Subject: SMML VOL 1254 Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 01:29:29 +1000 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: BB Trivia 2: Re: Pearl Harbour Movie - info / spoiler 3: British Standards institute 4: Deck colour of WW1 British capital ships 5: FLETCHER class DD deckhouse/bulkhead detail reference 6: Re: Pearl Harbor - A Film That Will Live In Infamy ... 7: SMS Scharnhorst Gneisenau Paint Schemes 8: Pearl Harbor 9: Re: Ned Barnett/Pearl Harbour the movie 10: Re: Pearl Harbor Movie, etc. etc 11: Where is the line? 12: IMM review of Heller Lutzow and other notes 13: Re: Ned's comments on PH 14: Bookstores 15: Toilet Paper 16: Revell CSS Alabama 17: Re: Pearl Harbor -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD INDEX 1: Snyder and Short back in town 2: from W R PRESS - Camouflage Volume Three 3: Other French ship kits in 1:700 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: "Btbldr" Subject: BB Trivia Do you know which ship: Fought everyday of the war (WWII) Earned 13 Battle Stars Fought off 53 air attacks Sank more combat tonnage than any other US ship All without taking a hit or losing a man to the enemy Guesses? .. .. .. .. Answer... Tight lips sink ship's legacy Not much was known about the USS Washington, the 46,000-ton namesake of this state, until years after World War II when the Navy declassified its record. Only then did folks realize that BB-56 -- the Big W -- was one of the most remarkable ships of World War II. * Read the full article at: http://seattlep-i.nwsource.com/local/23065_wash15.shtml -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: Shane Weier Subject: Re: Pearl Harbour Movie - info / spoiler >> Until Pearl Harbor reaches theaters on 25 May, no one can know whether the film presents a reasonably accurate account of 7 December 1941, or of the Doolittle raid, or whether Bay's efforts to create an entertaining movie exceeded the limits of dramatic license. At the same time, it remains to be seen if the love triangle helps or hinders the storytelling. Despite the apparent focus on the love story, a huge mural promoting the film on the side of a building in Los Angeles shows only the Japanese planes bearing down on Pearl Harbor and their date with infamy. << I have to wonder whether the Japanese chose the correct target to begin their part of WW2. If they'd only bombed *Hollywood* there's no way the USA would ever have won the war ;-) Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: Randy Short Subject: British Standards institute Does anyone on the list have an Address for the British Standards Institute for ordering color cards and BS 381C books? Randy -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: Ken Hoolihan Subject: Deck colour of WW1 British capital ships Does anyone know what the colour of the superstructure decks of British battleships and battlecruisers (eg HMS Lion) was in WW1. Were they the same grey as the vertical surfaces, or a much darker grey. Also, was linoleum (?corticene) used on any decks? Ken -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: BSteinIPMS@aol.com Subject: FLETCHER class DD deckhouse/bulkhead detail reference >> I've enjoyed your series of articles in _Ships in Scale_ describing your build of the USS Kidd. Using it as inspriration, I've been cplanning on starting one of the Tamiya 1:350 scale Fletchers that are stored in the closet. I've gotten the Tom's square-bridge conversion set. I've been looking at the bulkheads on the Tamiya kit - and compared them with the jumble of detail you included (as described in Part 3 of the article - May/June 2001; Vol XII No 3). They compare unfavorably - the Tamiya bulkhead details are sparse at best. In your opinion, what is the best, A-number-1 reference for the rails, vents, chests, and piping present on the bulkheads of a Fletcher? In Part 1 of your article (Jan/Feb 2001 Vol XII No 1) you included in your list of references the Floating Drydock Fletcher-class Plan Book. Is that the one to buy to get all the bulkhead detail references. << Ed: Thanks for the kind words, I appreciate them very much. If I were to procure only one reference on the FLETCHER class destroyer, this one would be it: Zygier, Al, and Thomas F. Walkowiak, Plan Book - Fletcher Class Destroyer of World War II, The Floating Drydock, Kresgeville, PA, 1987. (If you are going to super detail your model, or want to know everything that can almost be structurally known about a Fletcher, or just have a degree in naval architecture, this is the reference to buy. If you plan to purchase only one book on Fletchers, perhaps this should be it. There are more photos and detail drawings of round and square bridge Fletchers and all their armament, fittings, equipment, and fixtures than you thought existed: I found it indispensable. A must buy.) If I went on to buy several more, these next two would be the ones I'd add: Raven, Alan, Fletcher Class Destroyers, Warship Design Histories series, Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, MD, 1986. (Full of photos and drawings, this book proved essential to this project. Out of print, but available through OOP book dealers on the