a suggestion. You can be an IPMS(USA) National judge if you attend the OJT (On the job training) meeting at the US Nationals in Dallas. I know you will see competition and judging in a whole new light if you do. Come find me and I'll get you in. I learned a great deal once I learned how judges look at models. I would advise everyone to sit in as an OJT. Rusty White IPMS(USA) Head ship judge http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ "Yeah I want Cheesy Poofs" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: Cases >> If the only way IPMS judges can judge models is to pick them up and turn them over, what happens with dioramas? If they are to be consistent, then they should be prying the aircraft and tanks off their bases, so they can look underneath. Then again, if they can judge the component parts of a diorama without tearing the thing apart, why can't they judge a ship model in a transparent case?! << We do! Each of us carries claw hammer to make easier. Sorry Ken I had to say that. Obviously, if the model is too large or difficult to pick up we don't. We also don't pick up every model. The models start getting picked up when it comes time to nit pick and select 1st 2nd and 3rd. The difference between 1st and third is almost unnoticeable. Dioramas is a different animal. The theme of the diorama weighs heavily to determine the winner but the basic must still be followed. The bigger the diorama, the more there is to go wrong. Most dioramas have many "basics" mistakes. As I said they are judged differently and sometimes (I have noticed) the basics were considered secondary to the model as a whole. Obviously, we do the best we can to see below the models while fixed to bases. Rusty White IPMS(USA) Head ship judge http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ "Yeah I want Cheesy Poofs" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: HGYL@aol.com Subject: Re: MODELS IN CASES Kelvin Mok has written the most sensible comments so far about models in cases. The mind, as they say, boggles at the judging techniques that must be used by the judges at those IPMS and APMA competitions. One wonders what the likes of highly skilled modellers such as Donald McNarry and Lloyd McCaffrey would say to the suggestion that one of their models be taken out of its case to be judged. People are prepared to pay literally thousands for models built by modellers like these and I am sure that prospective buyers don't ask for the models to be taken out of their cases in order to be able to make a purchasing decision. Did anyone else see the beautiful miniature of the USS "Constitution" by Lloyd McCaffrey in the gallery at Mystic Seaport last year? Now that is what I call a real model. Harold Lincoln -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: Shane Subject: Re: MODELS IN CASES Hi gang, I want to make it ABSOLUTLY clear that APMA(Australian Plastic Modeller's Assoc) does not have any rules preventing models being judged in cases. In fact as I've said before, the winner of the ship category, which then went on to win Model of the Year at last years AGM competition was a scratchbuilt Thames Tug secured in a glass case. Regards, Shane APMA VP http://www.tac.com.au/~sljenkins/apma.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: Clifford Franklin Subject: RN Camouflage Decoy's multicoloured scheme shown in Warship Illustrated No 4 is of the First Admiralty type of camouflage, which wasn't introduced until later on in 1941. However, a photo of her starboard side wearing an early two colour scheme was published in the book "Into the Blue" by T.D.Herrick (Parapress:1997). The photo is captioned as being taken in Alex in 1941, and this was probably the scheme she wore during the Greek/Crete operations. Unfortunately, I have not seen a port side view of her anywhere. The book also has some nice photos of Hotspur wearing an early dazzle type scheme from the same time. If you want copies of any of these, contact me off line. For Ledbury, there is a photo in C. Barnett's book "Engage the Enemy More Closely" which has her in a WA style of camouflage in February, 1942. There is another photo of her wearing the same scheme in "Russian Convoys" (World Ship Society) dated February, 1943, so there is a good chance she was wearing this scheme during Operation Pedastal. cheers Cliff Franklin -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21) From: HGYL@aol.com Subject: Re: AFFORDABLE MODELS Steve Allen has made a strong plea for more moulded plastic ship kits on the grounds that he can't afford the models he wants because resin kits are too expensive. I believe the truth of the matter is that unless a model kit sells