Subject SMML22/11/99VOL737 Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 00:58:56 +1100 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Re: Judging 2: Eugen Decks 3: Bismarck details 4: Cases, societies and research 5: Need drawings of 10.5cm SK C/33 6: Re: RAF rescue launches 7: The Judging Issue(s) 8: Scratchbuilding Techniques 9: Adm. Sheer 10: Re: Japanese pronounciation 11: Judging 12: Dido 13: HMS Sussex 14: Judging 15: Re: Looking for 1/350 scale 40mm Bofor guns for my model 16: Re: Pedantic... moi?? 17: MS 1 18: 1/700 CVL-22 19: Russian Armored Ships Book 20: Re: Prince Eugen Decks 21: Re: Bismarck 22: A breath of fresh air... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD INDEX 1: NOW HEAR THIS!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: James Corley Subject: Re: Judging >> 1. You can remove glass cases thereby damaging someones model and if the builder doesn't want to do this you don't judge their entry.. {later reply} >> So let me see if I get this right - you ask a modeller to remove the case and therefore damage their own model. I am flabbergasted! << IIRC, this rule came about because a judge removed a case and was subseuently accused of damaging a model. The rule was changed so that the modeller had to remove the case to avoid anybody else damaging the subject. If the modeler put the case on, he is the one who would know about any problems with the case and the model getting in the way of each other. >> 2. You cannot mark down an entry if it is inaccurate and incorrect in some details. << Why should I, a judge, decree that your references are wrong? If you built something a certain way, I have to assume you had a good reason for doing so. Should accuracy be counted in the OOTB awards? I have lost OOTB based on accuracy and the fact that I should have "picked the other kit which was more accurate." OOTB specifiaclly denies the modeler the opportunity to change and accurize the kit. As Rusty said, if you have a photo that shows a certain unusual detail, you are better off showing it. My attitude is that if one was to build a ship to a set of plans, who is at fault if the plans are wrong? (the USS Arizona plans show her being fitted with 1.1" guns, for example) A model is only as accurate as the research shows. Using the Arizona, what if somebody builds the kit with the 1.1"s because he had unpublished photos obtained from an uncle or somebody that worked on the salvage and showed these guns being taken off? I, for one, would not be very willing to scratchbuild the entire upperworks of the Revell Arizona in the search for accuracy and the kit built OOTB is completely innaccurate. My basic point is that if the kit is built well, even if the kit details are wrong (regardless if they are based on Revell's mistakes or the plans from the Navy), that does not disqualify the model....because I cannot know the modelers intent. >> What kind of morons devised these rules? Actually I know the answer - RIVET COUNTERS!. I'm just glad I don't have anything to do with this ridiculous scene. << I would suggest that if you are having such a moral dilema with our system, that you dont participate and we will all be happier. The system is as it is because of input (read complaints) from disguntled entrants. The systems has been around for years and changes every year. The rules next year will be subtly different form 1999 and 2001....just they way things are. Once we satisfy everybody, we will have to quit judging because at that point we will be giving awards for every kit that is entered, and every award will be equal (otherwise we will hear complaints that "mine was really better than that one" and so forth. Besides, the "Rivet Counters" would want the ship to be able to board little scale men and get underway within a prescibed period of time! This is Anti-RC if it ever exists. THe point is to NOT mark down the model if the the rivets are wrong. Rivet Counting definitely leads to lower marks because the modeler didn't know enough to add the stanchions missiong from under the kit X helodeck overhang. From: HGYL@aol.com Subject: Re: JUDGING >> Chris Langtree is exactly right in his summary of what we have learnt about IPMS/APMA so called judging - ridiculous. Why bother to build a model if it is not an accurate representation of the prototype ? And what on earth is the point of the judge inspecting to see if the underneath of deck overhangs are painted if the thing is hopelessly inaccurate anyway ? I, too, am glad I am not part of it. << Shane had some comments at the bottom of this, and he is right....a HOBBY is for ****FUN**** If you feel so strongly about accurate models, jump into the resin pool and start producing accurate kits so all of us can benefit from you excessive expertise and modelling abilities. Another option is to become a professional modeller, build exquisite models and enter them and they will certainly win. This will raise the price of what you sell the next time you build. (Professional model builders entering IPMS is a pet peeve of mine, if you cant tell....if a kit has been built for the express reason of selling it to somebody else, it should not be entered simply because the hobby element of it is gone, prostituted to the altar of profit.) To be completely fair, the IPMS committees would have to declare certain kits for certain categories....1/700 ships are limited to Essex class carriers this year....that is the only way to be completly objective when judging (apples to apples) because you directly compare the ability of one modeller against the others on a level field. This is beginning to sound like a lot of "its not fair" whining, IMO. James Corley IPMS/USA - National Judge IPMS/Israel -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: DurlingK@aol.com Subject: Eugen Decks >> Prince Eugen Decks Natural or painted? Work begins on I.S.'s 1/350 kit :) << I have a book on the Kriegsmarine that has one particularly interesting photograph - I've mentioned it here before - of Prinz Eugen's forward decks, from about B turret forward. Aside of being a beautiful dramatic photo, it shows a great deal of detail on the deck, including a lot of scuffing, discoloration and what looks to me like stressing of unpainted wood. But I'm no expert on the subject. The book is "The German Navy, 1939-1945" by Cajus Bekker, and the photo is on page 90. I can also scan and send, if anyone wants to offer their interpretation of the photograph. I must have missed something - what is this kit? Iron Shipwright has a new Prinz Eugen in 1/350?? I hadn't heard that it was out! Where can I find out more? Ken Durling -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: DurlingK@aol.com Subject: Bismarck details >> looking for someone to help me find a sourse for the layout of the antennas on the bismarck. also need to know the color of the railings ,does it match the gray on the hull, or is it another color? << I just recently acquired the oft-mentioned Elfrath-Herzog book on the Bismarck - found it in the bookstore of the Maritime Museum here - and I must say it's hard to imagine a more comprehensive set of photographs. Great book. It looks to me as though the stanchions are painted the same color as the superstructure base color, and that where the railing itself is of similar metal construction it is also that color: however where the railing is cable or chain it appears to be a somewhat darker color, I would guess weathered steel. Once again - one of your experts on the subject will have the word. This is the way it appears to me in the Fotografen. Lots of photos in this book of the radar array, too. Also if you have the GMM set, it gives a pretty good guide to the basic layout. HTH Ken Durling -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: "Jens H. Brandal" Subject: Cases, societies and research >> So let me see if I get this right - you ask a modeller to remove the case and therefore damage their own model. I am flabbergasted! << Nope. The guy or gal who built the model should know how to remove the case from their own model. And they should be trusted to do it carefully. We cannot remove all risks in making and displaying models. Taking them to a display or competition is risky - I know a guy whose car got hit in the rear end on his way to a competition. Do you think they're safe in your home? Not a chance, your house may catch fire one day, and saving the models may not be the first thing on your mind. Or your house may be burgled, and the scum seeing these models may find great pleasure in smashing them. If you don't want your models damaged, you cannot build models at all. And if you don't think this can happen to you, you probably haven't got home insurance... >> I model for fun and have no interest in entering competitions or joining societies which will actually offer me nothing at all. << Few IPMS members are what I would call "trophy hounds" - they make models for fun, and those that build the best models do not necessarily build them to win competitions. These people have acquired great skills over the years because they can have a balanced view of their own skills, see where they can improve, and constantly try out new techniques to build better models. People who are happy letting seams show, and don't care if the decals silver and don't bother to fix fingerprints in their paintjob don't win competitions because they can't or won't see where they can improve. Being a member of a society which arranges regualar meetings and conventions (some modellers I only meet once a year when we go to our National competition) can be beneficial in that you can meet people that can give you inspiration and vice versa. Through IPMS I have met a lot of people and made friends across the Atlantic and north of the Arctic Circle (yes, IPMS Norway has a local branch in Tromsoe). These people I wouldn't have met if it wasn't for IPMS. If you don't want to be part of it, fair enough, it's your choice. >> With regard to the question of accuracy if a model is meant to represent a ship at a certain period you'ld expect a certain relationship to the prototype. Therefore you'd expect some proof that the model has adddressed this problem. << In principle, I agree with you. In the case of say Bismarck, how do we know one of the AA gun turrets weren't adorned with the names of the crew's sweethearts? Of course you will say, none of them were, but I am asking you to prove it. Luftwaffe crews adorned the aircraft with their girlfriend's names, so the practice was not unknown. And of course, you will make all sorts of arguments against it, and draw perfectly logical conlusions which I can agree with you on all counts. Even so, the question remains; how do you prove it? The only way to prove it would be to have pictures all over the ship at a given date, and often this is not the case. Ask survivors? Well, they cannot even agree whether the turret tops were yellow or not. Even an object as small as an aircraft (relatively speaking) is creating problems. You have a good rear three quarter view of a Focke Wulf. Great. You can prove what the camo scheme looks like and the weathered state of the aircraft. Not so. The picture only proves what that aircraft looks like from that angle, and only at the time the photo was taken - can you really prove that the aircraft didn't have a replacement right wing aileron a day after the photo was taken? Or did it perhaps have a non standard camo scheme on the other side of the fuselage? What you are asking is really possible with modern warships only, and even then, there may be hidden "gold mines". At a fleet visit in Stavanger in August, the SH-60 on board the USS Stephen Groves had pale blue metallic hot rod flames painted on the nose section, which the crew thought they would have to remove before going back to the US. Don't believe me? I've got the pictures to prove it. A modeller who displayed a model of this aircraft would then risk being marked down because the judges thought it was "impossible" because it hasn't been seen in the US. "Zaps" on aircraft are more often than not shown, and we will have to rely on word of mouth because noone had the time to take a photo before it was removed. A friend who works as a fireman on the local airport/airbase said something of a Mirage F.1 with "Belgian" roundels. Someone had painted black dots over the red centres of the Spanish roundels during a visit to Sola, and the Spanish were not amused. Just because you have never seen a black swan doesn't mean all swans are white. >> If a modeller enters a competition they should at least have made the effort to put in the research. << This is where "each builds to his own standard for enjoyment" comes in. If you want to make sure that you can document the FS number of the tiniest fire hose reel you will spend too much time to find the documentation to get any time to do the modelling. And if you do build the model, you're likely to worry so much of not getting everything right that the model will never be finished. If this is your idea of fun, I hope you find pleasure in it, but don't slam the people who would rather build models because they enjoy the craftworks aspect rather than the exact historical representation. People who do the research aren't given extra points if their model sucks. The judges judge the skill of the model, not the accuracy of the research. New information from times past is constantly showing up, and the judges cannot be expected to know it all. On the other hand, a modeller who take the bother to correct the kit will win extra points if the work is well done. I'm not saying my Scharnhorst is perfect, and my source was the "Kriegsmarine in colour" by Robert Stern. A number of the colour profiles have been proved wrong, but when I built my model, the colour profile was all I had, and guess what: I thought it looked cool with the grey scribbles on the superstructure, the light blue turret tops and the blackgrey painting on the lower hull. Did it have the wooden decks painted blue or grey? Did I use the right shade of "wood colour"? Indeed, is the grey the right shade? Don't know, but let me know, and next time I build it I will incorporate all the changes. In my experience, the narrower one's interests are, the more that particular modeller regards his or hers chosen nieche as the centre of the modelling universe, and thinking that "Tamigawa" owes them a cheap, injection moulded masterpiece of their favourite early 20th century Scandinavian coastal defence ship because they've put up with their ancient, overpriced crap which they don't buy because it doesn't interest them anyway. What is common knowledge in the Early 20th century Scandinavian coastal defence ship-SIG may not be well known amongst the people who have volunteered to judge. With a visitors view of one US IPMS Nationals, several UK IPMS Nationals, a few Swedish IPMS Nationals and judging experience from the Norwegian IPMS Nationals, I can say that judging sometimes is a very difficult task. Every modeller is free to enclose photos of their work in progress to show the extent of the modifications, and if a photo exists of the original, feel free to include a copy of it. The judges will have time to look at a photo, but there is no way the judges can be expected to read through a PhD thesis-sized documentation file for every model on the table if the cometition is to last for a weekend. If your subject shows a weird paint scheme or something that immediately sticks out as "odd", I would encourage you to provide the documentation in abbreviated form. Even if the modeller is usually given the benefit if the doubt, the judges should remove points if the modeller painted his/her Royal Norwegian AF F-16 dark or pale grey unless he/she can produce am unretouched photo of normal exposure. For the record, they are neutral grey FS26270 overall - with a single F-16 painted in USAF camo by mistake, but even so, there may have been cases where they have been given a temporary camouflage, but no photos have been available to show it... From: "Mike C" >> I agree with Shane that there should be "genre specific" rules that allow cases. I think cases should be allowed even as a general rule, but I think that whoever decides to case his model should be prepared to take his/or her chances on the outcome because the case blocks any chance of closer evaluation. Outstanding models should be recognized for their own merits cased or not, but if two otherwise equal kits are judged (one being cased), I think the one that is uncased should win because closer inspection is possible on that model. << Mike, I think that is an excellent idea! Besides your other points were good too. Sorry for this rather long winded reply, but I am getting tired of this sniping from people who by the looks of it have never entered a contest or maybe their latest pride and joy lost out to another model? They apparently have no idea what it is like being part of the team that runs the show. The judges and officials who voluntarily gives from their free time when they could be out in the trade stands looking for bargains or around the tables discussing painting techniques deserve recognition in what they are doing (note that I am excluding officials that lift airplanes by their pitot tubes here). We all want feedback on how to improve when things go wrong, and a pat on the back when things go well. If throwing rocks from the sideline is all you have to offer, the modelling organisations are better off without you anyway. Jens -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: "Sean D. Hert" Subject: Need drawings of 10.5cm SK C/33 Hello All I'm trying to find some good drawings of the SKC/33 mount used on most of the main German combatants in WW2. I've got the info from Campbell's, but it's really not enough. Any got some help for me? Sean D. Hert Webmeister, MBG Site: http://www.netwalk.com/~popev/bg/ Ringmaster, Big Gun R/C Warship Combat Ring "History doesn't always repeat itself... sometimes it just screams 'Why don't you listen when I'm talking to you?' and lets fly with a club." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: ALROSS2@aol.com Subject: Re: RAF rescue launches >> Can anyone give me a guide on the shade of yellow used on the decks and upperworks on the early RAF "Whaleback" rescue launches. "Sailors in the RAF" by Keith Beardow says "bright yellow" and the Airfix instructions say "deep cream". Any help will be welcome. TIA. << Quite a few years ago, John Pritchard did a series of color renderings of various RAF rescue boats. The yellow he used in his renderings was definitely a "full-bodied" yellow, not unlike FLOQUIL's Reefer Yellow. As I remember, John was on at least one "Whaleback" (63' British Power Boat Company ASRL), built ship models, and drew a series of 1/24 scale plans of ASRLs and other small combatants, so he had both first and second-hand experience with the type. Al Ross -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: ironship@usit.net (Jon Warneke) Subject: The Judging Issue(s) Hi Everyone, I've read with interest the discussion on judging, and the very adamant expressions of defense of the present methods, and couterpoints to those same methods. However, there is one factor that really needs to be taken into consideration in all of this, and that's the modeler. As far as I can tell, no two modeler's opinion on this subject is the same, and for each, competition means something different. So let me try this. There seem to be four major issues that need to be singled out, and I'll try to do this. These are the rules, the reasoning, the accuracy, and the willingness. The Rules: Big problems here since they mean different things to different people. Some say they're too confusing, others say they're too strict or lax. Why are there rules? It's to provide a basis for a judges decision, and parameters for their functioning. Agreed that sometimes they are counterproductive, but from a judges perspective, they are essential. IPMS/USA has adopted what they have simply to provide a framework for judging, and to participate in IPMS as a modeler, you need to abide by them. If you want them changed, then you need to work within the framework set forth by the membership. If you don't like them, refuse to participate (i.e. don't compete). However, don't attack the system at the same time. You need to participate to affect the outcome. The Reasoning: Why do some choose to compete, and yet others don't? I can't definitely say, but I'll tell you why I think it's good to compete. I did it to get better. I can sit in my own room, and build to my contentment, and get pretty good at it, but I also learned quite a bit by competing within IPMS\USA and talking with other members and having them evaluate my work. Why? I learned what IPMS looked for (i.e. my comtemporaries) in the way of faults, and how they did it. By competing, I showed a willingness to be criticized and evaluated, and learn from it, and the same goes for being a judge. I know a lot of modelers who are like this, but I know a lot from the other side. These are the modelers who look upon shows as a way for them to receive personal public acknowledgement and accolade for their skill, and are very reactive when they don't receive it. Just as many believe that the methods of judging are somehow nebulous and inconsistant, others are quite pleased with it, regularly compete, and feel they have learned something. The Accuracy: This may sound strange, but at the present time this shouldn't be a determinant within judging a model contest. Why? It's simple. I am only an expert at what I am doing at the present time (i.e. I expertly know that at the present time I'm typing). The basic reason is this. As a judge, I cannot know what will be entered prior to a show's beginning, I cannot access proper reference materials during the show, and I surely cannot be extensively versed on each and every kit, scratchbuild and conversion effort underway that exists in the hobby. Thus, accuracy cannot be a determinant when judging. The only thing that can be judged is the skill of the modeler on that particular model (i.e. a judge cannot go through the room and find all of the entries of a specific modeler, and then judge his overall skill). As a pattern maker, I try to have access to as much material on the specific ship as I can find, but I'm not about to fly all of that stuff to, say Dallas, and hope that I've covered every model that may be entered in the show. Same goes for (*gulp*) color. Yeah, I missed the color differences in a national contest, but as judges we are not tasked with this. The model was generally correct, the camo pattern looked to be monochromatically correct, but there were basic construction faults which led to a determination of placement far before color came into question. It was judged by the rules we were tasked with, and the three of us in the team all came to the same decision without going outside those rules. Judges are not all knowing, all seeing beings within the model world, but rather are guys like the ones on this list, trying to make a judgement that may or may not be correct, which leads to: The Willingness: It's very easy to be negative, but very difficult to be positive. Finding faults in a model are child's play, and as a judge you're almost programmed to find them. But someday go to a show and try to judge a model by it's positives. You'll be challenged. In Orlando, I believe (Rusty, correct this if needed) about 150 people out of 1200 entrants were willing to judge, express their opinion publically, and pay the piper if needed, and for what? Get blasted on a regular basis? Be called anything from biased to incompetent? No. They willingly accepted this responsibility because they're confident in their judgements, and willing to help other modelers improve. I personally take no joy in telling a modeler what he did wrong, but I will tell them what (in my opinion) did them in, and what (in my opinion) they did right. I have yet to have a modeler I judged either call me unfair, biased, incompetent, or any other negative title. All have accepted my opinions, and thanked me for being honest. I am willing to place myself squarely in the center of this (as are all other judges), and accept the bullets from those who are not. Judging is a qualitative function, and is by nature, inexact. Each person judges by his own rules, and is only restricted by his own honesty. Most judges accept the parameters set forth by the various governing bodies, and work within them to the best of their abilities. Most judges will willingly accept questioning of their judgements, explain their decisions, and learn from the criticism. Yes, the system is imperfect, and does need refinement, but it also does allow for the maximum number of people to participate and judge without having to be the end-all, be-all experts of the ship modeling world. And since all it takes to be a judge is to be an IPMS member and agree to be one, I think everyone should try it once. It's pretty painless, you'll learn a lot about the side that is so easy to criticize, have a better idea what is being looked for, and you just might (heaven forbid) learn something new. Jon Warneke IPMS(USA) 30977 one of many IPMS(USA) National Judges -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: Derek Wakefield Subject: Scratchbuilding Techniques A while back someone mentioned the virtues of scratchbuilding models for which there are no kits available. My apologies for being lazy and not going back into my archives to find out who posted about this. However, in studying a project in my rebuild bin, several questions started coming to mind. Note, this isn't for a naval ship (but a science fiction ship), so it's sorta off topic. However, I suspect the issue might be applicable to naval ships. I'm dealing with a project for which there are no highly detailed plans. Rough drawings are available, but they aren't drawn to any particular scale and they're relatively small. My hope is to rebuild an existing, not very detailed, model kit (that's already been built) according to a modified plan. As best as I can tell, the model scales out to approx 1:1010 scale. It's quasi accurate to the available drawings, but IMO is rather clunky looking (almost on par with a Lindberg kit - even though it was made by Bandai in the late 70s). A Tamiya it is not, but I'd like to try to emmulate that level of detail in the rebuild. I can't draw worth a darn, so the design only exists in my head (and isn't completely thought out). That said, the changes called for are probably on par with the reconstruction of the Tennessee, California, and West Virginia after Pearl Harbor. Lacking any detailed plans/drawings to go by (and use in the construction of the new subassemblies), does anyone have any suggestions on where I should begin work on this? Dasvidanya! _|_o_|_ Derek "Tiger" (/\)akefield /---(.](o)[.)---\ iscandar2@chatter.com o oo O oo o http://www.iscandar-66.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: Damian Pliszka Subject: Adm. Sheer Hi, Quite good drawings and many photos are in No 9 Monografie Morskie (AJ Press Poland). Damian Pliszka Slupsk, Poland -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: "Arjun Sarup" Subject: Re: Japanese pronounciation Hi, Just to expand Yohan's explanation about Japanese pronounciation, the vowel-consonant series (from memory) are as follows; 'a, ka, sa, ta, na, ha, ma, ya, ra, wa, n'. So, as explained by Yohan, one can combine the vowels 'a, i, u, e, o' with any of the above consonant series, e.g. 'na, ni, nu, ne, no'. But this combination holds good from 'ka' upto 'ma', as well as for 'ra'. The exceptions are: For 'ya': ya, yu, yo (there cannot be a 'yi' or a 'ye') For 'wa': wa, wo (there cannot be a 'wi', 'wu', 'we') For 'n': n (only 1 sound in this series. For example, 'shinbun' or newspaper is spelt shi-n-bu-n, and uses this standalone 'n' sound twice in the word.) Therefore, the entire hiragana or katakana syllabary can be simplified into 46 sounds, with further derivatives thereof. Hope this helps. One small word of caution though; several kanji are no longer in use since WW2, just as new characters have also been added to the Japanese language. The explanation of the above hiragana & katakana syllabary is applicable to modern times, and it is possible that additional syllabary may have existed during the war (perhaps no more than 1 or 2 sounds, if at all), and these may have been subsequently dropped. Therefore, pronouncing or writing names of IJN ships, while more or less straightforward as per the 'modern' syllabary, may still be subject to the odd exception, depending on what kanji or syllabary has been dropped from use since WW2. Best wishes, Arjun Sarup Mauritius http://pages.intnet.mu/warbirds -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: TechnoInfidel@webtv.net (John Collins) Subject: Judging SMMLmates: My, my, this certainly has been an acerbic debate. One I find, rather unusual from this group. Judging accuracy is a minor issue in any contest. Most contestants can be disqualified from competition for basic modeling errors, and usually the winners are those with the fewest or most minor of errors. Accuracy in either color or conformation to original is usually only a consideration in determining the winner between models exhibiting equal skill--in fact, a rare occurrence. Judging is a difficult, thankless job, many times for the reasons exhibited recently on the list. I've judged many times, and I would prefer not to do it. You simply do not get to enjoy the show; you are having to work at your hobby, and, obviously, have to take a lot of crap for doing it. The quality of judging is the most common complaint about contests. It's like blaming the referees for the outcome of a football match. It's easier to pass the blame for losing on to someone else than take responsibility for one's actions. It must be the competition itself, that brings out this miserable streak in us. To blast on organization and its members because of a minor, inconsequential rule (especially if one is not or has never been a member) is rude at best. I am a IPMS/USA member, because I am an officer of my club. Being a member of my club has benefited me. I've made long-lasting friends across the USA. I've experienced a quantum leap in my modeling skills from my club mates. We've tipped a few brews, celebrated weddings, the birth of children, we share a sense of community. The benefits far outweigh the minor irritation squabbles over rules may cause. It is a Mike said, it is a just a hobby. And if the nay-sayers haven't learned of the benefits of club modeling, well. perhaps they just haven't tried hard enough. Frank discussions like this can effect organizations. Rusty White's willingness to take the case gripe to the IPMS/USA competition committee is proof of the pudding. We don't need to be casting dispersions around liked this -- governments have gone to war over less, and the gods know we are all above that level. Thanks John Collins Atlanta, GA -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: "chenyangzhang" Subject: Dido Hi WRPRESS Dido was certainly in overall light grey in 1946 (OK outside WW2) see the photo in Royal Navy Warships 1940-1949. I'll see what I can do re xerox's. Chris Langtree -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: "chenyangzhang" Subject: HMS Sussex Hi Peter There are lots of good photos in Man O' War 1 County Class Cruisers. The Imperial War Museum Archives also have photos from the period you're interested in and finally Sambrook plans publish a set of plans for after the refit (there is also a White Ensign model). Chris Langtree -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: "chenyangzhang" Subject: Judging Hi all Just be thankful I was on holiday when that awful bit of poetry appeared on the list. Seriously though I've expressed my opinion and had a bit of fun but also raised some important points. Final comments:- Norm You misunderstand the tone - if a polite and civil point had been made then our IPMS friends would not have taken any notice, quite apart from certain moral considerations. I get the impression that you don't understand the make-up and dynamics of committee run organisations, my description was accurate both of the membership and leadership. I would hope that this list is a members forum NOT a listmasters forum. The fact that all sorts of issues, some of them only slightly related to ships appear is a good thing. But remember if it appears on the list any member has the right to comment. Bruce I work with all sorts of organisations and can size up the type and make-up of the organisation from it's published material. To change it I'd need to be on the inside but to understand it all I need to do is see its waffle. By the way you shouldn't expect us English people to be nice and polite. We're just as objectionable as you Americans when we want to be - why do you think you had the revolution? Finally, to all those who thought that judging is not a relevant subject to discuss on this list read Shane's comments. Chris Langtree -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: "John Snyder" Subject: Re: Looking for 1/350 scale 40mm Bofor guns for my model Try Classic Warships. I believe Steve Wiper is now marketing bags of parts that he's produced for some of his kits. Hopefully, that will include 1/350 Bofors mounts (Steve?). John Snyder Snyder & Short Enterprises The Paint Guys -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: "Christopher Hughes" Subject: Re: Pedantic... moi?? Hi Shane, I forgot, the "Real" Millennium doesn't start until midnight 31 Dec 2000 does it? Mind you, It'll be one heck of a party for all the pedants! ;0) Chris PS, was there ever a USS/HMS/SS/RMS Pedantic?? Just imagine "Atlantic Pedantic"... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: "Keith Bender" Subject: MS 1 Does anyone have an idea on what color to use for the MS.1 paint used at Pearl Harbor? Working on BB 48, need the grey color, Thank you -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: "Shaya Novak" Subject: 1/700 CVL-22 Does anybody know where I can get any of these. 1/700 DML, Rev Ger, Skywave CVL-22 Independence Class Shaya Novak Naval Base Hobbies The Store for The Model Ship Builder www.modelshipbuilding.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: Crossoflron@aol.com Subject: Russian Armored Ships Book Hi Guys Just another heads-up for Imperial Russian Navy enthusiasts-- cool book for sale on eBay http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=201830437 Check it out -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: SteveWiper@aol.com Subject: Re: Prince Eugen Decks I believe that during the early part of the war the decks were natural teak, which was a light brown/gray color. The later part of the war may be the same, but there is a chance that they may have been painted a dark gray or dark blue from late 1944 through 1945. Hope this helps, Steve Wiper -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21) From: SteveWiper@aol.com Subject: Re: Bismarck To the person with the Bismarck questions, As with most navies, the stanchions were usually painted the camo. color for the area that they resided, while the railings, or life lines, were a very dark gray. For antenna's, the only thing I can think of that would have an accurate layout would be the drawings from Christian Schmidt Books in Germany, which are about DM 250, very expensive. Hope this helps, Steve Wiper -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22) From: Jeff J Herne Subject: A breath of fresh air... Ya know, I spend relatively little time reading SMML in depth these days...with the baby recovering from her ear surgery and chronic infections, with the job, lectures, researching trivia, writing another book or two, and everything else going on, I only read the posts that I have an interest in. But aside from all this madness, I've actually managed to finish a model...yes, completed, attached to the base and everything, nothing left to do but sit back and admire it... I realized that if I spent all my time getting worked up over things like judging and resin vs. plastic, I'd be missing out on the true purpose I subscribe to SMML in the first place; to enjoy the company of fellow ship modelers. My advice: when the bell rings, go to your respective corners, and finish a model. It's far more relaxing than an uppercut... Prozac? Not me...it's called "defeated by a rowdy 1-year old " Jeff -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: "Shaya Novak" Subject: NOW HEAR THIS!! In less than 60 days we will have the Nimitz Class Carrier at today's configuration in 1/500 scale. That's 27" long, one piece hull. Plenty of parts and planes. Plus we will also have the new 1/500 to 1/540 carrier decals to build any of the WWII Essex, Mod. Essex, Forrestal and Nimitz class Carriers. Those decals will fit these kits; 1) Lindberg -Yorktown II 21" long WWII Essex 2) Revell - Lexington 21" long Angled Deck Essex 3) Revell - Forrestal 23" long other ships of the class 4) New - Nimitz 27" long CVN-68 to CVN-76 Look for American Carriers & Decals on our site. http://www.modelshipbuilding.com/nimitz.htm Shaya Novak Naval Base Hobbies The Store for The Model Ship Builder www.modelshipbuilding.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for having SMML at your home, why not stop by our home at: http://www.smml.org.uk/ for the back issue archive. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume