Subject: SMML VOL 995 Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 02:33:54 +1000 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Re: Britain's entry into WW 1 2: Re: Naval Fiction 3: Re: 1:700 Fletchers 4: Re: Resin and Putty??? 5: Re: Pearl Harbor and "why"... 6: Model Photography 7: Re: Ceramcoat 8: Re: Judging and being human 9: Re: what is known 10: Ned's Arsenal Ship 11: Re: Oscar kit 12: Re: Russian sub 13: Re: Resin putty 14: IJN Tone 15: Re: Hasegawa 1/700 Hiei 16: Dragon Typhoon(Akula) RuN Submarine 1/350 Scale 17: Re: judging criteria 18: North Carolina Scheme XVI 19: Re: Eastwind and new KM Sub kits 20: Greatest Generation -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: "J. London" Subject: Re: Britain's entry into WW 1 Britain did not go to war as the direct result of the German invasion of France but rather the invasion of Belgium whose integrity was guaranteed by treaty. Germany had declared war on France on Aug 3rd 1914 following her declaration of war on Russia (France's ally) on the 1st. Her strategy involved the Schlieffen Plan which was to move against France through Belgium and Luxembourg. When Germany invaded Belgium Britain declared war on Aug 4th. Michael London -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: "Stuart Batchelor" Subject: Re: Naval Fiction The author who wrote the book about the British 15" monitor saving the convoy in the Med is a gentleman by the name of Douglas Reeman (sp?). He also has a series of books under the name of Alexander Kent. I don't know which one or if both are pen names, in either case I have enjoyed both sets of books. Reeman is mainly set in WW II, with Kent being during the Napoleonic wars. Hope this helps. Stuart Batchelor Norman, OK (we have a cold front today, it's only going to be 90+ in the shade) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: GrafSpee34@aol.com Subject: Re: 1:700 Fletchers Ed wrote: >> I'd stay away from the Matchbox guns << The Matchbox 5" guns actually compare quite well to scale drawings, as opposed to Tamiya's which are noticably too small. Skywave has a nice set of torpedo tubes which are crisper and more detailed than Tamiya's. D -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: "chenyangzhang" Subject: Re: Resin and Putty??? Hi Ned I use Milliput which comes in two separate sticks which you mix together. Once this is done it is easy to shape and if you need it softer or more runny you just add water. After it hardens you can sand it with ease. Works wonderfully well with resin, plastic etc. Chris Langtree -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: Ross Bruce-QBR000 Subject: Re: Pearl Harbor and "why"... D. Carner wrote: >> Was it simply coincidence that our only true assests, (our carrier fleet in the Pacific) was absent on Dec. 7th. from Pearl? I really don't think so. << I've followed this thread with a great deal of interest and this is one item that I think I can comment on. My uncle served aboard the U.S.S. Enterprise so I've been picking his memory for years. The reason that Enterprise didn't make her port call on time (which would have put her in Pearl at the time of the attack) was weather. The carrier had to slow down because the DD's in her escort were being beaten up pretty bad. He remembers the DD's hitting some waves so hard that they looked like they were trying to do an imitation of a submarine. I really don't think that even Roosevelt could order weather up just to keep at least this carrier out to sea. Anyway, that's my input into this discussion. Best, Bruce Ross -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: Ned Barnett Subject: Model Photography Rusty was right on track, as far as it goes. However, I prefer natural light (shade or cloudy day) for better color balance. I also want to echo the follow-up comments on reciprocity failure and depth-of-field. Once, just for laughs, I took a photo of a 1/72nd P-26 Peashooter (Revell), nose-on. By playing with depth of field, I got a sharp photo of the propeller; but the cowl was so out-of-focus as to be virtually invisible. That's an example of depth-of-field for sure ... With a suitable backdrop, I like to shoot off a table on my back (covered) patio - it gives me all the light I need to use the camera's light meter, with no shadows worth mentioning. Also, I like to use slow film (ASA 25 or 64 - 100 if absolutely necessary) to get greater color saturation or gray-scale density. For those who are really interested, Kalmbach (publisher of FSM) put out a book on photographing models - a local hobby shop still has a few copies on hand, so it may be available even though ancient. If you want to photograph for FSM, that's a good place to start. Ned -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: "Bob Pearson" Subject: Re: Ceramcoat Paul says ... >> I have used Acrylic craft paints for many many years on all types of wooden projects, some non glazed terra cotta items and paper. Plastic is a problem, these products won't stick to surface. << I have used Ceramcoat for the last year on models and the only problem I have is that it may occasionally be scrapped off with rough handling. I have Airbrushing on models requires a base coat of some other type of paint first - I was using Tamiya Acrylic as a primer. After that has dried for at least a day, I then use many very light misted coats of ceramcoat/water .. if you try too thick a coat it will just run and/or puddle. http://www.internetmodeler.com/nov99 shows my Freccia done with Ceramcoat airbrushed. The stripes on the bow were handpainted, so it can be done I have recently taken up figure painting and am using Ceramcoat exclusively for them ... all brush painted. It does dry fast, so keep water at hand to dip the brush in prior to loading with paint, or use a pallete to mix to desired consistency. My first figure using this can be seen at: http://www.internetmodeler.com/july2000 Thinning with water or Future, the ratio varies depending on pressure sprayed at, as well as the tip used .. up to 50/50 can be done safely with a higher pressure. Regards, Bob Pearson Managing Editor / Internet Modeler http://www.internetmodeler.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: Judging and being human >> That may be true at the local/regional level, but Rusty rides us pretty hard over judging matters and criteria at the Nats. This year there was a model entered that had placed first in it's category, and at least myself and one other national judge had seen it at the lower levels of competition twice. To make a long story short, it was noticed that it has items missing, forcing a reevaluation of things. In the end, it was still a better model than #2. If Rusty wants to disclose more, I will defer to him and hope I haven't divulged too much here. << As you may recall a couple of days back I told art that the model with the fewest mistakes wins. That fact really hit home in Dallas. The ship judging was done and we were discussing among ourselves what models would be nominated for best ship. To make a long story short we were looking over all the first place models and were looking quite carefully at a very small WW-2 model (I can't recall exactly what it was). As I said we were all looking very closely at this model when a judge said "you know, that model doesn't have any anchors". I was holding the model by the base and proceeded to look real close. IT DIDN'T HAVE ANY ANCHORS!! What bothered me most was the fact that not only was this a fist place model, but we came that close to making it best ship! To be fair to the four guys that judged the category, the model a VERY monochromatic dark sea blue overall. It was really easy to overlook a small part such as the anchors. One of the judges said he had followed the little model around the regional circuit and to a couple of local shows and no one noticed the lack of anchors there either. I lost my cool and really chastised the judging team for letting something like that slip by (it really didn't. We DID catch it). Just to be on the safe side, I had the guys judge the category again. And AGAIN, the little ship took first place, without the anchors. That said two things to me. Our judges were on the ball. Even though the anchors were missing, the little ship STILL had the fewest mistakes in the category. They stood by their discussion and I applaud them for that. I also apologized for losing my cool. I was impressed that they stood by their decision after my chewing them out. The lack of anchors did cost the little ship the "best ship" award, but that's as it should be. So Art, it just depends on the level of competition on a given day. Rusty White IPMS/USA head ship judge http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ "Yeah I want Cheesy Poofs" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: what is known >> Not to mention the minor point that "what is known" tends to change from time to time as new information is unearthed... << Correct! The books on the Hunley are being rewritten as we speak. Rusty White Flagship Models Inc. http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ "Yeah I want Cheesy Poofs" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: TCAgardner@aol.com Subject: Ned's Arsenal Ship Just a note to you Ned, the JSP Arsenal Ship is a 1/700 model. I'm not sure if you were aware of this or not. If you are, then I understand if you are modifying it based upon its relative size to a 1/350 destroyer. If you have any doubts about its scale, I can humbly tell you that I cast all of them for JSP, and it was always intended to be a 1/700 scale ship. (at least at that time, 4 yrs ago). I might be able to get you a 1/350 oto melara turret and barrel. I think there is one lying around the shop somewhere. Best regards, Tom Gardner -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: Ives100@aol.com Subject: Re: Oscar kit >> Are there any kits available for a Russian Oscar Submarine? In 1/400 or larger? It looks like it would make a fascinating model. << Nope. The only kit was a 1:700 DML (also released by Testor's), that is now OOP (although some of these kits, originally from the early '90's are in rerelease). There is an R/C kit that I've seen at a SubCommittee regatta, but this is huge and expensive (IIRC, something like 5 or 6 feet long). Tom Dougherty -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: Ives100@aol.com Subject: Re: Russian sub >> While it is true that most DSRVs can't mate with subs heeled over at an acute angle there is much that a rescue sub could do, including attaching air lines. On last nights news it show 20 Russian vessels in the diaster zone including a Russian submersible its hoped that they have some chance of recovering at least some of the crew. The rumour that only 30 or 40% of the crew were alive after the accident gives hope that the limited resources may sustain the survivors for long enough. << There was an article in the NY Times about the US Navy's imminent retirement of the DSRV Avalon at the end of this month. Seems Mystic will be the only DSRV available. In 2005, the Navy expects to have a new generation of sophisticated diving bells for rescue. I have now seen reports in the Times that the Kursk may only be only listing at 20 degrees, well within the DSRV capability (45 degrees max). Also confusion continues, with the renewed claim of a collison (with what??), and reports that the sub is damaged all the way back to the sail area. Did they collide in the relatively shallow water with the ocean floor? Final point: neither the forward or aft rescue bouy were released form the submarine. Not a good sign as to watertight integrity.... Tom Dougherty -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: Ives100@aol.com Subject: Re: Resin putty >> Hey, folks ... Still wondering what kind of putty works (or works best) with resin. << I've used, in addition to the ubiquitous superglue, Bondo glazing putty (single tube, not the two part auto body stuff) on resin. Seems to stick well. I use the same stuff on styrene in place of Squadron white or green. Doesn't have toluene in it, so it doesn't mar the plastic, yet holds well. Tom Dougherty -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: "Peter K. H. Mispelkamp" Subject: IJN Tone Joe: I finally obtained a 1/400 Paramount Tone. I was a little disappointed, because the majority of the parts of the kit seem to be identical with those of my Mogami's. Since the Nati class CA's had a similiar hull form as well, I am guessing that the various Japanese firms collaborated and developed a multi-purpose mold that could be used as the basis for Japan's last three pre-war class CA's. About the only difference would be in the forward superstructure, but I haven't taken he time to compare the tree structure and shapes of the Mogami parts with those of the Tone. If I am right, this means I only need to find two more Mogami's of almost any configuration to complete these two classes. In any case, I am still looking for a fourth Mogami and a second Tone. Sincerely Peter K. H. Mispelkamp -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: YHSAIO@aol.com Subject: Re: Hasegawa 1/700 Hiei Yohan: Yes, the Hasegawa Hiei's bridge is different from the other three ships and does a pretty good job of representing the 1940 rebuild. The rear is also different, I think (I have the Hiei almost completed and a Haruna lying in the closet but I haven't got the chance to compare the two). Also, with the Kursk incident, it is good to see the British and United States offer help to the Russians. Makes me think that a tragedy like this could help potential adversaries understand each other more and lessen tensions. Maybe we need a similar incident in the Far East to bring everybody together and do more to resolve the potential conflict over there and lessen this crazy talk about a certain Asian power's possible warlike intentions. Then we could go back to building ships. Godspeed to the Kursk's crew and all the best to their families and the Royal Navy sailors attempting such a dangerous rescue. If there is any chance of success, the RN can pull it off, given its vast experience with midget subs dating from the last war. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: Scott Weeks Subject: Dragon Typhoon(Akula) RuN Submarine 1/350 Scale To the modeller looking for help on the Typhoon model, (and anyone else of course!) I just found this site tonight: http://home.earthlink.net/~marinetec/rcsubs/Typhoon.htm Has some nice pictures of the Typhoon SSBN, and some plans, that will surely help with a build of the 1/350 DML kit. Scott -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: "chisum" Subject: Re: judging criteria If one isn't going to be accurate, then why bother buying plans, researching your subject?;ie Scale modeling. Aircraft can land on other carriers, but they aren't re-marked or re-painted when they do (Nimitz aircraft on a Nimitz carrier). Let's just all buy a block of wood (you can use wood now at I"p"M S ) all call it what we want! To heck with that fatal word... ACCURACY!!!! R.Chisum Hi Randy, I feel the point here is that sometimes (due to sheer lack of information) you must take a "best guess" at things in order to build and complete some subjects. Accuracy while desirable isn't always achievable. There is no way to effectively judge a model built under these circumstances except by judging on basics Mistress Lorna Hi gang, Well, as always, Lorna has put things better than I could ;-) In respect to that dreaded term "accuracy". well that depends on how you view your modelling. I model for fun & enjoyment - for me that sometimes mean making a kit more accurate, other times it means slamming a kit together for the sheer hell of it. Since I model for myself & not for competition, I couldn't give a rats arse what any judge thinks of my models if & when I enter them. If I win something - cool if not - so be it. Anyway, I could most probably judge any model I make, more severely than any judge ;-). Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: Derek Wakefield Subject: North Carolina Scheme XVI After talking with a gent for the last few months about the North Carolina, I've thought about building a "what-if" model of the ship along the lines of the original Scheme XVI design (see: Friedman's "US Battleships: An Illustrated Design Study" pg 263 and/or Dulin and Garzke's "Battleships: United States Battleships in World War II" pgs 32-33). The idea is to build the ship as she was actually constructed, except with the single funnel and quad 14-in turrets, in a Ms 32/18d pattern. My plan is to use the old Revell 1:570 kit as a starting point. I've had one laying around here for a decade, so I figured why not. I know I'll have to scratch build the turrets and funnel. What I'd like to know is - Are there any aftermarket parts whatso ever that can be used to accurize this kit? I'd be happy just to find a brass kit at this point. - What, if any, pitfalls should I be prepared to deal with. This happens to be one of the few old Revell box-scale battleship models I never built as a kid, so I'm at somewhat of a disadvantage here. I'm already aware of the inaccuracies of the 5/38s 40mm's and 20mm's, but I'm not entirely sure how to correct them without scratch building replacements. What period the model is supposed to represent has raised red flags gallore. Since it doesn't appear to match up with any of the drawings I have, I'm going on the assumption this is one of the inaccuracies of the kit. IIRC, the triple 16's were designed to fit the same size barbettes as the quad 14's, but the latter turrets had a different external appearance (beyond the obvious). If I'm mistaken here, please feel free to correct me. A friend suggested I get another kit for spares, etc. Would this be adviseable? Thanks in advance for any suggestions, advise, etc. _|_o_|_ Derek "Tiger" (/\)akefield /---(.](o)[.)---\ iscandar2@chatter.com o oo O oo o http://www.iscandar-66.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: "edger1" Subject: Re: Eastwind and new KM Sub kits Thanks to every body for the leads on plans and photos for the Wind Class Icebreakers. It helps alot. Now, if I can get up the nerve to tackle this little jewel! If there are any U-boote fans out there, I found, what are to me, new U-boote kits at a local shop here in Austin, TX. (Village) They are in 1:200 scale and cover the Type II (A,B,C and D) and the Type XXI. They are by Planet Models which seem to be a part of CMK. They are resin without photo etch but they really don't need any PE anyways. They are not the quality of the aircraft kits that they produce but they will definitely build into nice looking models. Dave Edgerly Ausitn, TX -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: JRKutina@webtv.net (John Kutina) Subject: Greatest Generation Movie - "Space Cowboys" - the sea this time is space. Tom Brokow"s "Greatest Generation" again displays the "right stuff". I suggest you see it, if for nothing else, the computer simulations. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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