in the order of tens of thousands of units the manufacturer loses money. There is a fairly strong rumour that Tamiya has up to now produced even its Fletcher class destroyer kit at a loss. With apologies to the producers of resin ship model kits (and I enjoy putting their kits together enormously) there is a very easy way of getting a model of virtually any ship you want at very little cost. It's called scratch building. It really is much easier than anyone who has not tried it might think, it's fun, it's satisfying and unless one is building to a very large scale it really is very inexpensive. About the most expensive part of it can be buying plans and other reference materials but even here a great deal can be had from magazines and other inexpensive sources. There are lots of books and magazine articles on the subject of scratch building. Why not give it a try ? Harold Lincoln -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22) From: LUCASNER@aol.com Subject: Really anal USS PRINGLE (DD-477) questions... Only a truly dedicated modeler would dare ask the following: When the Pringle was outfitted with the catapult, does anyone know if she carried (and where) a 5-inch loading machine? I've visited the Kidd (DD-661) in Baton Rouge several (hundred) times and have photographed the depth charge controls on the port bridge wing. Was this a feature of all the Fletchers or was it a later war modification? Were there 20mm ready storage lockers for the 3 20mm guns mounted around and on top of the pilothouse? Were there any visible storage for bombs/depth bombs/ smoke markers for the Kingfisher aircraft embarked? These are really out there questions, but I've a growing fanaticism to build the most detailed and accurate Pringle I can. I figure that if you're gonna build a particular ship because of it's peculiarities, you might as well get ALL of them, right? OK, so I'm nuts... Thanks everyone, Dave Lueck -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23) From: "Tom Werner Hansen" Subject: GMM PE Supplier Fellows Does anybody know of a supplier for GMM P.E. that will: A) take credit cards, B) Ship internationally (Norway), C) Do me the favour of pretending that the merchandise is in fact a gift. My normal source (who will do all the above) does not carry GMM, or any other line that will set me up with P.E for the Heller 1:400 Aurora and Potemkin. Tom W Hi Tom, Try WEM at: http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/white.ensign.models They stock GMM & take credit cards, so that takes care of 1 & 2. I've dealt with them for 3 years now(PSM subs & PE) & the only complaint I make is the bloody exchange rate ;-)) Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24) From: "Steven P. Allen" Subject: On H-R Fittings and Re: Pine Island On H-R fittings: Does anyone know why it's currently so difficult to get H-R white metal fittings? I've had some on order from FD for over two months now, and no show yet. Tom W. has assured me that he'll ship as soon as they arrive, but they haven't come in yet. Is this typical for H-R? I know that it's not typical for FD. Re: Pine Island Loren, Thanks for the dioroma idea; I have to slap myself (it occurred to me independently about 1 hour after I submitted the question). Eureka! Now, near as I can figure, the ship scales out about 1/425. That means that the PE sets for either the Revell Yorktown class or the Arizona come pretty close, right? That is, those sets could be mined for railing, radar, etc., yes? Now, does anybody make fittings, guns, etc., in a reasonably close scale? I've never seen the H-R 1/384 stuff; has anyone out there actually used any? Might it be sufficiently "undersize" to work? Thanks all! Steve Allen PS I got hold of the December FSM; Kudos to Phil Kirchmeier. If anyone is interested, the Model Expo ad in it devots almost two pages to ships. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25) From: "John O. Steed II" Subject: Re: Resin vs Plastic kits. Hi Steve, I too wish there were more plastic versions of the many ships that seem to only be the subjects of high dollar resin models or in benign 1/700 scale plastic. I also do airliners; in that area, we have a friend in Al Trendle of Minicraft models who has gone a long way in providing good to excellent models of airliners in 1/144 scale at very accessible prices. I've seen that Minicraft offers some limited number of ship examples; perhaps someday Minicraft will introduce a line of ships that aren't all battleships, carriers, submarines, or post-WWII and can be purchased without incurring debt. Thanks to online suppliers like Model Expo, I have collected some of my favorite Royal Navy ships from