Subject: SMML VOL 796 Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 00:47:16 +1100 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Forest Sherman Cl DD kits 2: French CVLs in Vietnam 3: "Best" 1939 Ship 4: Re: Enterprise CV-6 5: Re: Sea Tec Models 6: Re: when to add photo etch details 7: Re: Finding a Forest Sherman 8: Re: Day of Deceit 9: Essex vs Illustrious 10: RN 507A 11: Royal Sovereign/Revenge class 12: Re: Battle of North Cape 13: New Illustrious 14: CW Benham Class destroyer kit 15: Request for information... 16: Re: Musashi 17: DECAL MAKING ARTICLE? 18: Re: Best carrier 19: Re: Most Successful Class of Major Combatant 20: Warship 2000 21: Sea Tec Address 22: Note on Norfolk 23: Shameless JAG Collective plug 24: Sea Tec Models 25: CW 1/350 USS Alaska kit + other questions 26: USS Indianapolis 27: Re: Poseidon Nanuchka 28: Re: Illustrious the best? Certainly not! 29: Chinese Gunboat Zhong Shan (Sun Yat-Sen) 30: Re: Best battleship in 1939.....and the winner is..... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD INDEX 1: Pacific Front - NEW RELEASES 2: Shiplist update -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: "Doremus, Mark" Subject: Forest Sherman Cl DD kits Folks, Someone asked about the Forest Sherman Cl DD's and kits. AFAIK, Revell released it at least twice, once as Forest Sherman DD-931, another time as John Paul Jones DD-932. As was mentioned, AHM rented the tool and released the Decatur DD-936(?). The scale is odd, around 1/317 or so. A little surgery is required to make it right for about the first half of the class as built. It does not represent the later ships in the class, Hull DD-945 and later had a higher freeboard. The kit armament is the early all gun suit and does not include any missiles or launchers. I'm hoarding one kit to build as the Barry DD-933 during the Cuban Missile Crises. I have seen them show up on e-bay from time to time. I think I saw the Decatur kit there as well. Expect to pay U$ 12 and up. Mark Doremus Eden Prairie, MN where the snow is trying to be deep enough to float a destroyer. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: "Michael C. Smith" Subject: French CVLs in Vietnam Can anyone point me to any good sources for information on what the former US CVLs Belleau Wood and Langley (Bois Belleau and Lafayette) did in Vietnam in the 1950's while in French service? My understanding is that they were used to support French interest in the region, and I am interested in what they did and what aircraft they operated. Michael Smith Marshall, Texas -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: "Summers,David" Subject: "Best" 1939 Ship A "best" thread again?!!! Actually, many of the comments and stories have been quite informative and thought-provoking about what constitutes naval operational effectiveness. So here's my input on the "best 1939 ship": Comparing the RN performance at Narvik and River Plate with other navies' over-all operational performance early in the war, I'd rather have had my home defended by 10 RN crewmen in a tugboat than another navy's battleship! So my vote for the "best 1939 battleship" would be the Nagato, crewed by British tars, commanded by Chester Nimitz, with Carl Doenitz as first officer. (Throw in Winston Churchill as Prime Minister and Admiral King as Naval Minister) David Summers -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: John_Impenna@hyperion.com Subject: Re: Enterprise CV-6 John Sutherland writes: >> By the way, Enterprise didn't just miss the last campaign, she also missed Coral Sea. << She missed Coral Sea for a pretty good reason I think......A "little" Raid on a town somewhere in the far east......... : ): ) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: Kevin Wenker Subject: Re: Sea Tec Models >> Would this company be located in the Bremerton, WA. area? Please post the answer on the list, because if this is so I know who is behind all of this, and it is time to take care of this problem, once and for all. Steve Wiper - Classic Warships << Steve, I know they were/are located on the west coast. I ordered a 1/96 RC Trafalgar sub from them last July. By end of Sept, I had received nothing even though delivery was promised in August. He gave me lots of excuses. Still nothing by mid October. Fortunately I had put this $1000 order on Visa. I disputed the charge and finally in December received a full refund from Visa. This has happened to others per mail through the SubCommittee. Sea Tec no longer answers their phone and their web site is not working. BIG SCAM ARTIST. BEWARE. Best Kevin -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: when to add photo etch details >> As for photoetch, I am still trying at this. I'm also a novice and still can't figure out whether it is better to add rails last and paint or what. In 1/700, I have added them last for example and brushed painted them after them after the CA set. << Man, that must be a real pain in the butt to paint all that inside railing on a 1/700 scale model after all the photo etch is applied. I just don't do it that way (too much work). Mostly because of the difficulty painting the rails at deck level. I'm sure there are others that disagree, but here's how I do it. I spray paint the entire detail sheet the most prevalent color on the model (in most cases Gray). Once the paint is dry, I cut the parts out one at a time as I need them. I then bend them to shape and glue to the model. Remember, after every cut and bend, paint will flake off and will have to be touched up. I do this as I go along. If you wait until the model is finished, you will be forever finding embarrassing shiny spots on the model when the light hits it just right. After I glue down the section of rail for example, I wait for the super glue to dry, then touch up the part with paint as I go. That way you don't miss any shiny spots. One last trick. Don't worry about those shiny super glue spots. Once the model is completely finished, (rigging and all) spray the whole model with a thin coat of flat coat. This eliminates any shiny super glue spots and gives the model a nice even shade. As I said, I'm sure others do it different, but this way works for me. Rusty White Flagship Models Inc. http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ "Yeah I want Cheesy Poofs" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: Finding a Forest Sherman >> The person looking for the Revell Forest Sherman Kit should be aware that there is also another kit out there the USS DECATER DD936 that was produced by a company called AHM. This company used the molds from the Revell kit. << If you're still looking for this kit, check out eBay. Go to their plush toys sections, then go to military models. I see this kit quite often with starting bids around $10.00. Rusty White Flagship Models Inc. http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ "Yeah I want Cheesy Poofs" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: Edd Pflum Subject: Re: Day of Deceit >> It is about President Roosevelt knowledge about the Pearl Harbor attack before it happened. This is written by veteran of the pacific war not some college guy hoping to cash in on conspiracy theories. << Hi Craig, I've always been amazed (with 20-20 hindsight) how anyone could have ignored the warnings about the Japanese attack. HOWEVER, the thing I always stumble up against is the belief, on my part at least, that the attack on Pearl Harbor would have been just as politically effective if Hawaii had been alerted, and the attack driven off with less loss of life and material. Comments? Edd -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: Joe Costanzo Subject: Essex vs Illustrious One thing I find interesting about this discussion is the mentioning (and re-mentioning) of the Illustrious' brushing off Kamikaze attacks. This was an unconventional and unanticipated development. In terms of conventional combat, the armored flight deck was of limited use against armor piercing bombs. One might even argue that an unarmored flight deck offers better protection, because it will initiate a bomb while the resultant explosion will be contained by the armored hanger deck. Kamikazes were an unfortunate surprise, but one that was eventually dealt with and by the end of the war Kamikazes were of considerably less threat. Had the war continued, new technologies such as the 3" AA gun would have further limited their effectiveness. This one point rendered moot, I think the Essex design is arguably superior. Another important issue is that both ships had treaty-limited displacements. The resultant design compromises make it clear that a 30,000 ton ship cannot effectively accomidate a large airgroup and sufficient horizontal protection. Thus the decision to give the Midway an armored flight deck was not one influenced by wartime experience, but by the natural progression that comes with a larger ship. Indeed, the decision to do this was made long before these wartime experiences. Hi gang, Ok, I'll buy into this lovely discussion. What effect do you think the USN fast battleships etc had (in their new role of floating AA batteries) in protecting the USN carrier groups. And would that have been a major factor in the survilability of the Essex's with their un-armoured decks, esp when you consider the volume of AA fire they could put up. IIRC correctly the USN carrier groups had more warships protecting them as opposed to RN carriers who operated in smaller battlegroups in more confined terriotory in the ETO. Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: Alan Lindstrom Subject: RN 507A Can anyone suggest a good 1/700 match/mix for Royal Navy 507A? Alan Hi Alan, I used Humbrol 112 for 507A on my Onslow. Don't know if it's been "scale effected" (now there's a nice topic ;-)) )or not. Fellow SMMlies Mike Cooper (long time, no hear Mike) & Dimi Apostolopoulos (Hi Dimi) recommended it way back in issues 609 & 612 respectively. Blatent plug: These are up on the SMML site at: http://www.smml.org.uk/ ;-) Regards, Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: Alan Lindstrom Subject: Royal Sovereign/Revenge class Does anyone besides myself have a serious interest in seeing a 1/700 WW2 Royal Sovereign/Revenge class BB? If there are, maybe Caroline would consider adding it to WEMs future project list. Alan -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: "chenyangzhang" Subject: Re: Battle of North Cape Hi John You don't mention Scharnhorst's destroyer escort (useless as it turned out) which failed to stay with the battlecruiser. Also the fact that Scharnhorst's radar was hit is irrelevant, it was never turned on. Someone described the battle as a clash between professionals and amateurs, a very apt description. Chris Langtree -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: Christopher Crofoot Subject: New Illustrious Hi SMMLies, I was just taking a look at the Illustrious pic on the RN site: http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/today/index.htm and I was thinking about converting my Ark Royal to the Illustrious. The conversion doesn't look that difficult. I was wondering if any body had more info on what was done to Illustrious that might make her external appearance different from Royal. Pics would be of even more help...and what weapon is it sitting on the prow? I can't tell from the pic? (lousy at IDing weapons) Chris Crofoot "still searching for a cool signature line" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: "Poore, Devin" Subject: CW Benham Class destroyer kit Has anyone built or have any experience or feedback with the Classic Warships 1/350th scale Benham class destroyer kit? I am thinking of purchasing one as my first resin ship kit, and would like some idea as to the quality, ease of built, etc. I wish to build this kit as the U.S.S. Sterett (DD-407), as she appeared at Guadalcanal in 1942. Any info is appreciated. Thanks, Devin -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: "Mike" Subject: Request for information... Hi all, I seem to recall that we went through something similar to what's requested below a short while ago........ Did anyone make a master list for their own use? If so, and you don't mind sharing, please mail it to me & I'll get it posted to the web site in the Hints'n'Tips section, as well as letting John know where to find it. Mike SMML Webmaster >> From: John Subject: Request for information... I publish the Ship Model Faq. My area of expertise is models of wooden ships, but I've had a few requests about modern ships. In particular, take a look at: http://www.seaways.com/faq/smf-q043.html http://www.seaways.com/faq/smf-q044.html and http://www.seaways.com/faq/smf-q046.html Could the people on your list provide me with a table translating the various USN Camouflage Measure colors into specific colors, or mixtures of colors, available for models (e.g., Humbrol, Floquil, Poly S, etc.), now that Floquil has discontinued their line of marine colors? (colors for other navies would be welcome as well.) I'd like to add such a table to the FAQ. Perhaps you can forward my request to the mail-list, and return any responses to me (or they can reply directly to mailto:kopfj@worldnet.att.net ). Thanks. John O. Kopf << -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: Mike Connelley Subject: Re: Musashi Howdy: So far as I know there aren't any construction reviews of either the Yamato or Musashi (Tamiya kits). To first order, they're good kits and build up to look like the ship they ought to be. I have found that they are generally accurate, and the inaccuracies (and there are many of them) tend to be in the smaller details. If you want to really get anal and have lots and lots of patience and want a perfect kit of this class of ship, then I can give you a list of the inaccurate things about the kit. A good set of drawings is also needed, such as the ever hard to find Skulski book. However, if you're not hell-bent on perfection and want a good looking model, then I recommend building it more or less out of the box but also with the GMM photoetched set. The set has railings, ladders etc like any other set, also has radars and the aft crane and antenna mast and catapults. Replacing these parts with the photoetched brass really adds "snap" and finesse to the model. Sure, the model won't be 100% accurate but it'll be quite a nice accomplishment. I haven't seen any good drawings on the Musashi, and I haven't seen the Tamiya kit itself, so I'm not sure how accurate they got the AA fit on her. At the time of her loss, she should have had the single AA guns on the weather deck (the Yamato kit is inaccurate in that respect) and the Musashi should have had 2 covered triple AA turrets amidships on the edge of the deck on each side, not 5 like on the Yamato (the Yamato was given three more on each side in a later refit). Also, the superstructure of the Musashi was modified like the Yamato to have six extra 12.7cm twin gun mounts. On each side the Yamato had the three upper ones unshielded and the lowers ones shielded. When the Musashi was refitted, six 12.7cm twin mounts were not available, so the upper ones were left shielded and in the place of the 12.7cm twin mount they installed more unshielded 25mm tripple mounts (at least that's what I gather from the Skulski book). If you have any ?s, feel free to fire away! Cheers Mike (Yamatoholic #2) Connelley -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: "lcp9" Subject: DECAL MAKING ARTICLE? Help! Can someone tell me which issue of FSM had the " Make Your Own Decals" article Thanks, David Hi David, It was the November 1999 issue. Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: "Erhardtsen" Subject: Re: Best carrier >> I guesses if history didn't go the way it did we would be speaking German or Japanese today Craig Bennett << "We" ??? I think, I have seen German and Japanese on this list. - Ok. I know what You mean. Best aircraft carrier from WW2? What about Shinano? Armour like the british, but more aircraft. And what ship could survive 6 torpedo? With an experient crew, Shinano could have done it. Erik Erhardtsen -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: "FCR" Subject: Re: Most Successful Class of Major Combatant Hello everyone As far I know, destroyers unfortunately aren't considered major ship's. The USN call them "cans", the RN call them "boats" and the IJN didn't put the circular symbol on the bow. But I have the same consideration for a destroyer that I have from another capital/major ship. Destroyers usually fight against extreme battle conditions and proved with their tenacity that they were too capable of sinking ship's well armed and bigger that them. They even in many situations sacrificed themselves to save the big brothers. Just my opinion Happy Modeling Filipe Ramires PORTUGAL -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: "Malcolm N. Waite" Subject: Warship 2000 Hi Shane Correction!! Now advised it is called Warship 1999-2000, still don't know whats in it! Malcolm Waite Hi Malcolm, Caroline Carter posted the contents in the last couple of days on SMML. Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21) From: "David Zimmerman" Subject: Sea Tec Address Sea Tec Models is located as a mail drop at 1728 Moorpark Road, Suite 423, Thousand Oaks, California 91360, FAX 805 497 3790. Sea Tec's telephone number is 805 241-3999. I hope this helps. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22) From: JOHNEME@aol.com Subject: Note on Norfolk Not only did Norfolk knock out Scharnhorst's radar, but she knocked out Bismarck's main fire control as well, during Bismarck's final battle. And people still put down those British Counties. Regarding Scharnhorst's final battle, it was at night in appalling weather for the Brits, too. John Emery Hi John, I for one like the Counties. Very nice looking & capable ships. Mind you it could have something to do with the Airfix Suffolk & the fact that the RAN had two ;-). Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23) From: Robert OConnor Subject: Shameless JAG Collective plug SMMLies, I was pleased to see Joe DAmato's(JAG Collective) post here in yesterday's issue.In spite of his support of a California team( the CAL Fruits and Nuts), he's got a first class resin model production operation going, and is addressing a niche in shipmodeling which is lacking in kits, but certainly not in subject matter.He has put together a team of absolutely great guys( to make himself look good), which has resulted in some outstanding ship kits of the mid cold war era. As for major combatants,I say cruisers or better (capital ships), as destroyers, while certainly of significance, and having even sunk numerous "major combatants", were designed and more often used for escort, coastal defense, support and the like. I certainly don't deride the little warriors for their usefulness, nor their crews for tenacity and daring in the face of more powerful foes. My only argument is one of design (Essex thread??), in which the majors were intended to take the fight to the enemy on a regular basis. Bob O'Connor,who does not run radar on I-95, but waits for the loads of "Miami Snow" to find their way into my little corner of the world...just say "blow". -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24) From: "Jeffry J. Fontaine" Subject: Sea Tec Models Hi Steve, SMML; Saw your posting in SMML and Sea Tec Models, when you mentioned Bremerton, you got my interest since I live here, well actually in Silverdale, but I use my parents address for mail since I am out in the sticks. Do you have an address for this individual? I am a bit surprised to see that this fellow is in the Bremerton area. I will be glad to help you out if I can. Jeffry Fontaine Bremerton, Washington -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25) From: Nick Wellington Subject: CW 1/350 USS Alaska kit + other questions I've recently ordered this kit from Pacific Front and would like to hear any opinions on what it's like. Things like the accuracy, casting quality, quality of white metal parts, detail, ease of construction etc. From the photos on the CW webpage it looks amazing, especially the photetch detailing, more than I've ever attempted! Also, with regards to decals, does the kit come with a custom sheet including the hull numbers, name, flags, aircraft insignia? Also, does anyone have any opinions on the accuracy of the ISW 1/350 USS Nashville kit? I got it for Xmas and it seems fairly accurate compared to my sources. The one thing that is missing are the two SG surface search radars. Anyone have an idea on how to scratchbuild these? I was thinking of filing down a 40mm twin mount and putting some of my extra photoetch on for the radar, would this work? Thanks in advance, Nick -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 26) From: Lawrence Tam Subject: USS Indianapolis Hi, I just picked up a Matchbox USS Indianapolis kit and is wondering if anyone have any tips on superdetailing it and correcting any errors? Thanks for any response. Lawrence -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27) From: James Corley Subject: Re: Poseidon Nanuchka >> Back around Thanksgiving, someone mentioned that a hobby shop in Norway had a kit of a Russian Nanuchka in 1/150 scale. I tracked them down and just after Christmas, the darn thing arrived! What a nice surprise! Poseidon is apparently a Czech company. The kit is molded very well and includes a nice sheet of photoetch! Cost was about 550 Kronor (~$50?). Instructions seem to be in every Central European language except English. No matter, there are pictures to follow. Now, if I can just find the time to work on it..... Has anyone else heard of this Poseidon? << I have both of the kits that I know they produce, the Nanuchka and an OSA II (or is it a 3??). Both kits are very well done, and include photoetch. The only catch is that ALL the brass is not included, the is a second optional set for all the ladders, etc that will super-superdetail the kits (set "L" IIRC). You can get N-scale ladder rungs at railroad shops to replace these, several companies, including GMM I think, make these. Still haven't gotten around to building mine yet. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 28) From: James Corley Subject: Re: Illustrious the best? Certainly not! >> The one time the RN faced IJN Carrier Air's elite "first team" cadres of 1941-1942 the IJN put on a dive bombing exhibition, sinking Dorsetshire and Cornwall, then Hermes and Vampire each in a few minutes... putting an estimated 2/3 of their ordinance on target against maneuvering warships in open water. << To be completely fair, the RN did not have frontline carriers in the IO at the time. According to Chesneau, HERMES only carried 12 aircraft by the start of WW2, not a very good defense compared to the IJNs 3 top carriers (SHOKAKU/ZUIKAU about 70 planes each)....heck, they wouldn't have been evenly matched with 3 HERMES vs 1 AKAGI (50 planes)! HERMES was lucky to survive as long as she did against a strike of nearly 100 planes. >> IJN Naval Air made such an impression on the RN that as late as February and March 1944 the news that the IJN had moved Shokaku and Zuikaku to Singapore caused Admiral Somerville to vacate the Bay of Bengal and move his fleet west of the Maldives. << Don't forget AKAGI, she helped sink HERMES, too. And after the loss of 2 BBs, a CVL, some cruisers and several DDs to the IJN/IJA, what did he have left to combat the IJN with, most assets were in the NA/Med trying to keep the SLOC open to the homeland and various strategic bases. The USN was not able to help that far west either. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29) From: RCClem@aol.com Subject: Chinese Gunboat Zhong Shan (Sun Yat-Sen) I heard a rumor that there is (or was) a model kit of this ship. It sounds like an interesting subject, especially if it is the pre-WW1 gunboat. If so, then who makes this kit? What scale? Has anyone built it yet? Is it a new kit? Thanks, Roger Clemens Hi Roger found the following entry for the Zhong Shan in my updated Shiplist (see item below ;-) ): Zhong Shan Jian Lee 1/150 PSM 98/1 1998 pp 8 Hope this helps. Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30) From: Reidar Berg Subject: Re: Best battleship in 1939.....and the winner is..... Interesting subject. To determine what battleship that was the best one in 1939 it is obvious that the different battleships must had meet each other in a gunfight battleship vs. battleship. Then speed is of little interest (except if you want to use your higher speed it to run and hide - chiiicken). As I see it it's only two factors (if we exclude good luck) that would determine who the winner is and these factors are GUNPOWER and ARMOUR (what you give and what you could take). And how does the picture look ? Battleship class Armament Armour belt Armour decks Nelson 9 x 16in (406mm) 14-13in (356-330mm) 6.25-3in (159-76mm) Maryland 8 x 16in (406mm) 16-8in (406-203mm) 3.5-1.5in (89-38mm) Nagato 8 x 16in (406mm) 12-4in (305-102mm) 3-1in (76-25mm), 178mm over vitals Hood 8 x 15in (381mm) 12-5in (305-127mm) 3-1in (76-25mm) Dunkerque 8 x 13in (330mm) 9.5-7.7in (240-195mm) 5.1-4.5in (130-115mm) Sharnhorst 9 x 11in (280mm) 13.8-7.9in (350-200mm) 2-0.8in (50-20mm) + 2in (50mm) As I see it it's only three candidates for the tittle "Best battleship 1939". These candidates are Nelson, Maryland and Nagato. All are equiped with 16in guns, Nelson with 9 and the other two classes with 8 each. If we look at the secondary armament Nelson have by fare the best armament (12 x 6in (152mm)) placed in twin hydraulic powered turrets compared with Maryland and Nagato's casemate guns. If we look at the Armour Nelson also win this battle with the best horizontal protection. So if you ask me it's no doubt, NELSON and RODNEY was by far the best battleships in 1939. They where built to meet and beat every possible opponent and not for running and hiding when they faced an powerful opponent (hence they did not need that high speed) as some of the other battleships / battlecruisers. Some of you have declared that Sharnhorst was the best battleship in 1939. I can not understand the argument for this. Nice looking ship but if it had meet Nelson and did not use it's higher speed to get out of range for Nelsons big guns it would have been pulverized. Remember what happened when Sharnhorst and Gneisenau together meet the lonely British battlecruiser Renown in april 1940 outside of Lofoten in northern Norway. The German ships had to escape into a northeasterly gale after Gneisenau was hit three times. Sharnhorst and Gneisenau was built as convoy raiders and not for facing opponents with 16in guns and heavy armour. And for those of you that think that Dunkerque was the best battleship in 1939, take a good look at the armament and armour balance. If I was captain on board the French ship and meet Nelson for a gun duel I would have pray to the Lord that all my 112.500 horsepower was alive and had enough food..... Reidar Berg, Narvik, Norway -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: Bill Gruner Subject: Pacific Front - NEW RELEASES NEW...SPECIAL NEW ORDER PRICES for the following resin kits and books: 1. 1/700 Loose Cannon USS John McCain (Mitscher class DL)...$42.00 2. 1/700 Loose Cannon APA Montrose (Victory ship variant)....49.00 3. Classic Warships 1/350 US Navy 4-Stacker USS Ward w/ IJN Type A Midget sub...$95.00 4. SKYWAVE/Pitroad NEW 2000 Catalog....$10.00 5. Conway Maritime Press Battlecruiser Scharnhorst..SB, 64 pp....$8.50 6. Marine Editions Battleship Richelieu...HB, French text, excellent book...$69.00 PACIFIC FRONT HOBBIES phone 541-464-8579, fax 541-957-5477 http://www.pacificfront.com shipguy@internetcds.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: Shane Subject: Shiplist update Hi gang, I have just uploaded a new html version of the shiplist at: http://www.tac.com.au/~sljenkins/apma.htm As always, it's a work in progress, so any comments are more than welcome. The text version is still being updated & should be up there soon. Regards, Shane APMA VP http://www.tac.com.au/~sljenkins/apma.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for having SMML at your home, why not stop by our home at: http://www.smml.org.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume