Subject: SMML VOL 1194 Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 21:37:45 +1000 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: USN verses Newfoundland 2: Quick Heads up 3: ICM Hood Kit 4: Re: HOOD, ESSEX From ICM 5: Re: SS United States 6: regarding modelshops in Taipei, Taiwan 7: Re: Resin priceing vs plastic priceing 8: Re: Mohawk 1942 9: Re: ICM Hood Kit 10: Re: ICM Hood- Probably premature data 11: converting ship scales to fractions 12: http://www.ussiowa.org/daily_sitrep.asp 13: Re: Model shops in Taipei 14: Heian Maru, Waterline 1:700, Front Gun Platform Location, HELP 15: 200 beans for a HOOD 16: ICM Hood Kits 17: Re: ICM Hood 18: Avoiding a SUNBURN [SS-N-22] 19: this is not a ship mode, but.... 20: Re: HOOD price... 21: Re: ICM Hood kit 22: Re: CVN names 23: Indy to Portland 24: Re: From Sea to Shining Sea 25: A Battleship??? 26: Sink those barges! 27: More on BB61at the Panama Canal 28: New Revell-Monogram Releases 29: Re: ICM Hood 30: Re: ICM Hood 31: Re: ICM Hood 32: Taipei Hobby Shops 33: WOGs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD INDEX 1: OzMods new E-mail and phone-fax number -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: "Steve James" Subject: USN verses Newfoundland G'Day List, this is a supposed transcript of a radio conversation between a US Naval group and a Canadian off the coast of Newfoundland. Not true, I'm sure, but it is a funny story........... CAN: US Navy ships, please divert your course 15 degrees to the South to avoid a collision. USN: Recommend you divert your course 15 degrees to the North to avoid a collision. CAN: Negative. You will have to divert your course to the South to avoid a collision. USN: This is the Captain of a US Navy ship. I say again divert your course. CAN: Negative I say again, you will have to divert your course to avoid a collision. USN: WE ARE AN AIRCRAFT CARRIER GROUP OF THE UNITED STATES NAVY OF THE ATLANTIC FLEET. WE ARE ACCOMPANIED BY 3 CRUISERS, 3 DESTROYERS AND NUMEROUS SUPPORT VESSELS. I DEMAND THAT YOU CHANGE YOUR COURSE 15 DEGREES NORTH, SAY AGAIN THAT'S 15 DEGREES NORTH, OTHERWISE COUNTER-MEASURES WILL BE TAKEN TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THESE SHIPS AND CREWS. CAN: We are a lighthouse. Your call. Cheers, Steve James PS What about USS Georgie Girl for the CVNX? It could be for any of the seemily endless George Bush's who is/was president and takes care of the male/female ship thing!!!! (Apologies to The Seekers) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: Colin Ritchie Subject: Quick Heads up For all those in the UK, the Channel 4 series "Battleships" starts on Saturday 1st April, at 7.00 PM, No its not a joke! VCR's to the ready.. Colin Ritchie -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: David_L._Miller@ccmail.wiu.edu Subject: ICM Hood Kit Of course Mfg List price and actual sale price are two different things. For instance, the Mfg List price of the Heller 1/100 scale Victory is $229. It is currently on special sale thruough Model Expo for $70. Big difference. Dave Miller -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: "Hank Lapa" Subject: Re: HOOD, ESSEX From ICM All, Maybe someone who knows how to email ICM can pass us the address so we can all give them a reality check!!!!! FWIW, US retail on Czech airplane kits seems to be running 2.5 times retail in Czech Republic, at least before taxes. And *that* reflects the generally inflated-for-German-tourists pricing scheme in vogue in the Czech Republic. I am sure that ICM and importers alike share the blame for a $199 HOOD. I for one was temporarily insame enough to get the White Ensign HOOD in 1/350. I surely don't need ICMs and the aftermarket brass it will surely require. And if I do, I'll not get it from a non-Czech source. Hank -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: Jodie Peeler Subject: Re: SS United States hello all.... Kurt Greiner wrote: >> The SS United States - no matter how meager her existence these days, would not impact one way or another on the ability of the Navy to name a carrier the USS United States, clearly they would be two different vessels. << Uh...that's not what I meant. What I meant was that although a new USS United States would be really nice, and something I'd love to see, I'd hope we wouldn't forget the peril of the civilian United States as well. Having been involved in one way or another with this ship's plight for the past ten years, she's especially dear to me. (Oh, and there exist some really cool pictures of the SS America berthed next to the carrier USS America at Newport News in Bill Miller's SS United States book.) jodie -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: melee Subject: regarding modelshops in Taipei, Taiwan Hello Henry, The best thing to do is write to my friend Melvin. He lives in Taipei. You can write to him at: melvin1@mail.apol.com.tw He loves to build models. Lee Shackelford -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: Resin priceing vs plastic priceing >> At 200 bucks (MSRP - yes you will be able to get it for 175 on sale), this kit will be out of reach of all but the most dedicated ship modeler - have-to-have-its!. The same people who drop 300 - 400 on a resin & brass kit will drop 200 for the styrene kit - and another 50 to 75 for the brass. << Wanna bet? The reason I pay the prices I do for resin kits is that for the most part resin kits are hand crafted by knowledgeable people with a very critical eye for accuracy and detail compared to thier plastic counterparts. I'm sure most everyone will agree that mass produced plastic kits are not designed or engineered with the TLC as resin kits. Resin kits cost what they do because they are produced in small numbers unlike the plastic ones which are produced by the thousands. Therefore plastic kits should be far more reasonably priced than the resin kits of similar size. ICM kits are produced where such production costs are cheapest. Obviously, they should be more reasonbly priced than kits produced in Japan for instance, were production costs (tooling, labor) are much higher. In other words, I feel ICM would be price gougeing modelers with a 1/350 Hood kit at $200.00 bucks. A more realistic price for a model that size would be the $95.00 range. Just because I spend more for resin kits surely doesn't mean I would spend the same money for a plastic one. I will gaurantee you that ICM's Hood will not include any photo etch or cast metal parts and not be nearly as detailed or as accurate as a resin cast Hood. That's why I won't spend $200.00 or $150.00 on the ICM Hood IF it ever is released. I would suggest that everyone take real close look at the kit before laying down that much money for a plastic kit. $200.00 is way too much. Rusty White Flagship Models Inc. You can now pay using your Visa / MasterCard http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ "Yeah I want Cheesy Poofs!" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: wem Subject: Re: Mohawk 1942 Hi Randy, Scheina's "U.S. Coast Guard Cutters and Craft of WW2" has a nice clear portside photo (p.24) of MOHAWK in 1942, wearing Measure 12R. Cheers, John Snyder The UK half of Snyder & Short The Paint Guys http://www.shipcamouflage.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: John_Impenna@hyperion.com Subject: Re: ICM Hood Kit Hi Folks, I wholeheartedly agree with Ed Grune. If ICM is listening, there is no way I would buy a Hood kit for $199 retail, $175 discounted or even $150!!. This is getting nuts...More importantly, we are not talking labor intensive, limited mold life, resin kits here. Thay can crank out many thousands. Frankly, I think Ed is 100% right: there are no where near enough ship modelers who can or would spend this much on a kit!! They will surely kill their ship line. Regards, John -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: Frank Allen Subject: Re: ICM Hood- Probably premature data We have asked some people at ICM to confirm or deny the $199 pricetag. It certainly doesn't fit in with the tentative figures they recently told us (which I can't pass on right now). The prices we were told were definitely a bit pricey for a plastic kit, but certainly not as high as $199. We hope to hear some firm news from the Ukraine in early April. The public reaction to this $199 news will be presented to the main office personnel. Hopefully it will persuade them to ensure a more reasonable price is affixed. Of course, we must all remember that there are other variables which can effect the end price of the kit: things such as taxes/fees and mark-up by distributors/retailers. That being said, even if ICM does affix a "decent" price, this thing could still end up costing a pretty penny/pence... Frank Allen HMS Hood Association webmaster http://hmshood.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: "Don Stansky" Subject: converting ship scales to fractions I'm presently building a couple of merchant/cargo type ships. I would like to know how to convert the scale of 1/16 in = a foot to the correct scale to that I can order the proper size photoetch fittings. thanks Don Stansky Hi Don, 1/16" to 1' is 1/192 Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: Dave Shirlaw Subject: http://www.ussiowa.org/daily_sitrep.asp They have not been keeping the website up to date. The lastest info had Iowa transiting the Panama Canal Monday. ETA San Francisco 24 April, Suisun Bay 25 April. Dave Shirlaw Editor, Seawaves Magazine www.seawaves.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: "Melvin" Subject: Re: Model shops in Taipei Hi Henry, Yes,the price of models in Taipei often cheaper. There are two famous model shops in Taipei with reputation of good service and variety of models.We also have six model shops located on the forth floor of Wen-Lian business building. One of them is a super market of plastic models. You can buy all kinds of plastic models there, especially those from China. But the resin kits are notpopular here. If you would like to buy resin kits, you just go to the wrong place. You can visit the most famous model shop "mpk" in Taipei: http://www.mpk.com.tw/ They just held AFV models show on the website. And there will be ship models show next month. Hope you can read Chinese. These model shops are not far from downtown area. You can take the bus from CKS airport to Taipei railroad station.It only takes you forty minutes. Then you can arrive to these model shops by taking mass transportation system from Taipei railroad station. Only five minutes. Hope this is useful. Regards Melvin Tung -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: "Axel Wolters" Subject: Heian Maru, Waterline 1:700, Front Gun Platform Location, HELP Hi SMMLIES, I am just building the japanese submarine tender "Heian Maru" from Hasegawa, 1:700 scale. Although the kit has its roots in the 23 year old "Hikawa Maru" kit (there are only two additional sprues with the guns, gun platforms and lifeboats), it is still a nice and well detailed kit. Only the location of the front gun platform is confusing: If you drill the hole for the platform-base in the marked location of the front deck, the gun is sitting very close to the bow and the gun barrel reaches over the bow. The box-top painting shows the gunplatform located more backwards. I only found one drawing in a japanese "model-graphic" book, which shows the same. If this is correct, I will have to drill the hole directly above the anchor-chains and winch. Any other suggestions and informations? Thanks for help. Axel Wolters, Monchengladbach, Germany -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: stillmo@mb.sympatico.ca Subject: 200 beans for a HOOD C'mon you guys, you are so hungry for a HOOD kit 350th, in plastic, you'll pay the price! And an ESSEX? Well, if I feed my kids rice cakes and water, and the wife tomato soup and crackers for say, 6 months, I can have the kit right away! Maybe the HOOD kit comes with a full brass set??? Nobody really knows for sure (sic) but people will sell the tires off their cars to buy these kits. (chortliing on the floor!!) RD Bean -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: Mike Bartel mkwb@excite.com Subject: ICM Hood Kits Reading the postings in response to the price of the upcoming (a subjective term for this kit so far) Hood kit, I am both surprised and not surprised to see so many folks balking at the price of $199.00. Without wanting to offend anyone here, and I can understand that budgetary restrictions may cause some people to think twice on buying this model, I must say that it never ceases to amaze me how people think that higher prices mean that companies are making a profit. Certainly, if you are talking about Nike shoes or designer clothing made in sweatshops by Chinese or Dominican 11-year olds and then selling them for 300 times their cost, that is indeed outrageous profit. But, this is a model company we're talking about. It costs money to make the tooling for these models. Does anyone know what it cost Tamiya to tool (and initially market) the 1:350 Enterprise?: I'll tell you: Close to a million dollars! (And, this is early 1980's dollars.) I was told this by a Tamiya representative over from Japan for a trade show a couple of years ago. You can imagine what it will cost ICM to make a kit the size of the Hood, and never mind the Essex! And, with 650 parts? What did you expect the retail cost would be? $45.00? Model companies invest a LOT in tooling, and usually, don't get a lot in return. Generally, a new kit will sell most of what it is going to sell in the first year of availability. I can certainly see trying to recover some of these costs as quickly as possible in that time. And, unfortunately, there is no standard in price since this often has no relation to model size, quality, or where (or when) it is made. The market size and tooling costs dictate the prices for injection kits. Admittedly, model companies, like any other, are not in business for altruism. Only the naive, small-time guy will tell you that he is in it just to make a few items, just for the fun of it. I wouldn't want him as my business partner. The successful ones are in it for the money, and they are trying to make a good-enough quality product to justify their business. When you see an item like the Hood, with a $199 price tag, remember two things- they are not trying to 'stiff' their customers, and most people will not pay this price, anyway. You can get it through mail order and other sources that will offer it, in some cases, for up to 40% off the retail price. The companies know this, and certainly, that is built in to the price. We are living in an age where plastic modeling is 'greying', and the companies that exist must try to compete in the shrinking market. And, it's tough enough for the big companies that can afford to make injection-plastic kits. What about the small 'cottage' makers? We have it even tougher. This Hood kit is now suppposed to be a limited production kit, according to Model Retailer, a magazine that usually is on time (along with the other magazines) when it comes to presenting information. This info is provided by the companies- these magaazines do not print information secondhand. I would expect a slightly higher price for a limited-production kit. If there are big misconceptions in the world, one of them is that model companies are out to gouge their customers by charging $199 for a model that they think should be $20.00. This is simply not the case. If you want a $20 Hood, get the Lindberg kit. Judging by the quality of the Konig kit, we will probably be getting what we pay for in this kit, and I for one am looking forward to getting one, and I don't even build in 1:350. Mike Bartel IHP -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: GKingzett@aol.com Subject: Re: ICM Hood SMML'ers, I have been on the sidelines of this one, and I will say out front that I am not involved, I build so slowly that all model companies would starve if they depended on my trade. That said, how many of you folks who have been going on at great length about Hood and Essex actually laid down your money for a Konig/Grosser Kurfurst? What do you expect ICM to do for money to pay for the tooling for Hood, and after that, where is the money to come from to pay for the Essex. Any discussions I have engaged in about the production of injection molded 1:350 ship kits start at about $100,000 and go up from there. And that is all out front money, they can't sell any units until the entire kit is completed. If my math is accurate, $100,000 revenue from Konig equates to about 1100 units at $89.00 per unit sold, and we know that ICM doesn't get all the $89 either, so actually they needed to sell about 2500 units of Konig to break even. Did everybody on this list buy two units? (plus somebody had to buy 4 to cover for me) I really doubt it. And, Rusty, you know better. You may not want to spend $200 for a Hood, but you know it is not outlandish or price gouging for them to charge that much. I suspect that ICM took a bath on Konig, so they have to try to get some of that loss back by selling more units of a more generally popular prototype. And mentioning Tamiya as the benchmark is not realistic either. What was the last non IJN prototype they offered in 1:350, and what are the chances for the next one? Their economics are the same as everybody else. Any manufacturer has got to make money from one kit to have money to invest for the next one. The realities of this are what make resin kits possible. I think that you resin manufacturers, you too, Rusty, are doing us all a huge favor, subsidizing our hobby with your own sweat and money. I can't believe anyone would work as hard as you guys do for such little return and such major risk. My hat is off to you. "How do you make a small fortune in the model business?" "... Start with a large one." Gary -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: Roland Mar Subject: Avoiding a SUNBURN [SS-N-22] A couple of thoughts on the SUNBURN, as it does indeed figure largely in calculations of the naval balance. It is a nasty bit of ordnance, without doubt. However it is not the Russian, Chinese, or Iranian equivalent of the "magic bullet" that we seem to always be seeking. Let's look at the specs. Speed-Mach 2.5, cruising altitude- 20 m., capable of 15 g. terminal maneuvers, range- 120 km (80 miles) although the Moskit-M version is reported to have a longer range. Capable of being launched at up to 60 degrees off of target azimuth, terminal guidance is either active radar or EM radiation homing. Operates from various DDG's, missile boats, and land launchers. There are reports of an air launched version (Kh-41) being proposed but I have no data that it has been produced or deployed anywhere. I will gladly accept future data on that point. Warhead- 150 kg. explosive (type unknown). I will note that if there is a nuclear warhead version and it is used, we are in an entirely different world; in more than one sense. The BURP briefed to Bush noted also that we are to reduce our dependence on overseas bases. Therefore given this, in the Pacific especially where China is our "potential adversary"; it will be the CVBG's that will carry the burden of projecting power wherever in the national interest. How will they do this? I will note that there is not an infinite supply of SUNBURNs. Any adversary will reserve fire until they have targeting information, this only makes sense. There are only a limited number of effective OTH assets the Chinese or anyone can depend on to provide real time information as to the location of American CVBG's. The Chinese do not now, nor will they likely have in the near future (unless Loral gave or gives them more gifts than we know about) a real time satellite open ocean recon and targeting capability. Other adversaries are less capable in this field. This leaves two other platforms for acquiring this data: 1) an equivalent of an AWACS or E-2, or 2) sea based platforms. Here is where things get critical. Our ability to deal with this kind of hostile activity will be greatly dependent on how far away we can control the battlespace. How many air based C3I platforms do we have to worry about, and where are they deployed.? If they are deployed over the open sea, I would not care to write an insurance policy for their crews. If they are deployed over land, using altitude to extend their radar horizon, then the question is how far away from our CVN's can we dominate the airspace against a layered air defense. If our ships have to come within range of the SUNBURNs, then life gets really busy aboard the CVBG. If we can project power from beyond that range, we will eventually prevail and blind the opponent. Then it is a matter of striking our targets, including launch sites and further battle management assets the opponent may try to bring into play. A similar, though lesser problem is posed with sea based platforms for both SUNBURN launch and C3I. They are limited in number, fairly easy to find with our battle management capabilities [AWACS, E-2's, AEGIS,etc.] and away from a layered air/missile defense. Assuming China notionally as the most capable threat in the Western Pacific, there are about 2 dozen major vessels that are SUNBURN capable, plus an unknown number of missile boats. These are scattered up and down the Chinese coast. The number of threat axis' is manageable, especially since the missile boats are primarily coastal vessels. The crucial point is the size of the air space we can dominate, which is itself dependent on the range and capabilities of the air group deployed. If our carriers get smaller, we will likely lose the ability to deploy the F-14 Tomcat. The F-14 is our long range fleet air defense asset. It, with the AIM-54 PHOENIX missile [120 km range], can control the airspace at easily twice the range of the SUNBURN. The next step down is the F/A-18 which is itself a) notoriously short-legged, and b) can only carry air to air missiles of significantly less than 100 km. range. Result, our ships have to move into the envelope of the most dangerous weapon that can be deployed against them. That means whichever bad guy we are facing gets a free shot at us. The step down in carrier size will have as its first result the effect of making our vessels MORE vulnerable to the very weapon we are making the change to try to avoid. There is yet another point. What happens if the adversary does get some targeting data, and we are in range. This does not mean that the CVBG is lost just because it comes under attack. 1) There is the matter of a layered defense that will attrit the strike. 2) We have a few tricks up our sleeve, ranging from EMCON to ECM, most of which are not public knowledge. 3) We are about to deploy [this year] a new battle management system that will allow the entire CVBG to operate dark and have all ships receive "the picture" from remote sources. 4) If there is a hit, assuming a non-nuclear warhead, we are far from done. Even granting that modern explosives are more powerful than their WW II equivalent, 150 kg is not necessarily a kill shot. Smaller carriers, with less capable damage control capabilities, survived more and larger hits by kamikazes and returned to the line in relatively short order. War is a deadly business. That is why we admire those who put it on the line for us. We have become too used to "sanitary" wars with few casualties, so that we have lost our tolerance for and comprehension of the reality of war. The questions we have to answer are, is the national interest that triggers the combat sufficiently worthwhile for the real risk, and have we made the decisions that allow our forces to fight and prevail with as little loss as possible. I admit that I really like the option of keeping it as "sanitary" as possible. This means operating from beyond the adversary's eyesight, blinding him, and then pummeling him into submission to our national will. If we shrink the size of carriers, we give up the ability to do that, or many other things. Roland Mar -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: Dave Trotman Subject: this is not a ship mode, but.... does anyone know of a model kit of any British 8th Army radio trucks used in WWII in North Africa campaign? David Trotman Hi Dave, You need to get on Rob Lockie's "Think Tank" list. It's a great mailing list for armour modellers. But, I'll let Rob reply & tell ya all about it ;-) Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: "Chris Hughes" Subject: Re: HOOD price... Well guys, if you're seeing US$199 being quoted across the Pond, what's the betting that the UK importer will just swap the Dollar sign for the Pounds Sterling sign? I think I'd prefer to save a few more pounds and buy WEM's kit - at least that has a good pedigree! The only ICM kit I've bought so far has been their 1/48 scale Spitfire IX - and that needs a "few" after-market items to allow a decent build! Let's hope that the Ukrainians are not going to get too greedy over this one - I would have no objection to paying what Tamiya BB's go for over here, about £50... Chris -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21) From: Richa5011@aol.com Subject: Re: ICM Hood kit Edward F Grune wrote: >> 1) What is the ad copy deadline for Model Retailer? << This was not actually an ad, but rather listed in their new product section (written by the magazine staff - not unlike the IPMS Journal's Recon Report). Any manufacturer can submit material (usually a press release) for inclusion in this column. Typically, there is a 60 to 90 day advance requirement on submitting material for inclusion in this type of column >> How fresh is this news? << Hard to say, but it would be the most current informaiton from ICM submitted to the magazine. (FYI Model Retailer is a Kalmbach publication directed at the retail hobby shop industry. It covers everything from rockets, die-cast, kites, RPG, etc) >> 2) Note: no release date in the copy! << No, there was no date, but there never is in this collumn. The inference is that the kit is soon to be released. FYI, the other kits announced in April's column include: Academy F-89J in 1/72 Minicraft 707-320 in 1/144 Occidental Sptfire IXc in 1/48 (with Johnie Johnson's markings) Revellogram Mini Cooper in 1/24 Polar Lights Blue Max funny car in 1/25 >> 3) At $199.00, ICM will watch the demise of their ship line and with it will go the hopes for Essex. At 200 bucks (MSRP - yes you will be able to get it for 175 on sale), << Quite possibly...but it would indicate that the Essex kit would be real pricie...perhaps too pricie...especially if the quality of the kit is no better than the Konigs. Nat Richards -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22) From: James Corley Subject: Re: CVN names >> Hornet is taken, and I don't mean the museum... at one of the many end of WWII events aboard the ship in 1995, one of the Admirals, and right now the name escapes me, said in his speech that the F/A-18 Hornet was named for the ship--not the bug. If this was a true fact statement, and not smoke for the sake of those at this event, then one might consider the Hornet name retired as a ship name so long as the aircraft is in service. << That means nothing, in effect. The official naming of aircraft is done by AirSys and ships by SeaSys, however, Industry really names aircraft and Congress really names ships (at least major units). Besides, the F-18 was named Hornet while the carrier was still on the reserve rolls, not being stricken until 25JUL89. The navy also has other aircraft sharing names with ships: Osprey V-22 & MHC-51 Harrier AV-8 & TRB-5 Orion P-3 & AS-18 Constellation C-121 & CV-64 Dolphin H-65 & SS-555 Hercules C-130 & PHM-2 Do I really need to name more? These are just a sample of past and present mixes. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23) From: TechnoInfidel@webtv.net (John Collins) Subject: Indy to Portland Greetings: OK, so I'm little late in responding to some of these topics, but here goes. To the listmate who was wanting to convert a USS Indianapolis to a USS Portland: I have a Larry Gertner article on this subject. If you contact me off list, perhaps I could arrange for you to get a copy. I build in 700 scale for the most part, but over the last two years, I have acquired and built several 350 scale kits. Most of these are destroyers or smaller ships. Selection is better in 700 scale. Space and expense are other deciding factors. While I would prefer traditional names for warships, I can certainly see the likelihood of the USS Whopper or USS Big Mac. Golden arches on the fantail and billboards on the island. Politicians have sold their souls for less. Current projects: 350 Tamiya Fletcher class DD conversion; 700 Delphis Gabbiano class corvette; and, two 700 Skywave B-1 bombers -- which may soon fly into the wall if the tail surfaces break off again. Generally speaking, I won't start another project until I finish or destroy one. I usually limit myself to three concurrent projects. Be well, John Collins Atlanta, GA -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24) From: Craig R Bennett Subject: Re: From Sea to Shining Sea Hi Guys David Wells remarks seems to open a door that I would like to use as for a question. It's this. After WW2 Europe rebuilt it self and with empires that dissolved the western european countries concentrated their economies on domestic issues including enivorment. Did they actually go "Green" with complete recycling decades ago? See I heard a story that they did and began to reuse everything that even junk yards were cleaned out and land was reclaimed in France, England, and Germany. Is this true? Anyways David your remarks about using New Jersey ships to sink garabage dumpsters ..Do you think your fooling me. That's just an excuse. That's a ploy to get the New Jersey into Bayonne. Who are you kidding. She's in Camden and she was launched on the Delaware River. Nice try. It was nice meeting you at Mosquito Con in Wayne. Craig -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25) From: Ken Youngstrom Subject: A Battleship??? Since we have little-used T-1 lines at work, I keep the Miraflores Locks web-cam up on one of my computers: http://www.pancanal.com/eng/photo/camera-java.html Happened to look up today (3/27) at 3:00 MST. Holy grey mountain, Batman! Here comes a battleship! BB-61, heading for the Pacific. That sure spices up your day! The interesting thing is that a dry cargo carrier is in the lock next to it - and it's about the same size. Next to some of the RoRo's that go through, the Iowa would look positively puny. Of course, the RoRo's have to be the ugliest things ever to sail the seas, and the Iowa? Neat, neat, neat! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 26) From: AJOWENS@aol.com Subject: Sink those barges! drwells@hogpb.mt.att.com (David R Wells) wrote >> Maybe New Jersey should commission some ships to patrol the Arthur Kill and sink any garbage barges before they reach our waters....... It would make an interesting 1/700 scale diorama, don't you think? Some resin tug boats & garbage barges (flying the blue New York flag) being blown away by a suitable New Jersey warship. Any guesses as to which ship I have in mind? << Awesome idea, but would this turn the 'Big J' into the 'Toxic Avenger'?? (Still he was noted as the first superhero from New Jersey!) If you need any mop-up assistance there's probably a few Bay Staters who'd be willing to take the Massachusetts and/or Salem down to help out! ;^> A.J. Owens -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27) From: Ken Youngstrom Subject: More on BB61at the Panama Canal The folks at the Panama Canal tell me that the IOWA will transit the Miraflores Locks at 10:00 AM EST tomorrow, Wednesday, March 28, 2001. Miraflores web cam: http://www.pancanal.com/eng/photo/camera-java.html After watching the show, how about sending them an e-mail in thanks for their camera work. It's not a fixed camera - they zoom around picking up all sorts of interesting things. Check it out. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 28) From: "Rod Dauteuil" Subject: New Revell-Monogram Releases I just received a copy of the Revell-Monogram releases scheduled for July to December, 2001. It's mostly cars, but they have 2 new sets entitled "War in the Pacific". The first set is their standard 1/426 USS Arizona and a 1/72 Japanese Kate torpedo bomber. The second is a re-release of the 1/480 USS Hornet and a 1/72 B25B Mitchell. Both sets come with a 48 page historical booklet. I suspect the Kate may be of Hasegawa heritage, and the B25 perhaps of Italeri. I just don't see R-M tooling up for these new kits. However, I do suspect they are anticipating the model rush from the upcoming movie Pearl Harbor (like when Titanic was released). Also in the catalog is a German Torpedo Boat S-100 in 1/72 scale. I don't know the heritage of this kit. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29) From: Allan and Crystal Plumb Subject: Re: ICM Hood Many have quoted a source as saying the ICM Hood will have an MSRP of $199, and exclaimed in horror. The latest FSM quoted it at $129, so the horror may be a bit premature. Wait until we see something a bit more solid, then do what you like, but let's not crucify the company without better information. Allan Plumb P.S. I heard all XXXX kits will be doubled in price next Sunday. Something should be done! Hi Allan, I agree, SOMETHING should be done - howsabout we just drink the XXXX before Sunday ;-) Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30) From: "Harvey Low" Subject: Re: ICM Hood Well I must agree with Rusty and crew on this. As I always want to support the hobby, I just don't see the reason for a $200 price tag. Maybe by scale of economies they would do better (sell more units) with a lower price tag. Any news on the cost of the IJN CHOKAI? Harvey Low -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 31) From: SteveWiper@aol.com Subject: Re: ICM Hood >> With that ridiculous price tag it had better be a limited production kit, because they sure as hell won't sell many. I sure won't buy one. << Rusty, Its all a matter of perspective. If you have the money to spend on an item, then you will. If you dont, then you should not, or will not. Imagine me trying to sell my $300 battleship kits! Steve Wiper -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 32) From: "George J. Stein" Subject: Taipei Hobby Shops On my last visit to Taiwan I went to: Wan Nien Business Center 70, Hsi-Ning S Road, Taipei Go to the fourth floor and you will discover about half-a-dozen hobby shops, all quite well stocked, and, yes, quite good prices on the various 1/700 Japanese-made ship models. Check out the other floors in the building as the whole place is essentially a teenagers' hangout. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 33) From: Shane Weier Subject: WOGs Waaay back when I was too busy to read SMML (horrors!) This question was posed: >> lets see how many SMMLs now the origin of the term used by Ned! WOGS << ...and I *think* I've read all the ingenious answers relating to Worthy Oriental Gentlemen (and variations) Working on Government Service (and variations) ..and am wondering if anyone gave the correct etymology (I may have missed a reply), which is in fact none of the above? Searching through my great big dictionary collection I find that it's an abbreviation of "golliwog", a word brought into the English language through a character coined by Bertha Upton in 1895. The rest are what are known as "Folk Etymology" - explanations which appeared *later* than the first written use to fit an earlier word, but for which there is no evidence whatsoever. (Sources - OED, Macquarie Dictionary, Random House Dictionary, endless www sites) Shane (the Elder, practicing pedant ;-) ) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: "Greg Anderson" Subject: OzMods new E-mail and phone-fax number Please note that OzMods Australian Models has a new E-mail address: ozmods@optushome.com.au and phone and fax number: 617 + 3424 1724 Accept the Challenges and you will Taste the Victory! OZMODS AUSTRALIAN MODELS Proprietor: Greg Anderson Tel and Fax: + 617 3424 1724 Web Site: www.ozmods.com.au E-mail: ozmods@optushome.com.au or info@ozmods.com.au Postal address: PO Box 1083, Gailes, QLD 4300, Australia. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the SMML site for the List Rules, 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