Airfix. Granted, the detail is not "laser eyed" sharp, but I can work around that at their purchase price. It would be truly enjoyable to have several examples of ships from 1905 - 1945 that could rest on my mantle or shelves without insurance from Lloyds. John Steed Amarillo, Texas -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 26) From: Mike Connelley Subject: Plastic vs Resin Howdy: >> However, I cannot afford most of them. And limited runs make it impossible to acquire many of those I can. << >> Where are the plastic Alaskas, tinclad treaty cruisers, interwar destroyers, just to use US examples? Where are decent plastic versions of the fleet carriers, the standard BBs, the 'phibs, and the auxillaries? Surely there are enough of us to support economically viable runs of these things in plastic.<< >> Am I wrong about the size of the market or the economic viability of large runs of newly-tooled kits (recent Tamiya experience tells me I'm not wrong, but I sure could be)? Am I being unrealistic about wishing for "odd" (really, they are "odd" only in not having been done yet) AND affordable kits? << I've given this issue some thought myself. I would also love to get my paws on some of those fine resin kits but being a college student I have a limited hobby budget (especially now since I just got a 1/200 Yamato!!!). The high cost of resin ships stems simply from the fact that comparatively few people are interested in ships and those specific subjects (you're average modeler won't know what the West Virginia looked like in 1941), and those who are interested might not be able to afford the price tag...thus reducing the number of resin kits sold thus increasing the per unit price. I also would like to see more ships in plastic if not just for the lower price...thus the news form ICM is very welcome indeed. Of the four major genres of modeling (cars, planes, armor and ships) we have by far the fewest numbers...and thus the least buying power. Companies want to offer interesting subjects but also have to watch their bottom lines. We haven't seen that many ships in plastic, especially in 1/350 scale since those molds cost so much to make and and comparatively few people are interested in ship models that are 3 feet long and take weeks or months to build. The recent re-tooling of a number of 1/700 ships shows there is interest in ship modeling but not as much as, say, planes. If there were more interest in ships we would have seen a re-tooled 1/350 Yamato rather than the 1/48 Fairley Swordfish (and who ever plans to spend the $50 or whatever astronomical price they're charging for it I would like a word with you). Now, given the re-toolings of 1/700 scale ships and the news from ICM regarding the 1/350 Hood, Nelson and Takao, perhaps there are enough of us and we have enough buying power to make companies like Tamiya realize that new ships (and even in larger scales) is a viable course to presue. If these kits sell well then we can hope to see more ships in plastic on the market. I'm always humored by a/c guys incessantly complaining about there not being a "good" kit in 1/72 of the Spitfire Mk9 or a bump on the nose of a Bf-109 G-3 is not quite right when we don't even have a good kit in any scale of 90% of the ships in WW2, much less WW1 or other eras. There is (not yet) a large scale Hood, the 1/350 Tamiya kits are all over 20 years old and leave much to be desired, there is almost nothing in WW2 British, American and German ships in plastic and a few in resin. We don't even have most ship classes, much less ever fitting of every ship (as the plane modelers have with every possible variant of the P-51, Spitfire and Messerschmitt available). So we, the ship modelers, must do more with less and perhaps that's why ships do so well at model shows. Not to sound too discriminatory and egotistical, but it takes a different kind of modeler to build ships. Cheers Mike Connelley Hi Mike, One could say that WW1 aero modellers fit in the same mould as shipmodellers. This is before all the WW1 listees(including Mistress Lorna) get stuck into you as well ;-)) Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27) From: "Mike Leonard" Subject: Resin vs. Plastic Steve said: >> Is our hobby not large enough to support plastic kits of some of the subjects now available only as (expenisive) resin ones? Surely there are enough of us to support economically viable runs of these things in plastic. << Probably not. I read a long time back - in FSM? - that the tooling costs for an injected plastic model are such that the manufacturer would want to be reasonably sure of selling many thousands of copies. I don't think we're there yet (unfortunately)... Mike