Subject: SMML VOL 991 Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 23:59:35 +1000 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Re: USS Oregon Plans 2: NNS Delivers Submarine Test Vehicle to Idaho Navy Facility for Final Outfitting 3: Building a modern USS NJ? 4: Writing for FineScale Modeler 5: Re: Testors 6: Re: Origin of Fujimi USN models 7: Re: Origin of Fujimi USN models 8: CO's Boat, USS Midway 9: Re: Fine Scale Modeller 10: Re: IPMS judging Criteria 11: Re: Testor's Price Increase 12: Re: FSM and ship modelers 13: Re: paints 14: Model Needed for Museum 15: Lost bookmarks 16: Ark Royal 17: Re: Testors Paints 18: Re: Fine Scale Modeller 19: Re: Fujimi USN kits 20: Revell U.S.S. Olympia 21: Re: FSM, China, German naval uniforms 22: Re: Eastwind 23: Ship Models in FSM 24: Pearl Harbor 25: Re: Pearl Harbour 26: Needed: 1.350th Seahawks and Oto Melaras 27: War with China 28: Re: CGC Eastwind 29: War With China? 30: Re: MIDWAY's Gig (Maybe) 31: Re: Almirante Jose Toribio Merino Castro 32: Re: USS Oregon Information and Plans 33: Over 100 trapped on crippled Russian nuclear sub 34: Re: Pearl Harbor Attack 35: putty and resin? 36: Modeling Oriskany 37: U.S. COAST GUARD SHIP & BOAT PLANS 38: Re: Computers & "the weak link - the products from Redmond, WA. :-)" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: GKingzett@aol.com Subject: Re: USS Oregon Plans The plans available from the Oregon Maritime Center and Museum are very nice, fully adequate for modeling, either scratch or modifying various kits. The plans are two sheets, drawn to 1:192 (1/16"=1'-0"). They include hull lines and plenty of modeling detail. They are drawn by Ed Neubauer, curator and model builder. I believe the Oregon plans were used by Tom's Modelworks for their photoetch sheet. Ed has drawn other plans including all three of the Columbia River lightships. Most of his interest has been in ships and boats local to the Columbia River of all time periods. You might want to ask for a list of the plans available. Gary -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: JRKutina@webtv.net (John Kutina) Subject: NNS Delivers Submarine Test Vehicle to Idaho Navy Facility for Final Outfitting http://www.seawaves.com/Articles/Industry/august2000/00081301.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: "Poutre, Joseph A" Subject: Building a modern USS NJ? I have news for you. I joined a crowd of thousands last Thursday that visited the ship in Camden. As I waiting on line, I noticed that she is riding high in the water, being empty of fuel, water and ammo. As far down as I could see, the lower hull was _black_ - no trace of the expected red. A good two meters above water was painted black, and as I climbed on board I looked into the water, and it was black as far down as I could see (not far, the water was filthy, but far enough). It appears that the Big J carries black all the way down to the keel. Hopefully we'll get a nice clear photo of her in drydock to confirm this; she goes in this week. As for the visit, it was wonderful to finally go on board the ship, to walk the teak decks (I corrected some yutz who said it was plywood), to feel the solid strength of her armored turrets. I also discovered that my models in progress need some corrections, such as in the shape of the teak deck. There will be photos on the BBNJMS site shortly, taken by David Wells and myself. Personal opinion piece: (Not Society opinion, mine) Unfortunately, the Home Port Alliance has chosen not to ask for volunteers to assist. All they did was herd people on board, have them circle the main deck, then try to sell stuff to people as they debarked. If the politicians really wanted to educate the people on board, all they had to do was ask the Battleship New Jersey Historical Museum Society, who would have provided knowledgable volunteers on board to talk about the ship and answer questions. This is what happens when politicians get involved in noble causes. What they need to do is ask the Society to come in to run things, and step back and take the photo ops. Joe Poutre Co-webmaster, Battleship New Jersey Historical Museum Society http://www.bb62museum.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: BSteinIPMS@aol.com Subject: Writing for FineScale Modeler Having had a writing relationship with the good folks at FineScale Modeler since 1983, I thought I'd pass on some of my experiences and observations for the benefit of those of you considering the same. This topic seems to have some controversy attached to it here at SMML and my comments might be of some use. I've written over 24 articles for FSM during the last 17 years which were primarily aircraft or aircraft engine oriented, and in all that time I've felt they were all fine people who were easy to work with. Starting with editor Bob Hayden, then Mark Thompson, and now current editor Terry Thompson, they have all been helpful, constructive, friendly, and supportive. Senior Editor Paul Boyer, even though he builds in the less-than-monly scale of 1/72 (smile) instead of the more monly scale of 1/48, is one of the stalwarts at FSM as well as in various IPMS functions. He's been most helpful in the aircraft modeling sector. You can download FSM's Writer's Guidelines from their Web site at: http://www.finescale.com. If you follow these guidelines carefully, your article is certain to meet their standards. Unlike most publications, FSM will pay you for your article upon acceptance, not after it's published. This means when they are able to review it and formally accept it, not when they receive it in their mailbox. This can take six months or more, depending on their publishing schedule and the need to make up a balanced issue. They usually use a standard formula of so much per published number of words or columns, so much for black & white photos, so much for color, so much for your drawings, and if you make the cover (I've made four) then they add a bonus. Unbeknownst to me at the time, they used a photograph of my Heinkel He 162 Volksjager (from a previously submitted and published article) on their 1996 calendar and then sent me a check for it. They were under no obligation to do so since they had purchased the article from me and with it went the copyright, but they did anyway. This indicates a high level of integrity. Along this line they've sold articles of mine to Italian and Japanese magazines and have been good with me about this arrangement. FSM will be running a "Modeler's Showcase" feature article on my 1/192 scale destroyer USS KIDD next spring or summer, and indicate it will probably appear on the cover. They are also working closely with The Mariners' Museum in Newport News, Virginia, on an article about the "Scale Ship Model Competition & Exhibition 2000" which is currently ongoing. It appears from all of this that they have a very high interest in serving the needs of ship modelers. Having said all these nice things, I think their level of payment is somewhat low (about $250.00 to $450.00 per article), and they often edit out 50% of what I write. This is a sort of "sound byte" approach to publishing: you can pack in more articles (albeit shallow ones) in a magazine and these short ones will match the average reader's short attention span. (A publisher's term, not mine) Lengthy six-part types of articles don't work for FSM. Seaways' Ships in Scale magazine pays far more for articles and uses a similar formula for payment. FSM's circulation is about 84,000 whereas