Internet) Ross, Al, The Destroyer The Sullivans, Anatomy of the Ship series, Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, MD, 1988. (Full of photos and crisp, clear drawings, this book was also essential to this project since The Sullivans was a sister ship to the Kidd and was configured similarly. Also out of print, but can be found through OOP book dealers) The bottom line is, get the first one, then if time and funds permit, I'd add the other two. Hope this helps, and I hope you have as much fun with yours as I did with mine. Bob Steinbrunn Minneapolis Member, Nautical Research Guild Tin Can Sailors -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: dlfowler@uscg.net Subject: Re: Pearl Harbor - A Film That Will Live In Infamy ... Hey Ned, If it's time to lighten up, one should remember that this is a forum for those who might be a little bit more aware of naval history than the average public and who might actually care. Also, for some of us this might be a forum to share opinions with those knowledgeable people who might care. I have already told all my closest friends that I plan on seeing the movie either by myself or with other "ship" people. We'll try to sit apart from the general audience so that they won't hear the groans or teeth grinding. I am sure that this movie will ignite an interest in naval subjects in general and Pearl Harbor in particular. I am also sure that sales of ship kits - especially any battleships - will spike upwards in the next couple of months and that will be great for those of us in the business of making kits or detail items. However, historically inaccurate is still historically inaccurate and it's a bit irritating to hear the director stating that he had planned on making the most accurate portrayal ever. I have a book made from the movie and unless there are several changes between it and the movie then I wonder how the Oklahoma got behind the Arizona. For the less than nit pickers there are several other minor points. Oh well. Anyway, perhaps those complaining about those complaining about the movie should lighten up. At least we're complaining about an object and not people. Best regards, Duane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: GrafSpee34@aol.com Subject: SMS Scharnhorst Gneisenau Paint Schemes The ships of Graf Spee's Ostasiengeshwader were not repainted in a new color scheme on the eve of World War 1. They had already been in the grey/light grey paint schemes for several years prior, like most of the Kaiser's fleet. The SMS Emden's buff/white scheme was repainted grey/light grey in March 1911 directly after her sucessful operations against a naitive uprising in Ponape (the Caroline Islands). The other ships of the squadron, including SMS Scharnhorst & SMS Gneisenau were repainted in greys at about the same time. Gunter Trenk claims the Scharnhorst & Gneisenau were repainted grey in 1910. Lochner's statement that the Emden's peacetime colors were overpainted just as the war began is a bit of a literary flourish. And lino might have been stripped from the Emden's interior but not from the exterior decks. Photos of the wreck show it was still there at the time of her destruction by HMAS Sydney. At any rate, photos of Scharnhorst & Gneisenau in Tsingtao in 1913 show they were already in greys. (See Huff "SMS EMDEN" p. 80 for example) At various times while in the grey scheme, the ships of the Ostasiengeschwader sported white bands around the funnels, which were no longer to be seen after the outbreak of the war. Locals in Vailparaiso, Chile took a number of photos of Von Spee's ships when they arrived on November 3rd 1914. These photos provide ample proof that the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were in a heavily weathered grey at the time of Falklands and Coronel. These photos of the squadron in Vailparaiso have been reprinted in a number of books, but I think the best of them is Richard Hough's classic "The Long Pursuit". (Highly recommended.) Interestingly, although I have seen many photos of SMS Scharnhorst in buff/white, (occasionally misidentified in the captions as Gneisenau) I have not yet seen a photo of Gneisenau in buff/white. Dave Krakow -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: Jodie Peeler Subject: Pearl Harbor hello all.... Ned Barnett wrote, re "Pearl Harbor": >> 1. This is a work of fiction. Do not judge it by historical accuracy, as that's not what it was made for. There are many great books on the subject that are historical (and they're all back in print, thanks to the movie); << I beg to differ. This is a film that's based on actual historical events, featuring characters who really lived and whose lives and actions are fairly well documented (Kimmel, Short, Doolittle, etc., etc). Unless the filmmakers are going to alter names and locations sufficiently to at least dispense with the veneer of historiocity, I feel they have an obligation to present the sequence of events with some element of accuracy. What's more, there's a point worth bringing up: *We* know where the problems lie, and we know what's inaccurate about the film, because *we* have studied it out the wazoo. But most people out there haven't -- therefore, they don't have anything from reality to check the film against, and therefore they end up believing that the veneer of historiocity they're seeing represents the truth, when the truth is far more complex and far more shades-of-gray than Hollywood would ever show in any film. I make my living as a college teacher. You would not believe how many students, when they do speeches on historical topics, try to use Hollywood films as sources -- partly because they don't want to spend all that time in the library, but also because they believe that because it's on film, it represents the way things really were. (I don't let them use movies as sources, because I know better.) I'm still disturbed by the number of people who believe Oliver Stone's "JFK" represents the way things really were. I'm disturbed that there are folks out there who believe that a gunfight took place as the Titanic sank (I was rooting for Billy Zane during that scene, incidentally) -- after all, there were many folks who went to see that film who didn't even know there was ever such a ship as the Titanic. From my own observations and experiences, the average Joe doesn't know a whole lot about history, therefore he sees a film and goes "wow, that's the way things were!" What's worse is that some people are so easily swayed that they will believe anything they see on television or on film -- I actually had a student give a speech, based in large part on a really badly-done FOX special, that argued that man never landed on the moon. What's worse, she actually *argued* me when I presented overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It was on television, so it's true -- the hell with the historical record, and to hell with books (which, despite their reappearance due to tie-ins with the film, most folks aren't going to read because they think history is boring), I believe what Hollywood tells me to. If Bruckheimer (who, among other things, doesn't understand that stock car teams don't build their cars in barns) wanted to do a war film with lots of sex and romance and hunky guys and such, he always had the option of fictionalizing the names and changing the locations and events slightly so that they were merely "based on" actual events. Unfortunately, a film that uses actual historical characters and actual events does have a responsibility to adhere to the historical record. People are going to go see this film and walk out believing it's the gospel truth, when it's not, and not a whole lot of them are going to go on to do some homework. Sure, some of them will, but not a lot of them. Ask how many folks have seen "Lawrence of Arabia" and then done some reading on Lawrence -- most folks who know of Lawrence (and the number is dwindling) probably think he looked like a tall, striking Irishman when he was actually a little short guy, and that's without getting into the stuff David Lean brought up in the film. Ask how many folks who have seen "All the President's Men" about how influential Woodward and Bernstein *really* were in the downfall of Richard Nixon. As for the argument that historical accuracy and entertainment don't mix, rent "Apollo 13" and compare it to the actual Apollo 13 mission. There's proof that an accurate and spellbinding film can be made with a minimum of violence to the real story. Those who took part in the real mission -- in the spacecraft as well as in Mission Control -- told the filmmakers that there was no need to punch anything up for dramatics, for the real story was far more dramatic than anything a screenwriter could contrive. No, it wasn't a documentary (and I'd still forbid a student from using it as a source), but it was made by good filmmakers who cared for the subject matter, and who did a fine job of translating it into great entertainment. I'm just concerned about the masses who don't realize that what they think is "history" is really entertainment. *We* know that, but I'm not sure enough people in the general populace do. Not until more people in the general population develop better critical thinking skills in regards to the media. Unfortunately, most folks would rather buy the soundtrack album so they can listen to the obligatory committee-written Faith Hill love ballad, and then go to Taco Bell and get the tie-in plastic cup. Apologies for the rant. All flames to me privately, please.... jodie http://www.mindspring.com/~raisingirl -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: "D.Przezdziecki" Subject: Re: Ned Barnett/Pearl Harbour the movie Well Ned all fine and dandy if it wasn't for a few points: 1 - your statement about Holywood and entertainment would have been valid IF the director and the producer did not make all this song and dance about "accuracy" and "realism" beforehand ; 2 - the sad fact is that the majority of young cinema public have real trouble in seeing the difference between "only a movie" and documentary. Even one of your presidents (R.Reagan) was frequently mixed up about if he actually took part in the war,or just played a role in a war film. Most of the older genration is used to reading the book before seeing the film, or at least to reading the book