L Alexandria, VA USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 28) From: JRuotsala@aol.com Subject: Help For the story I'm writing I need to know what kind of ship the HMS Sumarr was? Can anyone help me. Jim Ruotsala -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29) From: Ed Grune Subject: Squadron's Light Cruisers in Action Hello all: I received my November Squadron Mail Order supplement in today's mail. They are announcing the availability of the new "US Light Cruisers in action" book for sale. Description says ... "US Light Cruisers took the of the fighting after the loss of the US Navy Battleships and Heavy Cruisers during ther early days of the Pacific War. Covers development, and combat operations of OMAHA, BROOKLYN, ST. LOUIS, ATLANTA, CLEVELAND, and WORCESTER class light cruisers. Dozens of B&W photos, 9 color paintings, 50 pages." Ed -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30) From: "Mike Leonard" Subject: Sackville Book I just received my copy of "HMCS Sackville 1941-1985" from the Canadian Naval Memorial Trust in Halifax, NS. Softbound, 96 pages; an excellent history on the last surviving Flower class corvette, one of 123 that served with the RCN during WW2. The many contemporary color photos of the ship that can be accessed from the Warship web site make a wonderful complement to the book. Highly recommended for anybody who can't wait for the upcoming book by John Lambert. I simply mailed them CAN$20 to cover the price of the book and postage, and asked that they apply whatever was left towards the Trust Fund to help preserve this historic vessel. Mike L Alexandria, VA USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 31) From: Marc Flake Subject: Re: Resin vs. Plastic Steve: The short answer is: No, we don't have enough numbers to justify even limited-run injection-molded plastic kits. Hopefully, you'll get some responses from resin manufacturers like Caroline and Steve. As you'll see, they make only about 1,000 kits of each subject. But it'll take years to sell them all. In the economics of injection molds, this would be disasterous. We're talking tens of thousands in the run that have to be sold in the first year. These people aren't providing a service, they're in it for the money. What I can't figure is why people keep buying Me-109s, FW-190s, P-51s, P-40s, Spitfires, Mosquitoes, Shermans, Tigers, Panthers and T-34s. Admittedly, I have about three of each, but some people have one of every kit ever made. And that doesn't even count the F-15s, F-18s, etc. In order to get where we want to be, modellers would have to be building every example of the Fletcher or Yorktown class in each color scheme each ship wore throughout their career. (I have two Fletchers, two CV-6s and one CV-8), every single Essex-class (only two of these). At contests, there would be so many battleships entered that the judges would have to break them out by nationality. We can only hope that the latest ME-109G is the last straw for some Luftwaff-a-phile, that the latest Mosquito finally bores the RAF-o-phile, or that Kampfpanzers ultimately lead to Panzerschiffes. Look at the record of Czechmasters. Some of those resin kits are being turned into limited-run injection-molded kits. And a very few of these are becoming full-fledged injection kits from Tamigawa or Revellogram. If the first full run of WEM Warspites had sold out in the first month, the industry would notice. They will be watching ICM this winter. What we and other modellers do with the Konig, Grosserkurfurst and Hood will be important to the future of our side of the hobby. Marc Flake Tarrant County Texas -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 32) From: WRPRESSINC@aol.com Subject: U S S Lexington camouflage I am in touch with a former crew member of the Lexington who states, with firmness, that the ship was painted with broad, near vertical stripes along the hull, that were green in color. This was in the period immediately after Pearl Harbor, into the first weeks of 1942. Question:- Are there any photos of the ship taken in this time frame that can confirm or deny the above? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 33) From: Derek Wakefield Subject: Re: Derek and his California BB >> Trust me, (feel free to chime in here guys) a BB or your first resin kit is not the best idea...you're smart in holding off. If I may, here a few recommendations =>to get your feet wet... << Jeff Thanks for the feedback, and yeah - after going over all the parts of the kit - I can't disagree with you entirely. However, I also have other factors to take into consideration. My display space is limited, so the ships I choose to model have to be limited to those I'm the most interested in. No offense to the others here, but I've never been all that facinated with small boys and patrol craft. As such, I've concentrated most of my efforts on BBs, CVs, and CA/CLs. In my entire life, I've built three DDs/DEs (a Hawk Fletcher, a Tamiya Ayanami, and a Lindberg Rudderow) -- all of which were done when I was a kid. Accordingly, I'm only considering a handful of 1/350 scale ships (two of which I don't believe there are kits available for anymore - a USN Cleveland and Atlanta cl CL). The rest of the ships I want to model will have to be restricted to 1/700 scale. I already have the IS Elco PT boat to practice on. I wish there was either a Rudderow cl DE or Ashville PF kit available as the second-stage training kit, but alas there isn't. That being the case, I'm considering getting JAG's Ashville PG as a intermediary training kit, and possibly IS's Buckley cl DE (if it's still available) as a final exam -- as I'll need something to get experience working with PE with. There's also a chance I might hold off and try a cruiser before stepping up to the battlewagon, but that's going to depend on my finances. Likewise, I also plan on tackling some of the injection kits I've collected over the years first to get a handle on researching the subject, experimenting with different building/painting techniques, etc. From there I'll move on to the resin kits. More or less, I picked up the IS TN kit because after waiting for 20 years for one to come out, I didn't want to risk missing out. For now, I'm limiting my efforts to historical research and studying various techiniques I hear about here and other places. In many ways, I'm starting over from scratch because I never tackled high-detail realistic-prototypical projects before. Sanding, puttying, airbrushing, PE, rigging, superglues, epoxies, scratchbuilding, etc are all very new to me. Everything I did in the past was done slapdash fashion No way I'm about to set out learning all of this on a kit as complicated as the IS Tennessee. Just doing the research on the California is turning out to be more difficult than I originally thought it would be. But that's best left for another post. Dasvidanya! _|_o_|_ Derek "Tiger" (/\)akefield /---(.](o)[.)---\ iscandar2@chatter.com o oo O oo o http://www.iscandar-66.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 34) From: Derek Wakefield Subject: Re: On resin vs plastic kits. Steve All valid points, and I agree with you. Mind you this coming from an uninformed amateur with no connections in the business, but this is what I've picked up over the years from observation and talking to folks. The unfortunate fact of life is that when it comes to injection kits, ship models seem to rank as lowly fourth cousins to those of cars, planes, and armor as far as manufacturers and retailers are concerned. Locally (Denton, TX) I don't even bother looking for ships at department stores anymore because all the ones in this area seem interested in carrying are car kits, with a few tolken planes and Star Wars/Trek kits on the side. When I go to Hobby Lobby (the only craft-hobby shop in town) there's an asile of cars, and asile, of planes, a half an asile of armor, a scattering of science fiction kits, and maybe a half a dozen ship kits. At one of the closest well stocked hobby shops, there's one asile of ships compared to two of cars, two of planes, and one of armor (with the rest of the shop dedicated to trains). This seems to be the trend of most of the shops I've visited both here and in other parts of the country I've visited. The last IMPS show I attended about two years go had part of a row for ships - everything else was cars, planes, armor, and science fiction/anime (mostly planes). Back in HS, I wrote repeatedly to every US model manufacture I could locate an address for about producing kits for the California and Maryland. I received a few replies for my effort. Most said thanks, we'll think about it...which I came to equate to being your typical SOL letter. In HS, I was simply awestruck by the selection and quality of kits offered by Japanese injection kit companies. The disheartening thing though was that US, UK, USSR, French, Italian, and ships of other western nations seemed to take a back door in comparison to the number and diversity of Japanese warships they offered. The reason for this is pretty obvious. However, there still remains a number of folks in Japan that still hold a grudge against the allied nations for what happened to Japan in WWII. The current trend among Japanese model companies seems to favor modern American naval vessels rather than WWII ones. Not surprising, after all, we're allies now. I doubt if we'll ever see a Tamiya, Fujimi, Hasegawa, or Pit-Road USS Arizona kit for good reason. Not that it wouldn't be appreciated, but it might be seen as bad taste and an attempt to profit off the misery of the memory of the ship. To my knowledge, only one of the US BBs at Pearl Harbor has ever been offered by a Japanese model company - a 1/700 West Virginia. The last time I saw it listed at Hobbylink Japan though, the price for that kit was still rather steep. I don't think any of the major US injection kit companies have produced a new WWII era ship model since the 60's or 70's. I admit, I very well may be wrong about this, but when persusing through the selection available, most of the kits available seem to be reissues of older kits. Similarly, a lot of the US companies that produced warship kits have fallen by the wayside or simply stopped offering the warship kits they once did. Why is this? My *guess* is the demographics show that most models are built by pre-teens and teenagers who are more facinated with modern, speed oriented machines like cars and planes. Not surprising since cars are a part of our everyday life, and in recent military conflicts much more emphasis has been placed on planes than ships. Excluding the Falklands War, there really hasn't been a major naval war since WWII to pique the interest and inspire the imagination of the nation's youth. Likewise, there hasn't been a blockbuster movie like Titanic, Top Gun, Saving Private Ryan to bring the story of a fighting ship and her crew to the forefront of public awareness in quite a few years now. The Hunt for Red October and Under Siege are the last ones I can recall, and neither of those rank the impact that Titanic had. Accordingly, beyond the mild interest in supercarriers and subs, there hasn't been much interest in modeling ships among the masses. I had several chances to speak to proprietors of hobby shops here in town over the past thirty years. Most of the ones we had never lasted very long because they couldn't generate enough sales to stay open. According to one of these owners, ships just don't sell anymore. As he put it, "they're dead weight" - so once he managed to unload the kits he never bothered to restock that area of his inventory. He offered to do special orders for me, but the prices were prohibitive. Nowadays, we cringe at dropping $100-$1000 on a limited edition resin kit. Comparatively, some of the folks I've known have winced at a $20-60 pricetag on a Tamiya 1/700 waterline kit -- especially, as they put it, given the fact they were only getting half a ship. The only thing available in the $10-20 range they're willing to shell out were "those old crummy Revell kits I built back when I was a kid". Yeah, I know...a lot can be done with those old Revell kits. However, most of those I've known didn't blueprint, research, and build up their kits, but instead adhered to the slapdash method. Personally, I'd love to see Revell-Monogram put out a line of Pro-Modeler warship kits (like they're doing with their plane and car kits). I haven't seen any evidence they're planning to do so. To the contrary, it seems like the US branch of the company is slowly withdrawing all of it's old warship kits and farming them out to it's division in Germany. The last time I checked out the Revell-Monogram site, the only WWII kits they were still offering were the old 1/535 Missouri and 1/426 Arizona. Maybe that ship kits have sort of become standarized on the 1/350 and 1/700 scales they don't think there's enough interest (or sales potential) to warrant them retooling their old odd-scale kits. IMO, the existance of the aftermarket PE kits for the old Revell Arizona should be proof enough that a retooled, pro-modeler kit of that ship would sell very well. I'd also think that the owners of the museum ships in this country might be influential in the production of these kits, given they could be sold on site from suvenior vendors. A friend of mine picked up the old Revell 1/720 Alabama kit when he visited the ship back in the 60's. Nowadays, I don't if models of these ships are even offered anymore through such venues. Another issue related to this is that most of those I know who are interested in modeling tend to be much more facinated with cars, planes, spacecraft, and science fiction kits. My facination with warships is understandable because I'm a naval history buff. For them though, the notion of building a warship kit seems to leave them flat. Yeah, they could appreciate my work (even as crude as it was), but building one themselves...NOT. Personally, I think there's a bit of an intimidation factor involved because of the large number of small parts. A buddy back in HS gave me a 1/535 Wisconsin he bought because IHO it was too complex. I'd hate to see what he'd have to say about the IS Tennessee . The crude nature of the affordable old US kits also seems to have a bearing on their interest. That's my take on the situation. Again, I'm just a casual observer looking in from the outside of a very small pond. I suspect there are those here on the list who know a lot more about why we haven't seen more injection ship kits become available in recent years. Dasvidanya! _|_o_|_ Derek "Tiger" (/\)akefield /---(.](o)[.)---\ iscandar2@chatter.com o oo O oo o http://www.iscandar-66.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 35) From: Derek Wakefield Subject: USS California c.1944 Does anyone know if there's any plans available for the California as she appeared in 10/44 at Surigao Strait? I'm having a difficult time trying to ascertain her AA make up (among other things) during that time frame. Most of the drawings I have show her as she appeared in Apr-Aug 1945. For instance, Friedman's book states she was equipped exclusively with twin 20mm mounts as of Apr 44. What's not clear is when this modification came about because some photos I have of the ship taken in 44 show her to still be equipped with single mounts. Her 40mm battery is another gray area in this regard. One of the most striking differences between her and Tennessee was the fact she carried four extra quad 40mm mounts amidships. However, I'm starting to wonder when these were added. The distant/blurry nature of the photos, in conjunction with the Ms-32 scheme she wore during that time make it difficult to determine if they were there during '44. Another question in these regards were the type of seaplanes she carried. I recall reading somewhere (sorry...I don't remember the book) that she was assigned two SC-1 Seahawk scout planes in late '44. Every photo I have taken in '44 (in which she's carrying scout planes) show her with OS2U or OS2N Kingfishers. The only photos/drawings showing her with Seahawks were obviously taken in 45 given her Ms-21 scheme. Any help, suggestions, source material, etc in these regards would be appreciated. Dasvidanya! _|_o_|_ Derek "Tiger" (/\)akefield /---(.](o)[.)---\ iscandar2@chatter.com o oo O oo o http://www.iscandar-66.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 36) From: "hugh1lottie2" Subject: Re: Resin vs Plastic First of all, no toes have been stepped on. Itıs a matter of economics. A resin manufacturer can produce a kit for $1,000 and sell it for $36 wholesale which would be $60 retail and would take 28 kits to start making money while a plastic manufacture needs $100,000+ for just the metal dies not to mention the equipment to inject the plastic which is probably a million and the salaries of dozens of employees. If just the price of the dies alone were used, 5556 kits priced at $18 each wholesale which retail at $30 would have to be sold to reach the same point. How many 1/700 plastic kits of USS Alaska would you like or do you think will sell? I really donıt think that many will sell. Plastic manufacturers will only produce kits that will appeal to thousands that will build several. This is evident by the number of P-51ıs and Chevrolet Corvettes on the shelves and the lack of Vultee L-1E and 1937 oldsmobiles. The same thing is generaly true of cottage manufacturers but not to the same degree. Most of them produce a kit because they like the particular ship and want to add one to their own collection. Itıs a labour of love, not a job for them and that love shows up in the product weather itıs resin, etched brass, paint charts or decals. I might add the the resin manufacturers really earn each dollar and should probably charge more. >> Am I wrong about the size of the market or the economic viability of large runs of newly-tooled kits (recent Tamiya experience tells me I'm not wrong, but I sure could be)? Am I being unrealistic about wishing for "odd" (really, they are "odd" only in not having been done yet) AND affordable kits? << I donıt see the glass as half full but half empty when it comes to seeing a $35 USS Wasp. I hope I am wrong but only time will tell. Just in case I've been saving a few dollars for a resin Wasp! Hugh -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 37) From: "Pletscher-Lenz-Schneider" Subject: German paint schemes Bob Zobal wrote: >> I have also been puzzled by the gray hull/light gray upperworks cited by Groener......I wonder if Groener was unknowingly describing the interwar practice, if his article was written in 1933. << Groener was surely not! He was referring to painting instructions from 15.4.1896 on the so-called "96er Grau" (96 gray). There are also photos of German pre-Dreadnoughts as well as Dreadnoughts showing a light upperworks/darker hull scheme. See for example the pictures in Preston, Battleships of World War I. There are indications that the interwar two-tone scheme of the Reichsmarine was the same as the 96er Grau of the Kaiserliche Marine. Even the Bundesmarine (the Federal German Navy) was using such a pattern up to 1973. (Seemingly this was simply the best low-visibility paint for the average light and weather conditions in the North Sea). I guess, however, that the colors might have changed slightly. I hope this helps to complete confusion :-) Falk Pletscher -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: Shane Subject: SMML website update Hi gang, Just to let you know that the SMML website is undergoing a few changes at the moment & should be going "live" again over the weekend - at least I hope so ;-). In the meantime, I'm after someone who has issues 55-94 prefarably in their original email format, since I lost some of those in a crash last year. Then I can get to work on the other issues. Thanks for any help. Regards, Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: "Caroline Carter" Subject: NEW ARRIVALS Hi there SMMLlie folk, Just had the 1/600 HMS Ajax etched brass work in from Peter Hall.. looking absolutely superb (as usual!). This should be in production within 3 weeks. Price is 10.17 Pounds Sterling, around $16.00. The fret measures 7.5 inches by 5 inches, and is packed full of detail that is specifically drawn for this model. Highlights are the crane and catapult assemblies, all fully relief etched. Even thwarts, rudders and oars have been designed for the kit's boats. An array of correct pattern, relief etched doors and hatches, have been included in the frat and an awesome array of Seafox parts are also included. Of course, you don't have to use EVERY last part!! Also, Just arrived today... first price U.K. EC price includes 17.5% VAT, Second price, export price in U.S. dollars Heller 1/400 Charles de Gaulle 19.99 GBP ($27.22) Heller 1/400 Gneisenau 21.99 GBP ($29.94) Heller 1/400 King George V 21.99 GBP ($29.94) Revell 1/700 HMS Ark Royal 1991 14.95 GBP ($20.36) Revell 1/700 HMS Manchester (Type 42) 12.50 ($17.02) Revell 1/700 USS Saipan 9.95 ($13.55) Revell 1/300 F-122 Bremen Class frigate 14.95 ($£20.35) Revell 1/570 DKM Scharnhorst 9.95 GBP ($13.55) Airfix 1/600 RMS Mauretania ($10.88) Airfix 1/600 SS Canberra 9.99 ($13.60) Airfix 1/600 HSM Ajax 5.99 ($8.16) Airfix 1/600 HMS Hood 7.99 ($10.88) Airfix 1/600 HMS Warspite 7.99 GBP ($10.88) Airfix 1/600 King George V 11.99 GBP($16.32) Revell 1/72 PT 117 ($8.13) Revell 1/72 Vosper MTB 5.95 ($8.13) Shipping at cost overseas. All the Best Caroline Carter White Ensign Models http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/white.ensign.models/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: Loren Perry Subject: Hungarian customer's order can't be sent We at Gold Medal Models received an order today from a modeler/customer in Budapest, Hungary with an illegible return address. The order form had nothing entered into the address block and the return address on the envelope is unreadable. Also, the order contained $88 in U.S. cash (which isn't nearly enough to cover the items requested as it turns out - evidently the customer in question didn't understand the instructions and subtracted when he should have added) so we need to find this fellow. His name appears to be A. E. Gealp or Gfalp. The street address is illegible but he lives in Budapest, Hungary. If anyone can pass this message on to this person, we'll be very grateful. This emphasizes the absolute importance of providing a clearly written return address when you order by mail, especially from outside the USA. NEVER leave your address off the order form! DON'T depend on your return address on the outside of the envelope because this is easily damaged in transit. Also, I've noticed that handwriting standards are very different around the world and what is written as one letter or number in your language may appear as another in ours. We need your help to keep things going smoothly. Loren Perry/GMM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: "Shaya Novak" Subject: Seaplane Tenders, Larger Straight & Angled Deck Essex Carriers, & GMM parts Can all be found at The Naval Base Shaya Novak Naval Base Hobbies The Store for The Model Ship Builder http://www.modelshipbuilding.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for having SMML at your home, why not stop by our home at: http://www.smml.org.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume