Subject: SMML VOL 998 Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 19:18:07 +1000 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: 1/240 PE 2: Cheap torpedo solutions could have detonated Kursk 3: Re: LCM3 4: Re: IPMS Plastic definition (straying farther) 5: Re: LCMs 6: Re: Figurehead Identification 7: WWII LST colours 8: 1/350 scale Cleveland (CL) Cruiser 9: Sub anchor(less)s 10: Shame of Savo 11: Figureheads 12: SS United States 13: Re: Savo 14: Re: various 15: WW I Fiction 16: Pumps for RC models 17: Re: Awnings 18: Re: Anchors and documentation 19: Re: Figurehead Identification 20: Nautical Fiction 21: I"p"MS 22: Savo - HMAS Canberra 23: Awnings 24: Re: LCM 3 and 6 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: "Matthew Prager" Subject: 1/240 PE Hi Guys, I'm looking for phot-etch kits for the REVELL 1/240 4-stacker kits (Campbelltown/Ward). Any Ideas? Matt Prager -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: JRKutina@webtv.net (John Kutina) Subject: Cheap torpedo solutions could have detonated Kursk http://www.seawaves.com/Articles/Russia/August2000/00081801.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: SantMin@aol.com Subject: Re: LCM3 >> If someone has unearthed a decent set of drawings for the LCM3, I'd love to hear about it. I've got an RC version on my projects list, to go with my 1/16 scale RC Sherman..... << The Floating Drydock has drawings for a whole bunch of landing craft but I don't remember if they have a LCM3 or not. Check it out at: www.floatingdrydock.com cheers, Bob Santos -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: IPMS Plastic definition (straying farther) This was before my time as an IPMS official, but as far as I know IPMS has never used the dictionary definition for plastic. To my knowledge IPMS has always had its own definition of plastic. This definition is what was modified to allow for other media. This thread has also strayed way too far off the original judging thread for me to participate any longer. In short, I don't want to get into defining plastic or defending IPMS/USA's definition of plastic. Rusty White IPMS/USA head ship judge http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ "Yeah I want Cheesy Poofs" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: "Matthew Prager" Subject: Re: LCMs The LCM 6 was developed becuase the LCM 3 couldn't carry a Sherman Tank. The LCM 8 was developed much later on. You can get a set of plans for the LCM 3 from Floating Drydock, Plan GQ-LCM3, 1/32 scale, $12.00 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: AandMBlevins@gateway.net Subject: Re: Figurehead Identification I would suggest (if you have not already done so) contacting both the Mariner's Museum or Mystic Seaport. Also, many museums require/prefer that you put your request in writing and, in your case, enclose a photograph or two. Al Blevins -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: AandMBlevins@gateway.net Subject: WWII LST colours Anyone know what kind of paint schemes/camouflage that WW II LST's carried. Any info would be appreciated. TIA, Al Blevins -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: "Mic Toole" Subject: 1/350 scale Cleveland (CL) Cruiser Hello All, I really enjoy this list, but I need a bit of help. Can anyone point me in the direction of a pretty good to great model kit of a WW II USN Cleveland Class Cruiser? (Square bridge) I have the 1/700 injection kit, but I need something closer to 1/350, (1/500 if necessary...) PE would be great also, but I think I can find that, now if I could just find a couple of copies of the right size kit. Thanks, and regards to all! Mike Toole -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: Subject: Sub anchor(less)s As I recall, Rusty, O'Kane said that anchors were removed from some subs at the Skipper's discretion as there was too much of a chance that they could bang around and reveal a sub's position to an IJN destroyer. I went back through several references and found evidence both ways. In US Subs In Action, on page 34, Gato clearly has no anchor. Then again, lots of other subs do. Again, as we both agree, supporting picture evidence would be useful, especially if modelling a sub or other ship with no anchor. Kevin -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: "chenyangzhang" Subject: Shame of Savo Hi Gary Shame of Savo is probably the nearest you'll get to a definitive account. To my knowledge it is the most recent work on the subject and the most accurate. There are others but they suffer from various flaws. The standard American accounts aren't worth the effort as they tend to repeat various early errors (re the Australian