on which the film was based afterwards but nowadays chance of this happening are very slim indeed. So for many people this film might be the only contact with the story of Pearl Harbour they will ever have; 3 - Holywood producers, with the warm applause from large part of American audience,always did have a tendency to rewrite the history in the way which suits them best. Starting with Alamo and progressing throu to the WW II and Vietnam. Each time somebody had kicked your butt, you will make a movie in which few brave heroes win the screen war all by themselfs; 4 - U-571 story,there are people still alive who risked their life to capture Enigma maschine and they have every right to have their bravery recognised; 5 - the Eagle squadron,while pilots of some nations (including few American volunteers) fought in the Battle of Britain, quite a large number of American population (including US ambasador in London) believed that England is finished and that the person to do bussiness with might just be Mr.Adolf Hitler. Now you might not be worried that a few surviving veterans protest that their war effort was being bastardised, but IMO it just goes to show that even decency,at least to some people,seems to depend on the amount of money offered; Regards D.P -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: Marc Flake Subject: Re: Pearl Harbor Movie, etc. etc THE HERO DIES?!?!?!?!?! Marc 8^( -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: "VanBuren, Peter M" Subject: Where is the line? Following the Pearl Harbor movie thread, I want to add some hopefully useful thoughts. We seem to be talking past each other, without acknowledging that there are many ways to enjoy this hobby and none of them is right. Or wrong. Some folks prefer to do lengthy, significant research, at times at the highest of academic standards, seek out complex and expensive after market items and build a ship that is as close to real as life will allow. Some prefer to build more casually and find much pleasure there (I confess to being in the latter category). Same for contests-- some prefer to go for prizes and others cannot understand why anyone would use a dental mirror to see if it stills says "Monogram" on the bottom of the ship's hull. The Pearl Harbor movie seems much the same. Some will approach it as a movie, i.e., "Honey, do you wanna rent 'Pearl Harbor' tonight or that South Park movie again?", whereas others will derive some satisfaction (and perhaps intellectual pleasure) in picking out the inaccuracies. About the only reason I'd advocate moving away from a live and let live strategy would be if someone willfully misrepresents his/her project. If I build my Tamiya Yamamoto and paint it pink and orange and THEN claim it represents a historically accurate look, go ahead and whack me. I do worry a bit about the Pearl Harbor movie violating this truce, in that some of the statements by the filmmakers seem to emphasize their attention to detail and scale (sorry) when it looks obvious that what they actually are making is a piece that will sacrifice when needed in favor of entertainment, kind of like how Bruce Willis never seems to have to stop shooting and reload. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: Peter K. H. Mispelkamp Subject: IMM review of Heller Lutzow and other notes I read the Felix' preview of this kit on IMM and since I have actually have built it twice, (don't ask!) thought I should add my comments. Overall, this kit is excellent, but still needs some work and careful attention to details to portray her accurately. The fit of the parts is very good. A) The kit lacks the degausing cable which was installed in 1940. I simulated this by cutting a piece of thread to the right length and running it trough a big glob of white glue and then pressing it against the hull. Once dry, I airbrushed the upper hull light grey (1 coat) - this helped to completely paste the thread to the hull. B) AAA - yes, the kit's outfit is in great need of a refit. Depending on the period for which you want to model her, you will have add a variety of 40 mm singles (not quads!), up to 2 37mm twins, as well as several 20mm singles and quads. If you can find them, use PE/resin replacements. C) For post 1942 fits, add another, smaller radar mattress to the rear of the unit on the tower mast. D) Forget the railings, use PE replacements. E) The Arado - cut off the twin propeller blades and add a PE triple bladed replacement or leave it without blades. F) My kit came from the first production run which featured accurate (i.e. swastika be-decked KM) paper flags. It did not have the waterline decal strips - which is not a big loss. First of all, I suspect that these strips would be a veritable "********" to position and align properly. Secondly, they are the wrong colour, KM ships used a very dark grey for this demarcation line. Other notes: My first ship kit was probably either the Aurora Graf Spee, WolfPack Sub (U-505) or Bismarck - heck I built them so many years ago that I don't even have copies of the instructions any more! Never got the Altmark though, but I would probaly still be kicking myself because it probably would not haved survived my "growing pains" and moves! Work bench - nothing on deck, but I have over 60 1/400 or near 1/400 scale ships awaiting my tender mercies - not to mention two Revell 1/720 Graf Zeppelins. I hope to start building a "model-construction" facility later this year. Reading: Just finished reading the Koop volume on the Hipper class for a review. Writing: Just finished a review of the Koop volume on the Scharnhorsts for a web-site. Kits on order: Heller HMS Illustrious and Arromanches, the French CV Bearn, and four Arii 1/400 scale USS Missouri's. Please don't give my email address to plastic lover's non-anoymous! Happy modeling! Sincerely Peter K. H. Mispelkamp -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: " Jim Mc" Subject: Re: Ned's comments on PH Well, gee Ned, ummmm..... YOU GO BOY!!!!!! Ditto from me on everything you said!!!!!!! Jim McCormick -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: Paul Jordan Subject: Bookstores This is kinda part of a thread about bookstores in the UK. I'm sure many of you know the following well known website which operates here out of Victoria, British Columbia, but in case you don't, it's a good worldwide resource of used books from over 4,000 booksellers. http://www.abebooks.com/ There is a very strong search engine on this site where you can search for millions of older books. I have had great luck in obtaining a couple of out of print Ship Books. PJ Victoria, British Columbia PS Thanks for all the wonderful "my first kit" stories...I got a real kick out of them as I think others on the list did too.. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: Derek Wakefield Subject: Toilet Paper Found this tonight and just had to share!! http://www.snopes2.com/spoons/document/skipjack.htm Derek Wakefield -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: "Robert James Higgs" Subject: Revell CSS Alabama I am building this for the third time and would like to know, 1. Whether to use matt, gloss or semi-gloss colours. 2. Which brand of paint gives the best results, 3. what colour or combination of colours will give the best appearance to the deck so that it looks like wood. Any help would be very much appreciated. Robert -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: "Steven P. Allen" Subject: Re: Pearl Harbor >> b. Doolittle might (might, mind you - nobody knows) be shown as a reluctant hero. It's fiction. And those who really care know the truth ... << I do rather care about this: Doolittle was a friend of the family (before my time), and I'd hate to see a great man's reputation sullied for the sake of bucks, Hollywood's or model-makers'. D'ya know how people ask me about Rose and Jack when I teach "Convergeance of the Twain" (Thomas Hardy) and "Titanic" (David R. Slavitt) in one of my lit classes? People see the movie and believe it's accurate, that it's "real" history. Adding fictional characters (a la Midway and Titanic) is one thing; distorting real people is another. Now, about those Spru-boats . . . . :-) Steve Allen -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: Randy Short Subject: Snyder and Short back in town For our customers, we're back from the holidays. Have plenty of WR Press and Classic Warships books, the 2nd Kriegsmarine color set, and I'm working on getting the 2 oz paint jars that have keep Humbrols for 4 years in our garage without any solvent loss. Our garage gets well over 100F in the Sacramento summers, and down to freezing at times in the winter. All in all I'm real pleased with my test jars, as I like to mix colors and use a lot of Humbrols. These jars will do nicely for acrylics too. We probably will be doing GHQ on a custom order basis too, at a decent discount. Randy Short -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: WRPRESSINC@aol.com Subject: from W R PRESS - Camouflage Volume Three Port and starboard camouflage patterns as worn by all five ships of the Modified Dido class of cruiser will be in Camouflage volume Three: Royal Navy 1943-44. The volume has gone to layout and will go to print shortly. In addition to the above designs there will be many camouflage patterns for the carriers of the Illustrious class, several designs for escort carriers, including the British built ones. There are designs for destroyers, escort ships and for MTBs, Fairmiles etc. A grand total of over 180 pieces of artwork. There are even a few photographs. Contact your favorite dealer to place an order. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: Michael Bartel Subject: Other French ship kits in 1:700 >> WSW also does a French "Le Terrible" French Destroyer during 1945 for $30.17. This same company's new French Battlecruiser "Strasbourg" can be seen at http://warship.simplenet.com/images/WSWStrasbourg/Strasbourg294.JPG for only $65.96. Also for the Fracophiles out there, there is the "Le Triomphant" French Destroyer, 1943, for $30.17. << Don't forget the new IHP 1:700 "Le Fantasque", now available and in stock at a special introductory price of $24.00 plus shipping. Mike Bartel IHP http://ihphobby.tripod.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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