SSiS is about 5000 or so. Why the big difference in payment? I'm not certain, but if fame and recognition are more important to you, then you should consider writing for FSM with their wider circulation base. If you're more interested in remuneration, then SSiS is for you. More importantly, but less apparent, are the hidden benefits of writing for hobby magazines. Since you're being paid for the article, this represents reportable income which the Internal Revenue Service will tax you on. Now, if you have to pay taxes, surely you can have deductions. And this is how it works: you now become a "free lance writer", report your income on the proper form when you file your income taxes each April 15, and then you can deduct all of your hobby expenses. Yep, that's right. All of your books, all of your kits, all of your tools, and even a computer if it's used for the writing part of the business. By IRS regulation, you have to show a profit two years out of every five, and you have to keep writing to show that the business is a serious one. If you can do that, your hobby will be self-supporting from now on. Now, let's all sharpen our quills and open the ink pots. I'd like to read what the rest of you have been doing in the pages of Seaways' Ships in Scale, FineScale Modeler, Model Ship Journal, and Plastic Ship Modeler. Bob Steinbrunn Minneapolis Member, Nautical Research Guild Louisiana Naval War Memorial - USS Kidd, DD 661 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: John_Impenna@hyperion.com Subject: Re: Testors Hi All, I have to agree totally with Mark Flake. Anyone who accepts the fact that it is okay to be price gouged because he spends money on an expensive resin kit that is worth the money is a fool and should keep throwing his hard-earned money away!! Anyone, repeat, ANYONE who defends this practice is totally off-base and either gets "stuff" for free for "impartial reviews"(what a joke in some cases) or is in some way related to RPM Corp. In either case, they are probably a vast minority. If enough of us "raise a ruckus", they will see that it can effect their sales. If more hobby shops had the GUTS to drop them, as one shop in my area is doing, this would also help tremendously. What Testors is doing has nothing to do with oil prices. They are starting to drop by the way. They are only able to do this because they have become a monopoly and if enough folks took a stand, this will stop. I can afford $2.99 a bottle. I won't pay it, however. If Testors hears enough of this they may listen as there are alternatives out there. Are you listening RPM??? John -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: "Quan, MT Mike (5763)" Subject: Re: Origin of Fujimi USN models Hello Shane, I had a chance to peruse a number of Fujimi Modern USN kits this past weekend - (Ticonderoga, Burke, Spruance and Perry classes). None of the kits are based upon Skywave tooling and are original molds. The parts breakdown is different from their Skywave competitors, as most of the Fujimi kits have completely separate decks which must be glued in place. Overall, the Fujimi detailing is not as fine as current Skywave efforts with regards to panel lines and fineness of hoses, reels, chocks, etc. -- (especially the et-ceteras! ). Especially telling was that despite complaints from most modelers about the high price of Skywave kits, the Fujimi counterparts are even considerably higher in retail price! I personally prefer the Skywave offerings. Craig Bennett also asked: >> Does any one know who the company waterline represents that put out 2 sets of IJN ship accessories from WW2? << These two sets are actually 'generic' 700th waterline consortium sets as they lack a specific manufacturer on the box exterior save for the "S" logo common to the previously released Harbor Set and Tugger Set. HobbyLink Japan lists these IJN ship accessories as originating from Tamiya though. The contents are the same "Leviathan" sprues that are currently being packed with 700th Fujimi, Hasegawa, Tamiya and Aoshima IJN kit re-releases. In fact, each sprue inside has a "Leviathan" logo imprinted. Hope this answers your questions. good modeling, Mike Quan Rockwall Texas "looking forward to another day over 100 degrees!" Hi Mike, Firstly, please be quiet about those nice warm days :-(( Secondly, thanks for checking the fujimi kits. Nice review as well ;-) Shane - waiting impatiently for some decent weather again -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: "Edward F Grune" Subject: Re: Origin of Fujimi USN models Hello Shane Mike did me the courtesy of copying me with his message. I thought that I'd add my 0.02 USD. I too checked these new Fujimi kits and I'll echo Mikes assessment. I'd also like to add my impression of the detail parts, that they seemed to be "larger" than Skywave parts - at least using the uncalibrated MK1/Mod 0 eye-ball. I'd really like to have someone do a impartial side-by-side review of the Skywave, DML/Dragon. ARII, Lee, and now the Fujimi offerings. Compare the scale and "fineness" against a mythical standard. I'd volunteer, except I think I've already made up my mind. Ed Mansfield, TX Thanks Ed, maybe some SMMLie has the above kits & can supply a comparative review to here (for possible inclusion on the SMML website as well) or any of the other websites?? Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: "Christer Jδlltoft" Subject: CO's Boat, USS Midway First of all, my sincere thanks to Charles, Rick, Victor and Art for the information you have provided regarding the boat. I found the original photo at the U.S.S. Midway - CVW/5 Home Page: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~buzznau/navair.html and under the subject, 1953-54 Med Cruise Photos: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~buzznau/53-4medcrs.html The accompanying text says it is the Captains boat (there are two pictures), however I tend to agree it is not, as it is missing the silver arrow through the name and has the number "1". (I did study the photo from the Med Cruise page and think there is an arrow at the bow at the start of the waterline, but this probably not qualifies as an arrow through the name of the boat). BTW, if you check the web page out, do NOT look at the "Hubba hubba hubba...." picture, it has nothing to do with ships or aircraft. :-)) I found a lot of information in the pdf-file: Chapter 583 - Boats and Small Craft - 191 pages (2.08 KB) downloaded from: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/nstm/index.html There are three more interesting pdf-files, Chapter 631, but the links do not work. I agree with Art, if anyone knows where to get plans/drawings regarding Navy equipment, please let us know. The boat would certainly be nice in 1:48 or 1:32, Have to confess I have been thinking of 1:10, it would beat those popular Chris Craft model subjects, and I would surely not find another one like it "on the block" :-)) Thanks again, Chris -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: PT191@aol.com Subject: Re: Fine Scale Modeller I stand corrected. And - my photos were professionally taken. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: IPMS judging Criteria >> I hope to attend the Nats in Chicago next year, and even aspire to enter a ship model there! I would like to know a couple of things in advance, including what are the general judging criteria and the criteria for judging shipmodels in particular. (For instance, what sort of mistake would cause instant disqualication as opposed to just counting against you.) << Art, I'm taking quite a chance discussing judging here. The last time it was discussed (more cussed than discussed) in this forum, it was labeled as "we're sick of hearing about it" (or something to that effect). So if you wish, you may want to discuss this off post. However, I'll answer your questions as best I can here. It depends on the level of competition on a given day. By that I mean if most of the models in a given ship category have basic mistakes (99% do) the model that has the least mistakes wins. So as you can see, it depends on the quality of the models in the room on a given day. If Phillip Toy, John Leyland, Derek Brown, Bob Stienbrunn and Loren Perry show up (Gad! Wouldn't that be great), it could be a very long day for the rest of us. What we judge are the "basics". 99% of the models are cut due to errors in basic construction techniques. Most of the time (believe it or not) the masts just don't line up perpendicular to the decks or parallel to each other. We look down the bow first thing (that's why we sometimes need to pick up the smaller ones) to check the alignment of the masts and yardarms. If all the masts and yards don't line up, (and yes, I know the yards on sailing vessels are allowed to change a bit) the model could be in serious trouble competing unless all the other models masts don't line up either. That's just one of the many things we look at. We also consider photo etching construction techniques, masking, paint, seam filling, decal application, and of course, accuracy. Very soon you will be able to access and download the Competition Handbook (formerly known as the Judges Handbook) from the IPMS/USA web site. This will tell everyone what we look for when judging the basics for every category in IPMS/USA competition. We were hoping to have it up on the web before the Nats. in Dallas, but due to the size of the job, it just didn't get done. Keep an eye on the web site. It should be there very soon. As soon as I know it's there, I'll let everyone know. >> Also, when I don't place at Nationals (I have no illusions, having seen the models in Dallas and the ones in Santa Clara in '98), will there be a way to get feedback on what the judges thought of my particular model? << Don't sell yourself short Art. I believe the magnificent USS Texas Derek Brown won best of show with a couple of years back was his FIRST ship. At least that's what I was told. The answer to your question is absolutely. I instruct all the ship judges (if at all possible) to make themselves available after the award ceremony in the model room to answer any questions you or anyone else may have regarding how their model was judged. They will not compare your model to anyone else's. Just show you where the problems are on your model. >> Is anything written down on each model or would a judge have to give me feedback from memory? I would like to be able to learn from my (inevitable) mistakes. << Nothing written down. Believe me, written statements can really come back and bite a judge. The judges who judge your category will be happy to tell you anything you want to know about how your particular model was judged. Also, rest assured you will not be made fun of, or criticized in any way about the way you built your model. If you are, find me and that will be the last IPMS Nationals that judge will ever work. We are there to help you build better models and enjoy yourself doing it. I will do anything to make building ships enjoyable for you. I would suggest if you really want to learn about judging ships and what we look for, to sign up as an OJT (On The Job Training) judge next year in Chicago. This way you'll be on a judging team and will see first hand how we do it. I guarantee you will build your models differently from then on once you know what we look for. I also really look forward to seeing you and your ship model in Chicago next year. If you still have any questions, I'll answer them personally. I hope this helps. I'll be happy to answer any questions concerning IPMS/USA ship judging from anyone. There are no secret societies or handshakes among judges. It's all above board and we want everyone to know just how we do it. However, you may want to ask your questions off list, but I'll be happy to answer them here as well. Rusty White IPMS/USA Head ship judge http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ "Yeah I want Cheesy Poofs" Hi Rusty, Great post mate. AFAIC, any post (well, nearly any post ;-) ) regarding judging of ship models is welcome here. As for boring posts, well there's always the scroll bar at the side for them ;-). Please remember that SMML does support model clubs around the world. Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: cakeking@prodigy.net Subject: Re: Testor's Price Increase The Testor's price increase is in fact a 33% increase the way retailer's compute it. And they do it this way for the specific purpose of looking less like crooks. I'm in the food business and my wife is in retail department store sales they both do it the same way. Here's the formula: (Sell price-cost)/sell price = margin on sell or put another way: Old Price/(1-margin) = new price so..... 1.99/(1-.33)=1.99/.77=2.99 For regular humans if I buy something for $5 and sell it for $10 that's a 100% mark-up. But supermarkets and department stores call that a 50% margin. Meaning that the sell price is 50% of the cost. It's is intentionally mis-leading, but it's done all the time. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: FSM and ship modelers >> I respectfully disagree Shane - 99% of the FSM issue have never had ship articles. That's why I did not renew my suscription. << Believe me I know. If FSM lacked ship articles, it was because they were not submitted. They desperately want ship articles. Rusty White Flagship Models Inc. http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ "Yeah I want Cheesy Poofs" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: "Ken Goldman" Subject: Re: paints Yesterday, Marc Flake mentioned Ceramcoat in his comments about Testors' price increase. I have been using that product for years, among other paints. At $2 US for 69ml, it's a real bargain, but it took me a while to figure out how to get it to go on properly. It is very thick as it comes and dries rather soft, which adversely affects its adhesion. It also doesn't like to be thinned with alcohol. My solution is to mix the stuff with good old Future Floor finish and thin a bit with water. This mixture brushes well and airbrushes acceptably so long as you build up thin coats. I also mix small amounts of color using Grumbacher tube water colors and Future. I haven't gotten around to trying artists acrylics, but they should also work. The key is the hardness imparted by the Future. The downsides are the extra work mixing the colors you want and remembering to mix more at one time that you think will be enough. I clean out and save old model paints jars for this purpose and also use those little jelly and honey jars that hotels put out at breakfast. That said, however, I still do like Tamiya paints. Ken Goldman THE WALRUS AND THE CARPENTER unique wood sculpture and fine scale models www.walruscarpenter.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: Kurt Van Dahm Subject: Model Needed for Museum I was contacted by Ariel Orlov a Curator at Chicago's Field Museum of Natural History for a model of Shackleton's ENDURANCE. They have a traveling exhibit due at the Museum in October, 2000 and the current model of ENDURANCE has to be returned to the owner before the exhibit arrives in Chicago. They are looking for a model to fit within a circular case that is 40" in diameter by 62" high (gives 360 degree viewing). They would prefer that the model be loaned to the exhibit with all the necessary insurance and care taken care of by the museums involved. They can handle the shipping, etc. Failing a suitable loan they are willing to discuss the purchase of the model with the costs being shared by the museums due to get the traveling exhibit. If anybody has such a model and is willing to consider the loan or sale, please contact Ariel Orlov, Curator at the Field Museum of Natural History at her e-mail address of aorlov@fmnh.org I can vouch for the Museum taking proper care of loaned models as they recently used a few of our models in an exhibit concerning the Phillipines. Take care, Kurt Van Dahm Westmont, IL NRG member -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: "George Hackett" Subject: Lost bookmarks Dear Robert Fish, I am a WIN95 user- need I say more? I feel your pain at the loss of your image files and bookmarks. A site that I found, thankfully before my last computer debacle, is called: http://www.blink.com On this site you can store your bookmarks. It is sometimes a "little balky" to use but I found it a great help in restoring some semblance of my computer's former functionality. Are you by chance familiar with the Great Lakes WW II training carriers? Best of luck on your CV-1 project, George Hackett -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: "Bill & Joanne Burns" Subject: Ark Royal Hi, I am starting a model of a 1/48th scale Fairey Swordfish and am going to have it sitting on a piece of Ark Royal's deck, but I am unclear as to what that deck would have looked like. Was it a wooden planked deck like the US carriers or painted steel? What would the tie-downs look like? TIA Wm. (Bill) Burns London, Ont. ICQ # 9682543 http://www.ionline.net/~wburns If necessity is the mother of invention, then war must be the mother of necessity. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: Keith T Bender Subject: Re: Testors Paints Yes I know this is a classic case of "screw the customer". I can deal with the price of paint going up, everything else does. But do they have to increase it 50%. My boss still hasn't given me a 50% increase in pay. I think I'll ask him tomorrow and see how fast he throws me out the door. Want to know why Testors has increased their paints 50%? Because they can! I seen this happen before in other businesses, because they can and we will pay too! Face it, they have us by the ____s. I need paint just like the next guy does. OK I'll stop my whinning, I feel better now, just a little. KTB -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: SteveWiper@aol.com Subject: Re: Fine Scale Modeller >> I respectfully disagree Shane - 99% of the FSM issue have never had ship articles. That's why I did not renew my suscription. << If you are looking for a magazine that does have ships and ship modeling in it then I would suggest you try a one year subscription to Model Ship Journal @ www.modelshipjournal.com I have contributed to this magazine, as well as others, and think it may well be the one that best shows real and model ships. The reproduction quality is top notch. Subjects run a wide range. Check it out for yourself. Steve Wiper -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: CBNJBB62@aol.com Subject: Re: Fujimi USN kits Hi Guys On the topic of new Fujimi kits I have learned that a 3rd Perry class Frigate has issued it is the Thach . According to a website that handles 1/700 kits that is all that is new from them. Craig Bennett -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: Ferdinand Miller Jr Subject: Revell U.S.S. Olympia I wonder if anyone knows how I can obtain Revell's U.S.S. Olympia kit. I have the 1/240 scale photoetch for the Olympia but no kit to model. Would appreciate any info. tnx Ferd Miller -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21) From: Christopher Crofoot Subject: Re: FSM, China, German naval uniforms About getting the rejection slip from FSM --If you got it I can bet it was for crummy photos. If you read their author guidlines you'll see the biggest reason for rejection is lousy photography. I've had a few articles published and while they may do some rewriting they can't make the photos better. FSM publishes what hobbyists write... if you want more ship articles...WRITE them! Just make sure your photos are good. China and Japan. --Josh, The idea that you can't credit the Japanese with the ability to carry out a large secret operation and keep us in the dark is ignorant at best. We managed to carry out Operation Overlord without the Germans catching on...what makes you think the Japanese couldn't get away with PH (which was a MUCH smaller operation with no prying eyes to see)? Besides the British showed the Japanese how to do it at Taranto... The Japanese just had better planes. Sure many isolated incidents might point to the obvious when you look at them in whole... but that was part of the problem there was no centralized intelligence agency that could see the big picture. Thats why the CIA was created. You may not want to credit them but the FACTS speak for themselves and their isn't one FACT you can point to that shows otherwise. Bob Leonti, The idea that the Chinese don't have the technology to wage war with the US is another ignorant statement. A Nuclear weapon doesn't have to be sophisticated to slag a city... it just has to go boom. The Chinese have demonstrated that. Korea and Vietnam are pefect example of technologically superior forces failing to acheive decisive victory. We killed a lot of Chicoms and VC but if you can't get what you want at the table it doesn't really matter. They'll soon be joining the manned space program club, too. Just because they didn't invent it doesn't mean that they can't improve on it... Americans have been doing so for 200 years and look at the economic strength it gave us. The idea that the Chinese wouldn't risk war with us is the same arrogant opinions that were aired about the Japanese before they showed up with the Long Lance Torpedo, Zero, and an affection for Carrier ops. As the saying goes...Pride goeth before the fall. All this has been quite educational for me...I especially liked Capn Agee's bit about container ship delivery platforms. Wouldn't that fit right in with Sun Tzu's thought on striking where weakest? Makes me wonder how far the nearest truck stop is..... Anyway...back to ships....Does anybody know what type of uniform the German navy used during WWI....I've got a German Destroyer under conversion and I'd like to populate it with sailors...but I'm unsure as to what type of Uniform the Officers and men would have worn during a patrol. Chris Crofoot "Quemadmoeum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est" A sword is never a killer, it is a tool in the killer's hands. -----Seneca, 45 AD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22) From: "edger1" Subject: Re: Eastwind Mike M, Thanks for the great help in locating Eastwind info. I received some more info from a friend here in TX. Check out the following if you're interested: http://www.cgcwestwind.net/ there are some great links to other icebreakers and Coast Guard in general! Dave Edgerly -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23) From: Ned Barnett Subject: Ship Models in FSM >> I respectfully disagree Shane - 99% of the FSM issue have never had ship articles. That's why I did not renew my suscription. << And I have to respectfully disagree with you. I've been a subscriber since day-one (I had an article in the premiere issue, the one that tested the market - hell, I used to be a fair-to-middlin' modeler ). Based on your 99% figure, the roughly 180 issues produced would have 1.8 whole ship-model articles; I've seen more than that this year. If you want to claim that the folks at FSM give more attention to planes and tanks than ships, no question. That's a marketing decision, and (I think) a sound one, based on the sales of kits, the turn-out at IPMS shows, etc. Ship modeling may be the best game in town, but it's a game that relatively few choose to play. BTW - one thing that might weigh heavily on FSM editors is the same thing that I faced when I was editor of the IPMS Quarterly (the precursor to the IPMS USA Journal) - I couldn't get ship modelers to contribute. I know a few members on this list contribute (Rusty comes to mind) to FSM, but I had a devil of a time getting any ship articles out of anybody in IPMS - and I was too frickin' busy editing it to do any of my own (though I was tempted to do an article on detailing the Airfix LCM). Ned -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24) From: "john mcmanis" Subject: Pearl Harbor When I was college I made the mistake of debating my history instructor (in front of the class) on the issue of the Pearl Harbor Conspiracy and Rosevelt's possible involvement. After 15 minutes heated debate the only thing I got was a lower grade on a book report dealing with the subject. I don't think anyone here is going to change their opinion on the issue. I think it would be more useful to get everyone together in a room and throw paperclips at each other. God bless, John -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25) From: Robert Vancel Subject: Re: Pearl Harbour Saw this in a magazine many years ago: What if the Government Ran the News Industry... Dec 7, 1941... United States Tricks Japs into Scrapping Aging 7th Fleet Robert "Dr Al Roberts" Vancel/oWf Al Team # 78 Matching Night Vision Tiara sold separately... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 26) From: Ned Barnett Subject: Needed: 1.350th Seahawks and Oto Melaras I picked up the Arsenal ship and will be converting it to a DD-21; the gross conversion is not all that difficult, and the ship is spare enough in its fittings to keep me sane without the need of PE ... But I do need two things: 1/350th Seahawks and 1/350th Oto Melara turrets - two of each. Does anybody know of sources - or better yet, does anybody have spares that they could sell, lease, barter or donate to the project? Thanks Ned -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27) From: "Kerry L. Jang" Subject: War with China Two very good points have been made in response to the posts on a future war with China. They are: 1. China's weapons are inferior, and thus would not take on the United States 2. Countries shoudl prepare for what China is capeable of doing, not its intentions I think it is important to note that athough current Chinese harware is poor, the PLN, PLAAF, and the PLA itself is seen as being capabel of causing a great deal of damage to USN forces, more than is acceptable. I have read and heard this in several pulblications and have heard this familiar refrain on TV news reports, etc. Although Chinese hardware is primitive, the same was thought of the Japanese military in the 1930's. The Mitsubishi Reisen came as a nasty shock to many people, for example. It is also important to remember that the Chinese view their military as a defensive force, for the protection of its borders. The PLA has only been used in this regard, and I forgot to mention the border wars with India and Vietnam in my previous posts. It is important to understand Chinese priorities. This lack of understanding leads to posts like the one that commented on the lack of democracy in Red China. It must be understood that China was devasted during WWII, the Civil War and the Cultural Revolution. The priorities of the government is to first feed everybody, house everybody, protect everybody, and then after progress has been made here, allow social change to occur. The Chinese press (both from HK, Taiwan and China) have said, economic change before ploitical change, and they cite Russia as the case as to what happens when political reform proceeds economic reform. Democarcy has never existed in China (not even Hong Kong under British rule!), but that it is coming has been recognized by the central government. I have made a couple of visits to China (advising on health care reforms) and this was clearly the case, and the degrees of freedoms available now than before is amazing. One thing I did notice on my last trip over, people have a lot more leisure and holiday time in China, hence the resurgence of model kit production! Whith the gradual opening of China, we modellers have benfitted from several nice kits of subjects that may have never seen the light of day. I hope my thought have brought a Chinese persepective to this very interesting and thought-provoking thread. Cheers, Kerry Jang -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 28) From: Bruce Burden Subject: Re: CGC Eastwind >> The Coast Guard museum in Seattle would be a good place to start. I believe they hold a set of plans for the "Wind" class and the price for a copy was $16.00(1990). << I don't think they have a set of drawings for the "Wind" (it has been a couple of years since I corresponded with them), but they do have drawings of the Northland. >> The National Archives holds plans for decommissioned cutters and craft. << National Archives II, in Maryland, to be precice. :-) Unfortunately, unless the curator of the archives has unearthed them, the Nat. Archives doesn't have a deck plan for the WWII configuration. All of the deck plans I looked at showed that danged helicopter pad on the stern. I didn't find much at the Nat Archives regarding photos of the Wind class either, which I thought was somewhat puzzling. However, you could get drawings showing the aft 5" handling room, so you have a good idea of what was going on where. The Scheina book "U.S. Coast Guard Cutters & Craft of World War II" is the best thing out there, and even then it is very lacking (unless you want to do the Mackinaw!) On the other hand, there is a useful photo showing Northwind (I) in her lend-lease configuration. Bruce -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29) From: YHSAIO@aol.com Subject: War With China? To all SMLLies: Let me put in my tuppence worth on this subject. China may be preparing for war in the forseeable future, but her enemies are not necessarily the ones we expect them to be. I feel that any war will be along the Chinese borders, which means one of three enemies: Russia, India, and Vietnam, the recent tensions with Taiwan notwithstanding. The possibilty of war with Russia is high. Few people may know that most of the territory north of the Amur River, including Vladivostok, was once part of China with the borders set by the Treaty of Nerchinsk in 1689, a treaty recognized by all the major powers at the time. By land, I don't think it's more than 25 miles from the Chinese border to Vladivostok and there's a Chinese name for Vladivostok, which is Haichengwei (somebody may correct me if I'm wrong). Remember, China and Russia fought a war in 1969 over the Amur River island of Damansky (Chen-Bao Island in Chinese). Despite the recent arms sales, the Russians hate and fear China and feel that there is a possibility that those Su-27's and Sovremennys could be used against them. One indication of this is that the S-27's haver been deployed to the Shenyang Military District (covering the Russian border). India: remember the border war along the McMahon Line. China also is suspicious of India for harboring the Dalai Lama and may attempt a preemptive attack. That India has nuclear weapons doesn't help the situation any. Besides, Pakistan is China's ally and could be used as a proxy. Vietnam: Border clashes and China's disastrous war in 1979 show that a China/Vietnam clash is entirely possible. China's military performance was poor, but despite the lack of modern fighting equipment and fighting on unfamiliar terrain, China was within striking distance of Hanoi. Besides, I can quote the book The Vietnam Wars by Marilyn Young (professor of history at New York University) in which she states that Chinese hegemony in Southeast Asia was more preferable to Vietnamese rule/hegemony/conquest of the countries in the area (also stated by Kissinger, Brezenski, and numreous US policy makers). Also, remember that one of the reasons for the Chinese attack was the progroms against the ethnic Chinese community in Vietnam. Also, note that China has neither intervened politically or militarily when similar events took place in Indonesia or Malaysia. This leads me to the likliehood of war in Taiwan, but let me paraphrase the Chinese general who mentioned Los Angeles. I do not think that the average American would want to risk a conflict with China over Taiwan, especially with American soldiers' and sailors' lives at stake. Finally, most countries recognize that the Taiwan matter is a Chinese internal situation. The Japanese analogy can be put to rest, because China has plenty of natural resources, unlike Japan. Besides, China has a trade surplus with the United States and it's not a good idea to bite the hand that feeds you (I think that it was likely that Japan had a trade deficit with the United States circa 1930s). China is also attempting to cultivate better relations with her neighbors, unlike Japan (and even today in Asia, I think most countries would prefer a strong, stable China to a remilitarized Japan). With that, I say, let's just get back to talking about ship models and put this matter to rest by killing this thread (please Shane!) because this list is supposed to be friendly and not stir up controversial or xenophobic sentiments. Remember, let sleeping dogs lie. Of couse, the asbestos suit is ready. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30) From: Rick Heinbaugh Subject: Re: MIDWAY's Gig (Maybe) >> The gig in the picture you attached to your message is not the "Captains gig", but I believe a 40ft Personnel Boat, MK1, for transport of officer personnel (Re: THE BOAT OFFICERS OFFICER'S HANDBOOK, US Naval Institute Press, 1981 issue, page 99-100.) If it were the Captains personal gig there would be an arrow through MID on the bow, and there would be no boat number. This arrow marking goes back at least to the early part of the last century. <> Perhaps some SMMLie can supply us with a source of US NAVY small craft drawings. I would like this source myself. I am looking for a drawing of a 30ft MOTOR LAUNCH for transporting personel or cargo (shown in The Floating Drydock book (above) on page 27: - BuShips Plan No. 276455 - Stock Number S1940-268-9997 << Alright, this is war! (grin) I say it COULD be the gig. True, no chrome arrow around the name (visible to me, anyway... but that shadow might be covering it...) NavShipsTechManual 583, para 3.2.2.4, requires the gig to have either name or hull number in chrome letters, surrounded by that ubiquitous arrow. By the same section, other boats should have the ship's hull number in brass letters. These are definitely chrome, right? And look at that waterline. Could somebody have been trying to be clever with the arrowhead at the bow? I agree - we can't see whether the waterline is blue or red; that should be a giveaway. But consider the CG where I served as First LT: Lost the arrow in the boat storage yard while the ship was in an 18-month overhaul. Didn't have an arrow again until one night when we were tied outboard Snyder's old ship. After we got underway for an extended period, my BM2 showed it to me. What could I say? Besides, Bainbridge's gig had an arrow again, the next time I saw her. Art, at least we're agreed that it is a 40' Personnel Boat, Mk 1. (grin)(chuckle) - Sorry, Snyder. I have a 1/96 scale two-view of the 30' motor launch you mention. (same stock number, too. I have it in "Boats of the United States Navy", NavShips 250-452, May, 1967. Let me know if that would do you any good. Best regards, Rick Heinbaugh (Former First LT of an unnamed CG) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 31) From: "feed" Subject: Re: Almirante Jose Toribio Merino Castro >> I served onboard her as an electrician and is a bit curious: Back "home" in RSwN, she was camouflaged in a three-tone green splinter scheme, as almost any swedish ship. Is she repainted in chilean service, or has she just kept her old finish? << High Fellow Smmlie: About your question .I must say she has kept the original camouflage. She has not been repainted yet. Our geography it is very much like yours so her scheme it's worthy. regards from Chile. FEED -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 32) From: JVT7532@aol.com Subject: Re: USS Oregon Information and Plans Greeting fellow listees, can anyone tell me what the size of these plans are and what scale they are done in? I would like to frame them for my hobby room wall when I'm done with them. Thank you Best regards, Jon -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 33) From: JRKutina@webtv.net (John Kutina) Subject: Over 100 trapped on crippled Russian nuclear sub http://www.seawaves.com/Articles/Russia/August2000/00081401.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 34) From: dhjonespsm@juno.com Subject: Re: Pearl Harbor Attack WR PRess writes: >> Okay Jones, This is war then, I shall somehow have to get hold of that blasted obit' in the Times. Do you realize how difficult this is going to be for me? No you don't, but even so-----. I may have taken a hit or two but I shall prevail, so get ready for a counterattack. << I hunker in my bunker awaiting your riposte! Let the games begin!!!! >> I am not a revisionist, but with several decades of researching government documents I am certain that there are important missing elements in the story. << Actually I am in agreement with you on this point - re: the classified British Intel. files. However, I suspect the reasons for the secrecy have more to do with embarrassment than guilt. There are those (revisionists) who would seize on each and every "clue" as evidence of further treachery on the part of the leaders when in fact, there was no sinister "plot", merely judgements and decisions based on the best available evidence that hindsight proved to be in error. The racism element pointed out by Paul Jacobs is also a very valid point. I think this may be the underlying reason why this search for a "smoking gun" persists in the face of overwhelming documentary evidence to the contrary. To Mr. Bennett and Mr. Mayne: Magic intercepts dealt with the Purple Code, which was a diplomatic code! The Japanese military did NOT inform their own diplomats what they were up to, so this source would not (and did not) provide any specific military intelligence information to the code breakers. And, in point of fact, we did NOT know where their all ships were. Specifically the aircraft carriers of Kido Butai were missing for several days before the attack - we did not have a clue where they were, which was a cause of great concern in Washington and in Hawaii. That was one of the several reasons for the "war warning" messages that went out to Pearl. Washington DID alert all Pacific commands to expect offensive action from the Empire of Japan at any moment, and without any specific information as to the time and target of the attack (which there is No evidence that they knew this) there was little else that they COULD have done under the circumstances. Rather than accepting all this revisionist claptrap at face value, may I suggest a short reading list? "Pearl Harbor - Warning and Decision" by Roberta Wohlstetter. This is one of the few books written that attempts to determine exactly what the leaders in Washington and Hawaii actually knew, and WHEN they knew it. Ms. Wohlstetter also makes a very strong point about looking at these message with the advantage of hindsight. Those clues that were found to be (with hindsight) accurate in forecasting a possible attack on Pearl Harbor were buried in an overwhelming mass of data (what Wohlstetter calls "noise") that was pouring in from so many sources that the small staffs that did the decoding and evaluation could not hope to keep up with it. Some of the most significant messages were not decoded until after the attack! Generally the messages picked for decoding were chosen in either the order received or by source. It was largely a matter of luck as there was no way to know if a message was important until the time had been spent decoding it. "Pearl Harbor - The Verdict of History" by Gordon Prange. Actually completed after his death by his editorial assistants, this book is based on Pange's voluminous research notes and does much to refute many of the more outrageous revisionist theories. It does so, not by attacking the authors, but by the use of the historical record. It deals extensively with Toland's revisionist book "Infamy" and the errors and speculations therein. However, this book was published before Rusbridger's "Betrayal at Pearl Harbor", a book that has further muddied the waters. "Days of Infamy" by John Costello In addition to a very well written history of the events of December 7, this book also specifically deals with the points raised by Toland and by Rusbridger (among others) and is a very well balanced and logical analysis of their arguments, refuting them very effectively - with documented facts - not just opposing opinion. Costello also makes a devastating case against MacArthur's actions in the Philippines whereby he was also taken by surprise and lost almost all his entire air force on the ground in spite of having the advance knowledge that Pearl Harbor had already been attacked. In spite of an obvious dereliction of duty, MacArthur came out of this debacle a hero in contrast to Short and Kimmel, whose careers were ruined. Costello's reasoning as to why and how this could have happened is admittedly speculative, but it has a very logical ring, and is certainly interesting. This is revisionism in a very positive sense, dealing with an aspect of the Japanese offensive that has been virtually ignored by most writers. There are more books I could recommend, but those should suffice. Do yourselves a favor and read these three books (with an open mind). Daniel Jones -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 35) From: Ned Barnett Subject: putty and resin? What works (putty-wise) on resin? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 36) From: Derek Wakefield Subject: Modeling Oriskany Hey s'guys! A few days before I shut down my Oriskany forum at eGroups I threw together an article on how a model of the ship might be produced from existing kits (both as built -27A and in it's rebuilt -125A configurations). Shane seems to think it would make a good article for the SMML site, but I'd like to get some feedback on it before I officially submit it for inclusion there. I'm my own worst critic, and IMO the article is somewhat lacking in areas. It's not a how-to book (and it would take a book to cover all the alterations needed to properly convert any of the models listed). Instead, it's an article covering the bare-boned basics of what to look at/for. For those die-hard Essex fans here on this list, if you would like to help me out by reviewing this piece and offering suggestions, I would be greatly appreciative. Any suggestions added will be properly credited. I've also included a LOT of links to other web sources, including Naval Base (decals, kits), GMM (PE for the 1:525 & 1:700 kits), Tom's Modelworks (PE for the 1:700 kits), WEM (1:700 aircraft), Rajendra's List (for reviews and the fact I quoted a few bits from that site in the article - please contact me if this is a problem), Hazegray.org (ditto), Floating Drydock (possible source for plans), the Warship Site (links to manufacturers, reviews, etc), International Maritime Modeling Site (for a picture of a completed Lindberg 1:535 kit), SMML site (because I quoted Michael Smith's comments to me regarding modifying the Revel 1:535 kit and suggested anyone attempting this to join this list). Also mentioned was Alan Raven's Essex Class Carrier Book. I plan to add the Ship Camouflage site address as well, because painting issues have yet to be addressed in this article, and I'm not that knowledgeable in post WWII color schemes. Let nobody say I don't believe in sharing the wealth. I haven't worked with all these companies, but aftermarket parts needed for conversion of 1:720, 1:700, and 1:535 kits was a big (not small at all, humongous) issue, and I believe most of those firms listed offer at least some of the parts needed. There are a lot of areas in there where I wasn't sure where parts could be obtained (1:700 5/28 & 3/50 guns and 1:535 guns & aircraft come to mind -- for which the term scratchbuild comes up a lot). As such, if you're not listed, and you might have aftermarket parts that might be useful in such a project, please contact me and I'll send you a copy of the article so you can either tell me what to add, or where I gooned up. Please send all queries to me privately, offlist. Derek "Tiger" (/\)akefield iscandar2@chatter.com http://www.iscandar-66.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 37) From: Bob Evans Subject: U.S. COAST GUARD SHIP & BOAT PLANS You can find the plans at: Coast Guard Museum Northwest 1519 Alaskan Way South Seattle, WA 98134 206-217-6993 Each set of plans has (1) Outboard Profile; (2) Inboard Profile; (3) Deck Plans; (4) Hull Lines. Where hull lines are not available, then docking plans, hull cross-sections, or deck lines are in the set to provide hull shape information. Add $5.50 to each order to cover shipping. 110’ Island Class Patrol Boats (1985-) … $10.00 110’ Tug (WYTM) (1939-88) … $12.00 125’ Patrol Boats (1927-71) … $5.00 140’ Icebreaker Tug (WTBG) (1979-) … $8.00 143’ Seagoing Tug (1944-80) ..Comanche … $7.50 165’ “A” Patrol Boat (1932-55) … $10.00 165’ “B” Patrol Boat – Greek Class (1931-68) … $8.50 210’ Medium Endurance Cutter (1964-) … $15.00 213’ Seagoing Tug (1943-) Acushnet … $20.00 216’ Icebreaker (1927-46) Northland … $20.00 230’ Icebreaker (1942-) Storis … $10.00 240’ Cruising Cutter (1921-47) Haida … $15.00 250’ Cruising Cutter (1928-54) … $20.00 255’ Indian Class (1943-74) … Owasco … $12.00 269’ Wind Class Icebreaker (1944-89) Westwind … $16.00 270’ Famous Cutter Class (Built 1979) Bear … $20.00 290’ Great Lakes Icebreaker (Built 1944) Mackinaw … $20.00 295’ Training Bark (Built 1936) Eagle … $10.00 305’ Destroyer Escort (Built WWII) CG manned WWII & Korea … $14.00 305’ Frigate (Built WWII) (No hull lines) CG manned WWII … $12.00 310’ Icebreaker (1954-87) Glacier … (No lines) … $20.00 311’ Seaplane Tender (1940-88) Barnegat … $22.00 327’ Secretary Class (1936-88) Taney … $17.00 378’ Secretary / Hero Class (1965-) Boutwell … (Fram plans included) … $28.00 400’ Polar Class Icebreaker (1975-) Polar Starr & Polar Sea … $35.00 Revenue Cutters Fessenden (1883-1908) … $10.00 Algonquin (18980-1931) … $10.00 Joe Lane (1848-69) … $7.50 Manning (1897-1930) … $12.00 Unalga (1912-45) … $10.00 Snohomish (1908-36) … (Seagoing Tug) … $10.00 Thetis (1899-1916) … $10.00 Light Ships #128 #189 #196 #604 #605 #612 #613 … $12.00 #133 #523 #535 #537 #538 (1930-71) .. Swiftsure … $10.00 #129 #76(504) #78(505) #79(506) #81(507) #83(508) (1904-67) .. $7.00 Bouy Tenders 65’ Bayberry, Elderberry (Built 1954) … $10.00 100’ Cosmos/Bluebell Class (Built 1954) … $10.00 114’ River Tender (1941-89) .. Dogwood, Forsythia, Sycamore .. $10.00 121’ Columbine, Linden, Wisteria (1931-69) … $10.00 133’ Navy YF-257 Class (Built WWII) … $10.00 White Alder, White Bush, White Heath, White Holly, White Lupine, White Pine, White Sage, White Sumac 138’ Rose (1916-47) … $7.50 160’ Marigold (1890-1945) … $10.00 173’ Magnolia & Ivy (1904-45) … 10.00 175’ Hemlock (1934-58) … $20.00 175’ Fir, Hollyhock, Walnut (1937-91) … $12.00 179’ Heather (1903-40) … $10.00 180’ Cactus Class (Built WWII) … $10.00 38 in class … Acacia to Woodrush 201’ Cedar (1917-50) … $10.00 Small boats 18’ Motor Launch … $7.50 19’ Surfboat (1928) … $5.00 20’ Power Boat (USLHS) … $5.00 20’ Seine Skiff … $4.00 24’ Cargo Boat (USLHS) … $5.00 25’ 10” Motor Surfboat … $7.50 26’ Monomoy Surfboat … $4.00 26’ Lifeboat (USLHS 1892) … $4.00 26’ 3” Whaleboat (USLHS) … $4.00 26’ 6” Motor Launch – Gig … $10.00 26’ Sailing Cutter … $4.00 32’ Ports & Waterways Boat … $10.00 36’ Motor Lifeboat … $7.00 38’ Picket Boat … $3.00 40’ Utility Boat … $9.00 41’ Utility Boat … $9.00 44’ Motor Lifeboat … $6.00 47’ Motor Lifeboat … $15.00 52’ Motor Lifeboat … $9.00 65’ Harbor Tug (Built 1962) … $7.50 75’ Patrol Boat (Built 1920’s) … $7.50 82’ Patrol Boat (Point Class) … $8.50 83’ Patrol Boat (WWII) … $8.50 95’ Patrol Boat (Cape Class) … $12.00 Thank You. Bob Evans -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 38) From: "Jeffry Fontaine" Subject: Re: Computers & "the weak link - the products from Redmond, WA. :-)" Here is a bit of humor to follow that last remark about the weak link. "Saluting 25 Years of Microsoft 'Innovation' by Stephen Manes FROM: Billg TO: Our great innovators SUBJ: A pioneering history I'm sure most of you are outraged about government interference with our great business. Some of you may have heard whiny, baseless accusations that Microsoft basically takes others' ideas and moves them to new platforms, or simply buys them, and that we're not the innovative and visionary force we claim to be. Well, just because we didn't invent the word processor or the spreadsheet or the graphical user interface or the mouse or BASIC or any of our other historic profit centers doesn't mean we're not innovative. I've decided to provide some historical perspective on our proud 25 years in business to help you see precisely what kind of company you work for. 1975: MICROSOFT BASIC. Sure, we borrowed the feature set and syntax from a version for a DEC machine. But we changed the default prompt from READY to OK. 1980: XENIX. Many of you may not realize this port of AT&T Unix was our company's very first operating system. True, Xenix was expensive, didn't run all that great, and wasn't open-source, but otherwise, it was everything Linux could be if only that Finnish guy weren't so doggone altruistic. 1981: MS-DOS. Sure, we bought this knockoff of CP/M. But to copy a file, DOS used the word "copy" instead of "pip." We recognize innovation when we see it! 1985: WINDOWS. Some of you may think it resembles the Macintosh OS. Nothing could be further from the truth. True, we did sign a contract with Apple admitting Windows was one of our "derivative works of the visual displays generated by Apple's Lisa and Macintosh." Yes, one of our chief Mac programmers did much of the early Windows development. But don't forget we also hired guys from Xerox PARC, which developed the first GUIs. 1987: POWERPOINT. We bought the company that invented it. That's innovative, right? Who else did that? 1987: EXCEL 2.0 FOR WINDOWS. This was the first Windows version, but we're not hung up with mundane details. This product was so innovative that we had to pair it with a special version of Windows to make it work--at a time when we were telling other developers that our systems guys and apps guys were totally separate! 1989: WORD FOR WINDOWS. Sure, we touted it for years before it shipped--an innovation in product scheduling! And how could anybody say it derived from Xerox's Bravo, just because that was designed by the guy who was our chief software architect before I swiped the title? 1995: MICROSOFT BOB. What can I say but "one of a kind"? Nothing like Bob was ever seen before--or since! 1995: MSN. Innovation isn't about being first or being best. Innovation is about extending the Windows interface to everything! 1997: OFFICE 97. We introduce the Office Assistants, those cute cartoon characters derived directly from Bob. Wow! 1997: HOTMAIL. Yeah, we bought this one, too. You got a problem with that? 1998: WINDOWS 98. Thanks to Windows Scripting Host, Outlook lets viruses send themselves to your entire address book. Can any other program (besides Outlook Express) do that? 1999: OFFICE 2000. Its menus are supposed to adjust to the way you work. Kind of irritating, if you ask me, but the guy who sold me on it insists several people actually like the feature. When that kind of innovation comes calling, I'm big enough to answer the doorbell! 1999: MICROSOFT TAXSAVER. We introduce a TurboTax knockoff so innovative it refuses to compute state income taxes. Whatever's good enough for income-tax-free Washington State is good enough for us! Our vision is far from complete. Big challenges lie ahead. We must come up with great new slogans as MSN innovates the most popular features of AOL, Yahoo, and RealNetworks. We'll move forward as Windows innovates our concept of quality to everything from phones to cars and we innovate neutral terms for "crash." And all the while, you can be sure I'll credit your kind of innovation--and mine--as the source of our success. PC World Contributing Editor Stephen Manes is a cohost of Digital Duo, a series appearing on public television stations nationwide." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the SMML site for backissues, Member's models & reference pictures at: http://www.smml.org.uk Check out the APMA site for an index of ship articles in the Reference section at: http://www.tac.com.au/~sljenkins/apma.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume