Subject: SMML VOL 853 Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 00:22:56 +1100 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Re: HO scale 2: 1/700 scale wire 3: USN Flower Class Corvettes 4: Re: C.S.S. Alabama 5: Re: Ship Names 6: Re: Battleship Row Fit 7: War of 1812 8: Re: Modelkrak pre dreadnoughts 9: Re: USS Mohawk 10: HMS Happy 11: Ship names 12: SMMLcon 13: Ships used during the Korean war 14: Naming Ships 15: Re: Duane's "Best Ship Name" 16: Re: fine wire 17: Re: HMS Happy and Royal Navy Carrier Names 18: Adelaide mods / name thread 19: Flags 20: Re: Ships in the movies 21: Tachometric Directors 22: Re: HMS Happy 23: Re: Tom's ModelWorks 24: Re: Pre-Dreadnoughts 25: Re: Buff 26: Re: USS Nimitz References 27: Ship Names 28: Ships in Movies 29: ModelKrak 30: Re: Skywave sets, IJN Kongo, 1/700 rigging 31: Whats in a name! 32: Re: CSS Alabama/USS Kearsarge 33: Re: Making Your Own Tools 34: HO Scale... 35: Pre-Dreadnoughts (Modelkrak) 36: Re: USS Franklin (CV-13) 37: Ships in the Movies 38: Light Cruisers, etc -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD INDEX 1: Want to add your firm's link to GMM's new website? 2: FS: Scale Ship Modeler 3: 1:700 waterline kits and models for sale -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: ALROSS2@aol.com Subject: Re: HO scale >> I was under the impression that the Airfix HO armour range was 1/76?? << HO is 1/87, regardless of subject... :-) Al Ross Hi Al & Derek, I should have put the right nomenclenture down, Airfix HO/OO range of armour ;-) Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: "Matthew Prager" Subject: 1/700 scale wire Dennis Krowe wrote: >> After looking at the photoetch radio masts, cranes, and other structures needing rigging it appears that scale rigging particularly for radio antennae rigging on the com masts)should be no thicker than a human hair. Does anyone know where I can get wire the thickness of a human hair - I have no idea what guage or even diameter such wire should be? << I use the wire windings from electric motors for my rigging. Whenever I come across one from a model, toy, etc I put it in my tool box for later use. You can also purchase the wire from stores such as Radio Shack. Use a small touch of super glue to cement it in place. Matt Prager Ingleside, TX -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: Rod Dauteuil Subject: USN Flower Class Corvettes Hi, I wasn't really interested in the Flower Class Corvettes until I read White Ensign Model's home page. They reference that 15 of these ships were transferred to the US under Lend Lease. Can anybody provide names, hull numbers, or designations for these ships in USN service? Thanks, Rod. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: "Bultman, Fred" Subject: Re: C.S.S. Alabama >> I was interested in the "Chain mail" hung over the sides-I had not heard of this, although it makes sense-was this the first type of "Reactive Armor"? << IIRC, they used the anchor chain, so it should be easy to model. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: "Polvi, Henry" Subject: Re: Ship Names >> Actually, I think HMS Ambush isn't a bad name. But HMS Artful? Please tell me this was a joke I was too tired to get! IMHO, the best name given to a warship was HMS Broadsword, followed by Battleaxe, Warspite and Valiant. And no, I am not British! << me either; British, that is, but I'd vote for Warspite also, and the Black Prince and the Indefatigable. By the way those 'B' class RN destroyers have/had Westland helos with 'H" nicknames, for instance I believe Prince Andrew rode/drove on the Brave[n] Hussy... [Polvi, Henry] Thornhill, ON Hi Henry, The destroyers you're refferring to are Type 22s. Apparently, HMS Brazen's helo is called Hussy ;-)). Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: "John Snyder" Subject: Re: Battleship Row Fit Ah, Mr. WRPRESS, I believe that the photo ban was just a bit later than the late 30s The High Frequency Direction Finding equipment in question was in fact the first radar sets, since that's precisely the terminology used to refer to it at the time. John Snyder Snyder & Short Enterprises The Paint Guys http://www.shipcamouflage.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: "chenyangzhang" Subject: War of 1812 Hi Roland Sorry to disapoint you but American success at sea wasn't the reason the war of 1812 ended. The main conflict for the British was the European war with the American war being very much a sideshow. The real reason the war ended was because of pressure from American merchants who were suffering from the effects of the war. With the defeat of Napoleon there was really no reason for the British to continue the war (which they weren't that interested in anyway and which went against the grain considering the shared heritage between the two nations) so a peace treaty was concluded in Paris. Despite the superiority of the American frigates in ship to ship combats the American governement was taught a sharp lesson in the use and application of sea power and the British fleet was able to wander up and down the East coast at will and to impose a successful blockade. The war of 1812 was pretty stupid anyway (America declared war after the offending orders that lead to war had been rescinded and the major battle was fought after the peace treaty had been signed). Chris Langtree -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: "Gillian Boorman" Subject: Re: Modelkrak pre dreadnoughts From: RhinoBones@aol.com >> The price range is $16 to $30 and I've been told that they are resin and they come without PE. The question is, for anyone familiar with these models (i.e. Modelkrak), can you verify that these are resin kits and also, could you offer some comments on the overall quality of the kits? Considering their low asking price I would not expect the best from their kits, however, you never know when you might be looking at a good deal. The kits in question are list at: http://kitlink.com/ModelkrakResults.asp << I have the ModelKrak Tatsuma, its resin and no photo etch as you said ,but nicely cast with no pinholes etc. Looks a very nice little model. I never intended buying this model, but it was in the hobby stores marked down bin for $5 Canadian. Seems some guy ordered a few of Modelkrak models, paid for them but didn't want them so they were just trying to get rid of them. Once in a long long while you get a deal!! Ray -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: Roland Mar Subject: Re: USS Mohawk To: Micheal Eisenstadt When off chasing down the odd bit of information, it is not uncommon for me to take a wrong turn and find myself haring about in the wrong field entirely. Thanks to the post yesterday by wblad@email.msn.com, I think I am at least on the right continent now. While I don't have the current location of USS Mohawk [WPG-78, "not" T-ATF 180 (sigh)], I have found out that she is the object of preservation and restoration efforts by the Battle of the North Atlantic Historical Society, who are trying to bring her back to WW II condition. The Coast Guard Auxiliary is apparently involved too. There is mention of this on the web site of the NY Military Affairs Symposium, and there is a contact number posted for people interested in the Mohawk. Benjamin Hammer 718/ 377-0713. The BNAHS does not have a site that I have found, but if you contact Mr. Hammer I suspect he can help you. Hope this helps Roland Mar -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: Dave Swindell Subject: HMS Happy Caroline Carter said;- >> so why not an HMS Happy??! << Wasn't that a 'Dwarf' class 'Mine'sweeper? ;-) Dave Swindell Hi Dave, Yes, there was, but it wasn't big enough for the task ;->> Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: "wblad" Subject: Ship names My vote for favorite RN ship names goes to the nicknames given by their crews to Fisher's 'light battlecruisers", Glorious, Courageous, and Furious, which were converted to aircraft carriers postwar: Curious, Spurious and Uproarious. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: BECJPARKER@aol.com Subject: SMMLcon SMML Meeting? What's the latest word on the SMML Meeting? How about a little info that will let the folks that want to know about what will happen? Dates:? Hotel: Main and options Closest airport Will there be a show, display, etc.? Events: speakers, demonstrations? Things for families to do Hi Charlie, Check out the SMML site for the latest infomation. There you'll find contact info as well. Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Ships used during the Korean war I have been asked to put together a list for publication for a model magazine concerning ships that served during the Korean war. I believe I have most of the facts. However I would like the collective knowledge of this list to make the most comprehensive list possible. The question is: What ships (by class) served during this conflict? Also, what plastic and resin kits are currently available to represent these ships? Any help from the list would be much appreciated. Credit will also be given when the list is published. Please contact me off list at: shipmdlr@aol.com. Rusty White Flagship Models Inc. http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ "Yeah I want Cheesy Poofs" Hi Rusty, Are you after USN only or the whole gambit?? Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: rickl@efortress.com Subject: Naming Ships That concern is expressed over wether a particular ship has been named for a battle or person; or for a previous ship that carried the same name is illustrative of a naval tradition that goes back generations. This is the kind of nit-picking that landsmen indulge in while the sailor they are sharing the bar with can only shake his head and return to his beer. Any sailor will tell you that a ship with a traditional name is named to honor both the battle or person whose name it carries and previous ships that have carried that name. Ships are temporary, sailors too but Naval tradition will remain long after the current ship has been sent to the breaker's yard and a new ship, bearing the same name, has taken her place in the fleet; long after her crew has crossed the brow and saluted the ensign for the last time. CVN-77? Lets give her back to the Navy. The "Blue Ghost", the "Sara", whatever but lets give her a Navy name. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: CBNJBB62@aol.com Subject: Re: Duane's "Best Ship Name" Hi Ed Your Taney represents the ship in 1946.I used Paul Silvertone US Warships of World War II for a source it has photos of this class covering they're development during the war. Craig -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: SantMin@aol.com Subject: Re: fine wire >> Does anyone know where I can get wire the thickness of a human hair - I have no idea what guage or even diameter such wire should be? << I use a lot of .005 stainless steel wire for rigging. Get it at www.smallparts.com Cheers, Bob -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: AllenFW2@aol.com Subject: Re: HMS Happy and Royal Navy Carrier Names That's a pretty good name Caroline! As long as they don't call it "HMS Mister Happy" things should be fine! LOL! (Sorry 'bout that...couldn't resist.) Seriously though, I read in Navy News/was told by Royal Navy contacts that the MoD is seriously looking into designing and building a new set of large carriers. I understand that they will be larger than the current lot, but smaller than our Navy's Nimitz monsters. As the UK has pretty much run through the same few carrier names over and over (did they really have to have four "Ark Royals" in less than 100 years? LOL), I understand that they are contemplating using other historic names. Even the name "Hood" has been mentioned. Indeed, the Hood Association has been asked what it would think of the name being used again. They do like the idea...but state that only a carrier would be worthy of it! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: Stuart Robottom Subject: Adelaide mods / name thread Greetings again all. With respect to the RAN's Adelaide class, does anyone know how their external appearance is to be changed during their upcoming mods (presuming they haven't been cancelled)? I have heard all sorts of proposals ranging from Aegis (presumably including some fixed arrays visible), to just adding another STIR forward and installing some VLS for ESSM. I recently received a Perry kit in a trade and would like it to look a bit different to the standard ship. This is a belated addition to the naming thread -- with a bit of a difference. I can vividly remember reading Jane's (1939 edition) and seeing in the RN section a motor boat with the number P00. This is quite amusing to someone in primary school! Secondly, to the casual outsider HMS Excellent may sound a bit haughty and/or arrogant, but it is the RN's gunnery school -- traditionally the most "prestigious" arm of the RN. I am lucky enough to have been to both Excellent and the RAN's equivalent, HMAS Cerberus, and feel that Excellent is superior in atmosphere and tradition. I don't want to say which, if either, was superior, but I 'enjoyed' my time at Whale Island more than at Crib Point. I hope I haven't put any noses out of joint! Regards, Stuart Robottom robottom@deakin.edu.au http://www.deakin.edu.au/~robottom/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: "Sean D. Hert" Subject: Flags I've been wondering for some time now- what flags, ensigns and pennants get flown from where at what time? I'm interested in WWII methods, all navies, but particularly the Japanese Fleet. I know Jacks are flown from the bow when in port, but am unsure where the Ensign goes when underway, as well as an officer's pennant. Thanks, Sean D. Hert Webmeister, Midewest Battle Group Site: http://www.netwalk.com/~popev/bg/ Ringmaster, Big Gun R/C Warship Combat Ring -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: CBNJBB62@aol.com Subject: Re: Ships in the movies Hi Guys Concerning the question about Hollywood and the ships of the Navy used in them. I found a book called The Fleet's in: Hollywood presents the USN in World War 2 By Harvey Biegel , 1994 Pictorial Histories Publishing Co. It covers the use of Hollywood before and after world war 2 and indirectly sees how the USN uses Hollywood as recruiting tool. The book has good photos of famous actors, copies of the theater art posters are included and interesting unknown stories during of what happened during filming or where it was filmed. It's ISBN is 0-929521-91-9 Any way heres a list of some ships used Movie Year Ship Shipmates 1932 USS Colorado BB-45 Here Comes the Navy 1934 USS Arizona BB-39 Flight Command 1940 USS Enterprise CV-6 Dive Bomber 1941 The same ship Wing and a Prayer 1944 USS Yorktown CV-10 Task Force 1949 USS Antietam CV-36, USS Bairoko CVE-115 Midway 1976 USS Lexington AVT-16 Operation Petticoat 1959 USS Balboa SS-285 The Caine Mutiny 1954 USS Randall APA -224 Mr. Roberts 1955 USS Hewell AG-145 There is others but I think this is enough by me. Craig -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21) From: Jim Fearn Subject: Tachometric Directors My l:96 scratch built HMS Newcastle, a Southampton class cruiser, circa l952, requires a number of simple tachometric directors mounted in tubs. Does anyone know where I might find a drawing and/or a good picture to work from? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22) From: SteveWiper@aol.com Subject: Re: HMS Happy >> Quite enjoying the ships names thread.. something that's always puzzled me.. we had HMS Victorious and HMS Glorious... so why not an HMS Happy??! << What about "The Good Ship Lolly Pop" or the "Yellow Submarine" Steve -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23) From: Ives100@aol.com Subject: Re: Tom's ModelWorks >> My only suggestion is that Tom offer more kits in 1/192, especially WW II models. << Uhhh, that reminds me, supposedly Tom was working on a 1:192 WWII Fleet submarine. Anyone know how that project is coming along? Tom Dougherty (no, the other Tom) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24) From: Marc Flake Subject: Re: Pre-Dreadnoughts Rhinobones: I believe others will talk about ModelKrak quality. I've heard nothing but priase for these ships. I'd like to put in a good word for Kitlink.com. I just received an order (Thursday) that I e-mailed on Monday. He has some of the best prices around, too. I also like the fact that he tells you on the website whether something is in stock or not. I'm not doing this for any special favors, just want to reward good service. (I won't name the two e-tailers I did business with last month that took more than three weeks to send me orders.) Marc -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25) From: Marc Flake Subject: Re: Buff This is a continuation of an answer I made earlier this week. The paint I used for buff on my Olympia was the old Polly S "Earth Yellow" (30257). Polly S is now out of production, but some shops still have bottles laying around on sale. I was at one of the local plastic pushers and found a new Polly Scale paint that looks close -- Russian Lt. Earth Brown. But I don't know what it looks like dry. Marc -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 26) From: Darren Scannell Subject: Re: USS Nimitz References Colin Ritchie was silly enough to write: >> So the question is this how big is Nimitz in 1/48th , NO Only Joking... << Never, ever joke about a thing like this. A 1/48 NIMITZ class ship is 23 feet long and is serious business. In Scale Ship Modeler, Vol. 5 #3, May 1982 pg. 53, there is an article with pictures of Peter Shreeves of SuperShips building his 1/48 USS CARL VINSON. There is even a photo of it in the water with Peter poking his head through a hole in the flight deck. Unfortunately, SuperShips is no longer around, so you cannot get a hull any more, but Lee at Scale Shipyard has one available in 1/96 scale that I hope is still available when I get a bigger house in 10-15 years! Darren Scannell -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27) From: "sctrtrash" Subject: Ship Names I am jumping in a little late, but when it comes to names that are a little off, how about the HMS Glow worm? Nuff Said Mark Krumrey New Richmond WI -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 28) From: "sctrtrash" Subject: Ships in Movies In "A Wing And A Prayer", CV 10 is used. It was filmed during a shakedown cruise, and has a nice shot of a TBM being shot off the Hangar Catapault. It is really a pretty decent movie too. Don Ameche plays a great airboss. The usual WWII Propaganda shtick, but still a pretty decent movie. It is neat to see some familiar faces early in their movie careers. "Away all Boats" features; I think: the USS Randall as the "Belinda". The only movie I know starring an APA. And last but not least, James Cagney in "Here Comes the Navy" features the USS Arizona, The USS Shenendoah, and some great scenes at NTC San Diego. The love object is the same lady who played the elderly Rose in "Titanic". There is one movie, I don't know the name, but features Clark Gable, and Wallace Beary. They are on the Saratoga during the '30's. One of the first movies the Navy allowed Hollywood to film aboard a carrier, and film landing sequences. It is a great flick. L8R Mark Krumrey New Richmond WI -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29) From: isublett@home.com Subject: ModelKrak In 852, "RhinoBones" asks about ModelKrak. I have three and expect another from Pacific Front shortly. They are certainly worth the money. They do come with a lot very heavy overpour (is that the right term, manufacturers?)since they are evidently made from open molds. However, I deliberately cleaned up one kit using only a jewelers saw, some files, and sandpaper, and it only took about 30 minutes. If you have a motor tool, clean up goes a lot faster. They do require building gun barrels, davits(the most disagreeable job) and masts. They don't have any photo-etch. If you have built one of the OLDER Classic Warship 1/700 kits, these will hold no terrors. Dan Jones has severely critised these kits in the last two issues of PSM with some justice. If you are expecting WSW or WEM or Clasic Warships quality, you are going to be greatly disappointed. Also, I have only built Japanese ships. From Dan's comments, I think they may be better than the Russian. If all your models are to be very accurate and very detailed, you are to have quite a bit of work. But, this line has a lot of ships you are not going to see anywhere else. Partly due to my ignorance of the period, I haven't tried to build them too seriously, and I found them to be(dare I say it)fun. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30) From: Dboykap@aol.com Subject: Re: Skywave sets, IJN Kongo, 1/700 rigging Well, it's been way too long since I've piped up on anything. Unfortunately, my "real" life has intruded way too far into my hobby for far too long. Too many good projects collecting fresh dust. I'm not sure what I'd do if not for my daily SMML fix. Anyway: To Ismail Hassenpflug: Thank you, thank you, thank you. Despite all the pleasure my curiosity has brought me in attempting to decipher those Skywave set descriptions by matching Kanji characters, it really helps to have a great translation. I know others have said it but it bears repeating: Thank you from all the IJN fans. Incidentally, there is another website with another board devoted to the IJN & JMSDF posted here just the other day (J-aircraft.com Main Page @ http://www.j-aircraft.com/ ) whose devotees would surely appreciate your posting those translations. Please consider it. And if you're really motivated, how 'bout giving those modern sets a try? To Keith Butterley: While no great expert either, I've never come across a reference suggesting that any of the surviving late war Kongos were painted green To Dennis Krowe: Human hair is notorious susceptable to the vagaries of humidity; I don't recommend it. While there are those who have perfected the use of stretched sprue, I think you'll find that the most consistent material is the ultra-fine fishing line sold under various names, the most common being Dai-Riki. The finest that I'm aware and use is size 9x. At .002", it scales out to a 1.4" diameter in 1/700, pretty damn close. Try it, you'll like it. To John Dussault: I have almost everyone of those original instructions and none of them (actually, only Tamiya and Hasegawa are in English) have anything other than generic painting notations like "Dark Gray" hulls. It wasn't until the reinvigoration of the 1/700 consortium in the early to mid 90's that instructions appeared with specific references to specific paints (only) Japanese brands. Maybe Ismail's got a spare nanosecond for translations. Dan Kaplan, NYC (where the end of spring training looms along with the start of the Yankees 2nd century. :-)) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 31) From: "Lambert and Keel" Subject: Whats in a name! Whilst I agree that in the case of warships, the crews, who lets face it, do not have a choice as to what ship they were drafted to (particularly in wartime) had to put up with the name of their home and the problems that it may have produced. Think of the long list of Herbaciousus Borders (Flowers -I can say it now) which were reissues of earlier names carried by convoy sloops constructed during the Great War. (1914-18). Poppy, Pansy Heather etc. "According to tradition, a senior admiralty official who was a keen gardener solved the problem by taking a seedsman's catalogue out of his desk". I am drawing a V&W Class destroyer at present. Built in 1918, HMS WHITLEY is an unknown name to me. I have "As Fitted" drawings of her, as modified at Chatham Dockyard in October 1938 when she has been modified as a "WAIR" and armed with two new twin 4" Mark XIX Mountings. I looked up the history of her name. WHITLEY. "This name was intended to be WHITBY (A seaside town) but, owing to a typist's error, she was launched as the Whitley. It then follows - John Whitley was the First Lieutenant of the Caesar at the Glorious 1st of June 1794. So it would seem that the powers that be are not too serious about ship names anyway. Whitley will be a three sheet subject drawn at 1/8" = 1 Ft. The R.N. has a long list of ship names changed at the last moment. Usually because name sounded very similar to existing ships (Hardy and Handy changed to Harvester). I served aboard Sluys (DD) Theseus, Albion, Scott and Bulwark. None too loin stirring, but then nothing I was ashamed of. I have never been happy with the names given to our new warships of late anyway. Gone are the well known names with a history behind them. Now they seem to choose obscure naval names eg Westminster, Portland etc for the reducing number of ships the RN has. Mind you, I'm