Hudson not sending a report for example). Stick with this one. Chris Langtree -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: "chenyangzhang" Subject: Figureheads Hi Laurence Have you tried the standard reference on the subject - Galionsfiguren by H J Hansen? Chris Langtree -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: "Barry Kerr" Subject: SS United States Hello guys, I recently purchased a kit of the SS United States. I visited it in dock at Philadelphia. It is in sad shape regrettably. I was wondering if any one knew where I could find photos of 'Her' in her prime, or any other helpful information to finish this project? Barry Hi Barry, Try International Marine Modelling at: http://members.tripod.com/~Febus65/imm.htm I seem to recall there was a link to some SS United States pages there. Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: CBNJBB62@aol.com Subject: Re: Savo The only really done account of Savo Island that could be considered accepted is by Samuel Morrison 's 15 volume History of US Naval Operations in World War 2. Volume 5 deals with Guadalcanal and has charts. Both US and Japanese. Craig Bennett -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: "Ferek, Ronald" Subject: Re: various >> There are several threads upon which I would like to comment. << Me too. It's been interesting to see people's opinions on these subjects. (I appreciate people like John Collins, who post what they think, and I have no interest in flaming replies.) >> Pearl Harbor: Did FDR know beforehand? I haven't seen any evidence here or elsewhere to prove either point. He did deliver an ultimatum to Japan. He had to know war was imminent. Where or when, perhaps he didn't know, but we certainly don't know. But, I'm not so certain that using the knowledge the FDR so loved the Navy and wouldn't risk its destruction at Pearl is plausible evidence that he did not know of the attack beforehand. In war, as in chess, pawns are sacrificed. One needs only look as far as the US Forces in the Philippines and the US Asiatic Fleet to see that FDR was willing to sacrifice US Forces for the cause. << Evidence-schmevidence. We had a lot of raw intel, but didn't figure it out precisely. The IJN surprised us, period. FDR "knew?" He relied on his intel and military infrastructures like every C-in-C. The only question is, did they get it wrong. History says they did, but there was very little the US could have done about it at the time. We were shockingly thin and we grossly underestimated the capability of Japan. As for "sacrificing" the US Forces in the Philippines and the US Asiatic Fleet, the US simply did not have the logistic infrastructure to reinforce (or evacuate, like Dunkirk) anything in 1941. We really did not have it till 1944. I do not accept the assertion that any US commander at any level would "sacrifice" any of our armed forces to make a political point. Look at the contest for Guadalcanal in 1942. Midway was a great bit of intelligence/luck with inferior forces, but the US threw everything it could muster at the time into a desperate struggle for Guadalcanal and prevailed by the thinnest of margins. After that, we built up much faster than Japan could, and by 1943 the outcome was inevitable. >> War with China. For what reasons would we go to war with China? Or China with us? Over Taiwan? The US and former USSR didn't go to war despite far greater provocation in 40 years of the Cold War. << No reason at all to go to war with China, unless we believe the Taiwanese have earned the right to freedom and the Chinese don't, and they try to do something about it. The US should take a clear stand. China should get over it. My Taiwanese co-workers are clear on this question. In the meantime, "In God We Trust," all others we should monitor. For now I think it makes sense to have a military that can beat the next 2 toughest potential adversaries around, whether they're Chinese, Russian, Iraqi, Iranian, North Korean, whoever... Being prepared for any potential threat doesn't imply that we think they are threatening us, it's just reasonable caution, and a function of how much we're willing to pay (freedom isn't cheap) to be prepared. Britain did much the same thing prior to WWI when the Germans built the High Seas Fleet. It may have been a wasteful arms race, but they simply would not allow a situation where the Royal Navy was second to anyone. Well, that's my 2 cents today. Ron Ferek -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: Joel Labow Subject: WW I Fiction Colleagues, I recommend 2 books by Max Hennessey entitled "The Lion at Sea" and "The Dangerous Years." They chronicle the life of Kelly Maguire, a RN officer who comes of age during WW I. The first volume covers his early career including his WW I service in DDs and the second covers the interwar years including a very interesting description of the Invergordon mutiny. The series was billed as a trilogy but as far as I can tell no third volume was ever produced. I checked abe.com and both of these books are available.....if anyone on the list knows anything about the 3rd volume I would appreciate hearing about it. Joel Labow -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: pepe@ns.sympatico.ca Subject: Pumps for RC models I am searching for a source of miniature pumps that will fit inside of a model speedboat about 32" long.Maybe a rotary type pump. Any and all help is appreceated. TIA rolie in Nova Scotia,home of the Bluenose -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: Christopher Crofoot Subject: Re: Awnings I saw the replies to the awning question and would add this... Using tissue in anything smaller than 1/35th scale would look over-scale, I think. If I were doing awnings on say a 1/350 - 1/700 scale ship I'd go with cigarette paper or very fine bond paper. It's more to scale, supports it's own weight better. It might be the deuce getting the pattern cut to suit you but it would work much better I think. I will add the caveat that I've not used it in that manner but have considered the matter when thinking about displaying the Revell Arizona as she looked on Pearl Harbor day. I've also seen some amazing things done with it for simulating sails on 1/600 scale sailing vessels. 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: "Jim Roberts" Subject: Re: Anchors and documentation >> A question here - was it supposed to have anchors? No, that is not a silly question. Subs (US, anyway) in WWII removed their anchors (see Clear The Bridge by O'Kane as he discusses this) when going to combat zones. << >> To my knowledge (remember, I'm not a naval architect), all US SURFACE ships used anchors except for some very small ones. Otherwise holding them in one place away from a dock or port would be impossible. How did these submarines secure themselves in place when in an undeveloped area (no dock or port)? They had to have some kind of anchor. << Submarines do in fact have anchors, though they are rarely if ever used. Diesel electric fleet boats were designed and built with one anchor in a recess at the bow, though as O'Kane says these were removed during war time at the same time as the bridge silhouette was cut down. All the classes of nuclear submarines that I served aboard during the late 1960's and early 1970's (PERMIT, ex-THRESHER class, ETHAN ALLEN class and STURGEON class) were equipped with mushroom anchors that fit into a recess in the bottom of the hull beneath the forward compartment and were backed by a fairing plate that faired into the outer hull plating when the anchor was housed. All the other classes of polaris subs (GEORGE WASHINGTON, THOMAS JEFFERSON, BENJAMIN FRANKLIN) all were equipped with this type of anchor, though I don't know if this is the case with boats of the LOS ANGELES, OHIO, SEAWOLF or VIRGINIA classes. I would be very surprised if any of these boats ever used this gear. Jim Roberts Budd Lake, NJ Member: Nautical Research Guild Ship Model Society of Northern New Jersey -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: "Jim Roberts" Subject: Re: Figurehead Identification >> A bit off line, but can anyone advise where I can get a wooden (full size) figurehead identified. I have several emails out to museums but no responses. << Your best bets would be either Mystic Seaport Museum (they have a large collection of figureheads and figurehead documentation) or Norman Brouwer, the Historian/Librarian at South Street Seaport Museum. Normans e-mail address is NBSAILSHIP@AOL.COM . Barring that, can you give a description of the object, or better yet can you send a picture? I may have something in my library (mostly 18th & 19th century maritime topics) that could offer a clue. Jim Roberts Budd Lake, NJ Member: Nautical Research Guild Ship Model Society of Northern New Jersey -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: "Jim Stein" Subject: Nautical Fiction Hi Just finished listening to Douglas Reeman's audio book HMS Saracen. As I travel 200Km each day it's good to have something to listen too. Is there any kits available on this type of warship? Jim Stein http://www.geocities.com/cjstein_2000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21) From: Marc Flake Subject: I"p"MS I've got to weigh in on this one. If wood ship models are going to be allowed to enter plastic modeling contests, they should have their own category. To me it's a little like rigged biplanes competing with jets. The modeling skills and methods aren't comparable. Just my .02 worth. Marc -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22) From: "Rees, Graham" Subject: Savo - HMAS Canberra At home I have a few books in the area which seem to range from scholarly to woeful. At least one deals with claims that Australian aerial reconnaissance missed the ships/did not make radio reports/reports was not passed on to the appropriate places in a timely manner. I remember reading the Japanese ships logged an Australian radioed sighting report. I do not know what is the commonly held view. Perhaps some Australian reports were not published at the time the book was written. The various battles there were intense and bloody with many crew and ships being lost by the participants. The leadership of many was criticised by those who had months or years to ponder the decisions taken in the heat of the moment, often on incomplete and conflicting information. It is easy enough to have disasters in peacetime (eg Kursk), let alone under pressure of war. It would be interesting to know the truth, but I hope that it does not ignite animosity if established that it was "friendly fire" and "scuttled too early". We do not need more blood letting this long after the event. Sometimes Boards of Inquiry/Judicial or Royal Commissions are too good at disinterring bodies which might have otherwise been left in peace. Sometimes the best result is to find out what went wrong and make sure it does not happen again. A modern trouble is the press reports proceedings before evidence is tested and the reputation of an innocent may be destroyed without a right of reply (or the reply is not published). (You can see the lawyer in me talking.) It is a pity that the expedition published as "The Lost Ships of Guadalcanal" did not get to do much investigation on Canberra. A large hole in the "wrong" side of Canberra's engine-room would be some proof (unless she was scuttled by torpedo in the same area). I do not remember that detail. I will dig out the books and post something to the list tomorrow. Graham Rees -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23) From: "Mike C" Subject: Awnings Ship awnings are usually white canvas and stretched fairly taut. Why not use Evergreen .005 sheet plastic sprayed with a coat of clear dullcoat? Once you have your stantions and support wires in place, use bond paper to make templates and then cut the plastic to that shape. The plastic is translucent enough to let light through- similar to actual canvas- and the clearcoat will provide whatever texture you need. The plastic is also stiff enough so you won't have to worry about sagging. The thinnest paper that I've found is cigarette rolling papers and you can tint those with diluted solutions of tea or watercolors. Most have watermarks, though, so have fun trying to find some without the "Zig Zag Man" emblazened across them. I peeled a cigarette to make fan-folded curtains for a Betty bomber I did a few years ago. Worked pretty well, too, but finding a sewing machine small enough was a bear. If you're using white glue solutions on paper, I'd suggest laying the paper on some plastic kitchen wrap first. That will hold the paper in place until the white glue dries and should peel off easily. Have fun, Mike Czibovic -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24) From: "Daniel Taylor" Subject: Re: LCM 3 and 6 Hi I have come across a plan of the LCM 3 in a book called "The Design and Construction of British Warships Vol 3". This volume is titled "Amphibious Warfare Vessels & Auxiliaries", and is edited by D K Brown RCNC. It is published by Conway and the ISBN No is 0 85177 675 2. The plans are two view - one from above, one from stbd. It also has a couple of sections. No specific scale is given - to fit the book format they have just copied it to the size of the page - but full dimensions are given so it wouldn't be too difficult to scale up or down. By eye, I'd say it was about 1/85 or thereabouts. It could be used fairly easily up to 1/50 scale but you might be pushing it with that 1/16 RC model! Besides the LCM 3, there are a number of other landing craft plans. Given the format, anything over the size of an LCM comes up pretty small but I guess most of you produce in pretty tiny scales anyway (my scale of 1/76 is considered fairly small by the armour modellers I mix with). If anyone wants a JPEG of the plan, e-mail me before Friday when I'll have access to a scanner. Dan Taylor -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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