pleased that three of my 'old' ships are in the list of things to be! Yours "Aye" John Lambert -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 32) From: "Steve Sobieralski" Subject: Re: CSS Alabama/USS Kearsarge The chain armor on the Kearsrage was covered with a layer of planking and appeared as a bulge in the hull amidships over the boilers and engines. It is (barely) visible in at least one photo of the ship I have seen which was taken soon after the action with the Alabama. It was a temporary measure that was not part of the ship as built and was later removed. This armor was not represented on the Revell model at all. As I understand reactive armor it is actually explosive and thus "reacts" when struck by a projectile. I don't believe the Kearsarge's armor would therefore qualify as reactive, composite maybe. I have both the Alabama and Kearsarge kits and have compared them directly. As I wrote in a previous post they share many common parts, the main differences being the hull above the waterline and the deck layout. A conversion would certainly be possible. Coincidently, the quarterly Nautical Research Journal is currently publishing a three part (I think) article by Arthur Roberts on the Kearsarge as she was in 1864. Part one is in the December '99 issue and this should be a very valuable resource for any conversion. BTW, I found my Kearsarge kit on ebay about six months ago. I had built (butchered actually) the kit at the age of about 11 or 12 when it was originally released, and I had been looking for another one for years. When I received the kit, the box had an original price tag still attached of $8.99 - about 1/20 of what it cost me today. Steve Sobieralski -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 33) From: Derek Wakefield Subject: Re: Making Your Own Tools Kurt... Those sound like really great tips. You've got some really interesting ideas there. Thanks for sharing! Go Navy! _|_o_|_ Derek "Tiger" (/\)akefield /---(.](o)[.)---\ iscandar@chatter.com o oo O oo o http://www.iscandar-66.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 34) From: Derek Wakefield Subject: HO Scale... Shane... If it's HO scale, it's 1:87 scale. Go Navy! _|_o_|_ Derek "Tiger" (/\)akefield /---(.](o)[.)---\ iscandar@chatter.com o oo O oo o http://www.iscandar-66.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 35) From: "Pletscher-Lenz-Schneider" Subject: Pre-Dreadnoughts (Modelkrak) Modelkrak kits are, in deed, resin models with no PE parts. I got me some of them, but was rather disappointed. The parts are casted clean and with sharp edges. But the hull and most other parts, especially decks and platforms are molded on thick blocks. The resin material is very hard, so you can not cut it with a knife. You literally have to sand down these blocks of about 5mm or more to clean the parts. Instruction sheets are in Polish with drawings that don't show exactly where to place the parts. On some models, the proportions were not correct. On some other models, I found neatly cast details which were, alas, simply incorrect. Nearly every ship had already molded-on gun shields for the light armament which were of the non-open type at the rear. Unfortunately these shields were way to low. 1.5 - 2mm is not enough in 1/700 scale, even if you take in account that the average Japanese at the turn of the century may have been not as tall as an European. Also I found gun turrets and shields for major guns which were that low. Small parts are mainly "standardized", i.e. there are two or three types of vents and boats for all kinds of ships. After all, I regard these kits as basic kits which require a lot of time and patience to clean the parts and a lot of scratch-building to give decent models. From this point of view, you may ask yourself if they are really so low-priced. On the other hand, most of these models are not available from other producers at the time. But maybe it's worth waiting a while. Seals Models just started a series of Japanese battleships and destroyers of the Russo-Japanese war era, and some of them are even injection molded. Falk Pletscher -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 36) From: Derek Wakefield Subject: Re: USS Franklin (CV-13) The odd thing about this is the uss-salem.org site has conflicting data about the naming of this ship - sorta. Andrew Toppan attempted to clarify the confusion in the FAQs, but the DANFS entry on the same site doesn't refer to the Battle of Franklin or the plate on the ship. I also have to correct my last post about this. The FDR was the first ship officially named after a current day politician/statesman. Reading through the posts here, I forgot about Hancock, etc. I hate to admit it, but Edd is correct about the disregard for official naming practices (nomenclature). An old copy of the Bluejacket Manual I have states... "Usually named for famous ships formerly on the Navy list and important battles" The key term here is *usually*. Other types occassionally had exceptions to the rule, but those used come about a lot less frequently than in the present day USN. I have nothing to back this up other than IMO, but it seems that the USN had trouble nailing down a specific nomenclature for carriers at first, because although a large, treaty-limited vessel, it represented a second-line scouting fleet type until WWII. The Lex and Sara seemed to secure the "famous battles" angle of the nomenclature, then they seemed to carry on the original naming scheme of the battlecruisers with Ranger and Wasp establishing the "famous ships" angle. Then, somewhere down the line, famous persons, such as Franklin and Hancock, were added to the mix. Then they started adding exceptions to the list such as Shangri La, FDR, Kitty Hawk, JFK, etc. For the most part, exceptions have always been the rule in USN carrier nomenclature. From just before WWI up to the late 60s, Battleship, Cruiser, Submarine, and Destroyer nomenclature remained pretty constant with only a few exceptions to the rule. They didn't start changing until their relative roles within the fleet began to change. Once surface-gunnery warfare became less and less important, and the Battleships and Heavy/Light Cruisers gave way to the Ballistic Missile and Attack Submarine, I guess it didn't seem appropriate to continue naming attack subs after fish, while Guided Missile Cruisers and Destroyers (who's role was to defend carriers more than to engage other surface ships) were still being named after states and cities. I can see the logic in it, but I don't necessarily like the change. Given the introduction of the Boomer (and it's importance in our strategic triad) right around the time the last of the Battleships were heading for the mothballs, it would've made sense if the USS George Washington had been named USS Illinois instead (only reason I picked that name is that's where they left off with the Battleships). I mean, if they were going to go that direction, why not do it then. For that matter, why not have named USS Forrestal the USS Illinois. Hey, after all, it was the carrier that surplanted the battleship as the center of the battleforce, and again most of our remaining battleships were in mothballs by that time. Since Cruisers at the time were limited to WWII left overs for the most part (with Frigates being named after naval heroes), that would've been the logical time to switch the city nomenclature over to say the Boomers. So, say USS George Washington becomes the Indianapolis (which would seem fitting if you think about it). So what about Attack Subs...how about lesser cities, so the Sturgeon becomes the Ashville. This was around the time the LPH came into being as well, so they carry on the "Famous Battles/Ships" nomenclature started by the carriers - which is what they did, but... That only leaves statesmen/polticians which I guess would have been the logical choice for the DLGNs (later CGs), as it's a logical step up from the naval hero nomenclature used by Destroyers. Hey, they are Destroyer "Leaders" after all ). However, I've known folks who consider the notion of naming a warship after a person who's claim to fame was the pursuit of peace to be an oxymoron. I mean, one of George Washington's last points when he left office was do not get embroilded in international affairs, and what types of ships have we named after him...hoo-boy. If you really start thinking about things like this, you really start wondering who came up with these ideas. Yes, to a point I'm poking fun at all of this, but this did seem to be the period when the shape of things to come seemed to be getting underway. Of course, I'll be the first to admit that hindsight is 20-20, Navies tend to be tied to tradtion to the point of hanging themselves from the yardarm at times, and doing this would've ended up with a nomenclature morass no better than what we had in the 70s & 80s. Eh, enough of this. Who am I to say anything. I still believe that the hybrid 6/8-in gun-missile cruiser is the only way to go, and they should be named after cities. IMHO, if it doesn't bristle with guns (or planes) it ain't a real-warship. I'll make an exception for subs, but... Exploring the how's and why's they chose to go this route would seem to be an interesting bit of research. Go Navy! _|_o_|_ Derek "Tiger" (/\)akefield /---(.](o)[.)---\ iscandar@chatter.com o oo O oo o http://www.iscandar-66.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 37 From: Derek Wakefield Subject: Ships in the Movies What I'd like to know is in Tora Tora Tora how did they manage to do the scenes aboard the Nagato, Nevada, and other battleships? The opening scene aboard the Nagato was very impressive. At first I wondered if perhaps they did those scenes aboard the Texas, but then I noticed, no...it looks WAY too much like the Nagato for that to be the case. My only guess is they built a replica of her, but that would seem excessive back then. Of course, how many of you noticed the problem they had with the scenes onboard the Nevada mock up (a triple superimposed turret rather than the twins the Nevada actually had). Go Navy! _|_o_|_ Derek "Tiger" (/\)akefield /---(.](o)[.)---\ iscandar@chatter.com o oo O oo o http://www.iscandar-66.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 38) From: Derek Wakefield Subject: Light Cruisers, etc I'd like to thank everyone who took time out to answer the questions I had about the Houston, San Jacinto, and Light Cruisers in general. The Skywave Miami came in a day after I posted my message about the Ms scheme. This is an excellent kit BTW, and I've yet to stop drooling. My only complaint is the kit's retail price (I bought mine second hand from someone here on the list, so...). The going prices for 1:700 resin cruisers is reasonable IMO, because you're getting hard to find subjects that have been well researched, and beyond clean up, the fiddle-factor tends to be relatively low (mods for accurization aren't needed as much as what I've enountered with commerical injection kits). Comparatively though, $41 for a 1:700 commercially available injection cruiser kit seems a bit stiff IMO. If I could get it at half that price, I'd buy three more of these kits (as I would like to have more than one decent Cleveland in my collection). It's for this reason that - even though they're more expensive - I'm leaning toward concentrating my efforts on resin kits of this type because in my warped sense of perspective, they seem to be a more reasonable buy for the money. Of course, YMMV. On the other hand, I conceed to the fact this kit is far more detailed than some of the Tamiya, Hasegawa, and Fujimi 1:700 offerings I've owned/seen in recent years. I spent several hours comparing the Miami kit to my DML Princeton kit (the two of which I plan to mount together) and the latter simply doesn't compare in the level of detail. Yes, I've noticed problems with both, but that's par for the course. As they say though, you get what you pay for. Another issue is how much is your time worth. I'm likely to spend much less time with the Miami than I will on the Princeton because the latter will rate a greater fiddle factor. I paid roughly a third more for the Miami, but it's going to take more than a third more time to build the Princeton the way I want because of the mods needed. That's another reason why I'm leaning more and more toward resin kits. More accurate, less fiddle-factor, fewer aftermarket parts required (yet another argument that could be added to the equation), less time needed to do a proper build up. Of course...all of this IMO and hypothetical meanderings. These are things that have been creeping into my mind in the last 24hrs. I can only hope that eventually the Skywave Cleveland and Miami molds will migrate their way over to DML & Rev-Ger like earlier Skywave kits have done. Yes...I'm a terrible person and I admit it. ) Go Navy! _|_o_|_ Derek "Tiger" (/\)akefield /---(.](o)[.)---\ iscandar@chatter.com o oo O oo o http://www.iscandar-66.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: Loren Perry Subject: Want to add your firm's link to GMM's new website? Gold Medal Model's all-new website is up and running now at: www.goldmm.com and we're adding new links as they become available. If you have a company or provide a service that's closely related to scale model ship building, and would like us to link it to our site, please contact me and we'll see what we can do. Loren Perry/GMM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: CokerRE@aol.com Subject: FS: Scale Ship Modeler THE FOLLOWING ISSUES OF SCALE SHIP MODELER ARE FOR SALE $10 each July 1989 Narvik Class DD, PT-109, HMS Avenger, Tamiya's New Jersey May 1989 US sub Seawolf, DE USS Abercrombie, USS Brooklyn November 1989, USS Indiana, Galley La Reale, October 1987 USS Arizona, Danish Gunboat, Lindberg's Constellation May 1986 Le Protecteur, USS Augusta, USS Bainbridge January 1984 Fram I DD, USS Louisville & San Francisco, USS Alaska January 1985 Airfix Bismarck, Seaview Submarine, tugboats, USS New Jersey the above is just a sample of what is available. Please reply off list to PC Coker at cokerre@aol.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: "J. London" Subject: 1:700 waterline kits and models for sale Japanese:- Assembled and painted (no boxes):-SUZUYA, ARASHIO, HUBUKI, AKITSUKI (some boats missing), I-16, I-58. Partially assembled and/or painted (boxed):- KIRISHIMA, FURUTAKA, MYOKO, YAMASHIRO, HYUGA, I-400, YAMATO (no box). Original boxed kit:- AKAGI, ATAGO. Others:- Revell 1:720:- ARIZONA (some assembly, instructions missing), PRINZ EUGEN (some assembly and painting). $US 90 the lot plus postage. Reply off list including destination and will quote postage. Michael London, Mississauga, Ontario. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for having SMML at your home, why not stop by our home at: http://www.smml.org.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume