Subject: SMML VOL 1300 Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2001 19:46:44 +1000 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Atlanta and Juneau 2: Re: Kevin Wenker/Kit instructions 3: Resin kits, instructions, etc, etc, etc 4: Re: U.S. Coast Guard 40 Footer Pix 5: Re: Kit instructions (or NOT) 6: Re: Bad kit instructions 7: Kit instructions (Good Quality) 8: Re: USS Atlanta question 9: K19 Updated 10: Anyone familar with this company? 11: Thank you (Russian flags) 12: Re: Resin Kit instructions 13: Re: But first synd 14: Re: HMS Agincourt 15: Re: USS Atlanta question 16: Re: Potiemkin 17: Source of fine wire for rigging 18: Re: Kevin Wenker/Kit instructions 19: Kit instructions by "LOOSE CANNON PRODUCTIONS" 20: Liberty Ships and other merchant ships- colours -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Model club & SMMLcon Infomation 1: Porno! 2: Re: Chicago Nationals -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: cfrieden@calpoly.edu Subject: Atlanta and Juneau Bruce brings up a question I have been intending to ask. Hopefully somewhere there is definitive information on this. I am working on the Juneau, and I was running up against the same problem. I found a copy of Juneau’s War Diary online, and there is no mention of 40mm guns, but there is reference to test firing both 20mm and 1.1in after Juneau had left for the Pacific. I suspect the photos in the squadron book are of the second Juneau, CL(AA)-119. They are labeled as CL-52 in the Floating Drydock catalog. Also, as far as I know 40mm mounts were not available until the summer of 1942, so it is unlikely these two ships would have gotten them. Then there is the issue of markings- does anyone have a photo/diagram showing the final camo pattern on the Juneau’s port side? Also, the War Diary mentions the fact that the superstructure was repainted after her last refit. Has anyone seen further information on this? Thanks, Chris Friedenbach -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: EMSR569@aol.com Subject: Re: Kevin Wenker/Kit instructions Kevin Wenker wrote: >> Jeez, John, remind me never to come to you for assistance. Reads like you need some granola in your diet. How is a first time resin buyer supposed to know all the things you listed? Osmosis? Instead of helping someone who was frustrated, you just likely turned him off to ships for good. Nice move. << D.Przezdziecki wrote: >> Sorry Kevin, but don't you think that it is better to forewarn the first time resin buyer that a resin kit building is different from plastic and to advise to start with something relatively simple so that he might gain some experience without too much frustration?? Otherwise the poor guy may get turned off ships anyway. << The problem with John Sheridan's answer is that it may not turned off ships, but they may also get turned off of this list. Don't we want to encourage more people to join the hobby? Sal Ruiz -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: "Kerry L. Jang" Subject: Resin kits, instructions, etc, etc, etc I have just "returned" to resin/plastic ship models after a long sojourn into wooden ships and scratch building. I've now built some of the new resin kits and some new plastic kits. What I noticed is that there is often quite a difference between "looking at the thing in the box" aka the "in the box review" and "actually putting the thing together" aka "build up reviews". I see in the box reviews waxing lyrical (or condemning) the quality of a kits casting, its instructions and PE set. Once I start building it, I find that despite its quality (or lack there of), things are much different. Kits with lousy instructions were so well engineered that this wasn't an issue. Other times the intructions are very complete but sooooooooo wordy that I got lost, and had to keep flipping back and forth, and so on and so on... I buy a kit 'cause I love the subject. I open the box and fondle the parts. It's not the actual building that I am I surprised (either happily or sadly). At that point, complain about it or write build up reviews to warn the world. Cheers, Kerry -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: "Victor M. Baca" Subject: Re: U.S. Coast Guard 40 Footer Pix >> I am doing a model for a customer of a 40' US Coast Guard Boat, does anyone have any pictures this boat, is the one that has the engine compartment hump in the middle of the rear deck and a crew compartment up front, I have searched the Coast Guard Web site no luck << A good source for photos would be the U.S. Coast Guard Historian's Office in Washington, D.C. The phone number is 202-267-0948, FAX 202-267-4309. If they do not have the photos you need (usually very reasonably priced), they are very good about directing you to another governmental source, usually National Archives. Another excellent source is the U.S. Coast Guard Museum Northwest located in Seattle, WA. The museum is a top notch institution and is staffed on MWF from 9am-3pm and weekends from 1pm-5pm. They can be reached at 206-217-6993 and have a huge library of USCG ship photo subjects on file as well as a selection of many Coast Guard general arrangement and lines plans. The plan set for the 40 footer would only set you back about 10 bucks--one of the last bargains out there for the modeler. A good starboard quarter shot of CG 40548 underway appears on page 203 of Scheina's U.S. Coast Guard Cutters And Craft 1946-1990, published by Naval Institute Press in Annapolis, MD. Victor Baca Model Ship Journal www.modelshipjournal.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: "John Sheridan" Subject: Re: Kit instructions (or NOT) >> John, why is it that every time someone has a LEGITIMATE complaint about something regarding one of the resin manufacturer's, you always make it sound as if these folks are doing us a favor just by existing and we should genuflect whenever their sainted names are mentioned?????? << Why does someone feel compeeled to slam a kit maker one the basis of one kit? I defend the resin kit makers because they *are* doing us a favor and making the kits *we* want. All of them read this and the steelnavy message boards and many of them post on one or the other. All of them are very reachable and listen to our concerns. >> When someone feels that their money may have been mis-spent because of something that just about all modelers take for granted and SHOULD REASONABLY EXPECT, like legible instructions!!!!, they have a right to air that issue. Granted, they should take it up with the maufacturers first and try to resolve their concern. << That's right, they should at least contact the manufacturer and try to clear up the problem BEFORE going on a public forum and slamming them against the wall. Denis G Campbell did not do this. He took his complaints directly to this forum before trying to solve his problem privately. That's what I have a problem with. >> I have purchased at least one resin ship kit from just about all of the "cottage industry" folks. For the most part, I have been pleased. A couple, I feel, have not been worth the money, but still glad to have them. Your comments make it sound that someone, especially a first time purchaser!!, should simply be grateful these folks put these kits out and that we should line up with our money and throw it at them. << I never advocated this point of view so please do not put words in my mouth. What few people do not understand is that the resin shipmodel makers are 1 or 2 man operations and NOT megaconglomerate Inc. These model makers have the skill to make a model most of us do not have the skill, time or pateince to make. I have said many times that the instructions are usually the weakest part of the kit. The kit makers have improved this weakness considerably over the last few years. As for poor quality kits, the ones who have tried to sell crappy kits do not last very long in this business; witness Viking. >> I for one wish Dennis HAD named the manufacturer, so I can take that into consideration the next time I may be considering one of those kits. << I wish he had too because maybe I would not have been so harsh. OTOH, how do we know he is telling the truth if he does not mention the manufacturer? I'm sure others would have either discounted or bolstered his argument had he done so. My guess is that he was trying to be polite and only wanted to mention *those people* without being clear. Of course the whole thing backfired. >> Not a smart idea though, to be turning off newcomers to these type of ship models. You might want to brush up on the laws of supply and demand: especially the part about what happens to suppliers when there is no longer any demand. << Yeah, maybe i'll just come on here and slam kitmakers for no good reason and without any proof. Of course, I will not metion their name directly but i'm sure everyone will guess if I drop enough hints. That'll boost sales i'm sure! As for turning off new modelers; puh-lease! gimme a break! I've been a modeler for many years and I have yet to be turned away for a kit simply because 1 person says something negative about it. John Sheridan -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: "Ray Mehlberger" Subject: Re: Bad kit instructions I'd just like to add my 2 cents on this thread and say that armor kit instructions...too...are sometimes bad...especially some resins. They give you a very poor exploded drawing and expect you to know just where and how the part should be once on the main body of the vehicle. I have some kits from France that are multi-media....resin....injection plastic...and P.E. that are that way...and some totally injection molded plastic ones from Eastern Europe...same thing. Then there is the popular DML Dragon brand of armor and figures...My pet peeves with them is the lack of any history of any of the vehicle kits they produce...or any history on the figure kits. They also like to tell you the GUNZE SANGYO brand of paint numbers..."ONLY"...on the back of their figure kits...but not what the heck those numbers equate to in colors. They expect the modeler to have vast reference libraries for the historys...and a conversion chart...telling ya what those numbers mean as far as colors...groan. The molding in DML kits is mostly faultless...but they drop the ball in these two other catagories. Finally, I have had a number of Eastern European kits lately that the decals suck in. You put them in the water and they shatter!! I couldn't even save one sheet using Krasel's Superdecal coating fluid. All this makes a modeler very appreciative for a superb kit with none of these bothersome problems in it...no matter what the subject of the kit. Regards, Ray Mehlberger IPMS/USA #12269 (AMPS member also) Contributing Armor Editor for INTERNET MODELER MAGAZINE www.internetmodeler.com web page: http://members.tripod.com/~research60/index.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: "John Sheridan" Subject: Kit instructions (Good Quality) >> It is not all bad news, and sometimes there is great news.. Some manufacturers in the cottage industry do indeed provide excellent examples. As an example, DJ Parkins has some awesome CAD based instructions - multiple colours - exploded drawings - great stuff - there is a sample for you to look at at: << The worst person to write the instructions is usually the creator of the product. (Those who write software for a living know what I am talking about) Most of the kit makers have improved considerably on their instructions. Take a look at Iron shipwrights new instructions v.s. their old ones. The old instructions usually consisted of a exploded view and a few arrows. The new instrcutions are crystal clear as to what goes where on the kit. I just recieved my instructions for the new BWN Porter kit yesterday. It is a nine page book with photographs, drawings, and text explaining where everything goes. This is a vast improvement over some of their early kits which came with a single photo, a couple a arrows and a large amout of guesswork. All of the kitmakers know their instrcutions are the weakest part of their kits. All of them have improved their instrcutions considerably over the last few years. John Sheridan -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: Craig R Bennett Subject: Re: USS Atlanta question Hi Bruce Concerning your question about the weapons fit of the Atlanta and Juneau. First take into account your Skywave kit was manufactured back in the mid-1980's they didn't have 1.1 gun available. They provided parts for really the San Deigo kit. These were SW-49 for Atlanta and SW-50 for the San Deigo. When they came out with the Cleveland class cruisers did the 1.1 gun become available. Now if you want to try buying Skywave's USN -WW2 No.2 set. It has two 1.1 guns in it. Some time ago Skywave redesigned their accessories parts to be smaller particularly AA guns and look more realistic. You might want to try these out. As far as AA fit goes the Atlanta and Juneau never carried 40mm guns. They were planned for but the 1.1 guns were only ones available. Both Atlanta and Juneau carried 4 1.1 gun mounts. Two on each side of the bridge with one directly behind the no.4 twin 5 inch gun and then the last one on the stern. The 40mm were installed to the survining Atlanta class cruisers San Deigo and San Juan in Dec,1942 at the Mare Island Shipyard. Atlanta and Juneau were sunk by then.Your kit of the Atlanta is herself at the time of commissioning Dec,1941. Now to 20mm guns using two books Floating Drydocks USS Juneau CL-52 and Warship Perspectives Atlantas class cruisers it seems they carried 8 that can documented. Two were placed on each side of the bridge with four that has two on each side of the second stack. This reveals a serious challenge because in your kit (I have one too.)you can use two pieces for the boatdeck area. Part no.4 has the boat deck with supports for the ship's boats and a boat crane for the orginial Atlanta and part no.14 which has no boat supports but the four 20mm gun mounts. I guess your best bet would be to use part no.14. Put in the four boats after sanding down their bottoms on the big whale boats after putting in the captain's boats on top as per instructions and then drill a hole for the boat crane and add it. Or you could use part no.4 sand down two of the boat supports that are opposite the smoke stack and using the USN weapon set no.2 add the 20mm guns and then glue in the boat crane. All four Atlantas carried boat cranes and 4 of the 6 boats they were commissioned with. Then add the two remaining 20mm guns behind the 4th 1.1gun. I hope this is of help to you. Craig -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: "Ian MacCorquodale" Subject: K19 Updated New pictures have been posted of K19, and Costar USS Bigelow (HMCS Terra Nova). http://www.geocities.com/macamodius/ Cheers, Ian http://www.geocities.com/macrachael/ Main Site -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: John Maze Subject: Anyone familar with this company? SMMLies, I was doing a websearch on Cottage Industries Models, and came up with only their homepage, Steel Navy (aka warship.com) and this one: www.ajeffsvending.com But I can't connect to it. Anyone doing business with this guy? Or know if this link is valid, or if he has a new one? JohnM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: Masashi Ito Subject: Thank you (Russian flags) Hi, everyone. I just wanted to thank all of you for the useful replies to my inquiry about Imperial Russian Navy's ensigns and jacks. Thank you! Now I can decorate my cute Askold (still under construction, though) with her (nation's) graceful ensign and jack. Also, I hope Bill Gruner's father is getting better. Regards, Masashi Ito -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: "Ray Boorman" Subject: Re: Resin Kit instructions Sorry but got to put some humour in this discourse. How can you tell that most Resin models are designed by men. Answer- There's no instructions........... Sorry couldnt resist. Ray -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: Dave Judy Subject: Re: But first synd Ahhh, Iced coffee...........! A man after my own heart!!! I thought I was as strange as my wife says I am!!! Dave Judy -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: "D.Przezdziecki" Subject: Re: HMS Agincourt Hello Kurt, To my knowledge no such a set of plans was ever drawn. I have been interested in warships for more than 20 years now and I have never come across plans of Agincourt even thou I have catalogues of all the commecialy available plans of British warships of WW I. There are various drawings around and those of R.A.Burt in "British Battleships of WW I" are probably the most comprehensive (M.Williams article and drawings are based on those) and good enough to attempt a 1/700 model. There must also be a set of builders plans in NMM in Greenwich, but they would be just too expensive for my purposes. Regrads D.P -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: Craig R Bennett Subject: Re: USS Atlanta question Hi Guys I have been looking at the photos of the Juneau 1942 40mm gun mounts. The sailors appear to be drilling. I think it's photos of the 2nd Juneau CL-119 in the postwar era. Any photo of a 1942 Juneau would show camouflage paint, lifejackets, and helmets on the sailors. Well enough from me on this. Craig -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: "D.Przezdziecki" Subject: Re: Potiemkin Barton writes: >> According to the book Battleships of World War one it states that the hulk of the Potemkin was actually used for the movie... (snip) I think Anthony Preston is the book's author. << I have to disagree Barton even if Antony Preston says so. The famous shot from the movie (the firing party and condemned men under the tarpaulin) was published in Military Modelling May 1973 article about the ship and I do have this article. The quaterdeck of the ship in the movie looks nothing like the quaterdeck of the Potiemkin. There is no trace of the aft 152mm gun casamates and there is only one,centrally placed, companionway. In real Potiemkin there were 3 companion-ways on the quaterdeck, two to the starboard side and one to the port. Regards D.P -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: "Steve James" Subject: Source of fine wire for rigging G'Day All, For those 'lucky' enough to work in an office or have a photocopier I discovered the corona wires are extremely fine, very strong and look great for the smaller scale kits. I was chatting to a technician who gave me the U/S corona unit from my office and almost finished reel with about 4 meters/yards of good wire. Next time you see a tech ask to see if they can get you one. It only cost me a 20 minute talk on the benefits of Amway! Cheers, Steve -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: downscope@earthlink.com Subject: Re: Kevin Wenker/Kit instructions >> Sorry Kevin, but don't you think that it is better to forewarn the first time resin buyer that a resin kit building is different from plastic and to advise to start with something relatively simple so that he might gain some experience without too much frustration?? Otherwise the poor guy may get turned off ships anyway. With the growth of the Internet a lot of information is there for the picking and really only a very little initial effort is required on the modeler's part. << D.P. I absolutely agree 110%. Sorry for not being as clear as I should have been. I was more reacting to John's soapbox defend-the-manufacturer-at-all-costs diatribe. Now, that said, there are some such as WEM who include instructions which are better than any plastic model kit I know of. Kevin -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: RhinoBones@aol.com Subject: Kit instructions by "LOOSE CANNON PRODUCTIONS" >> After taking all the time and effort to research and lovingly make every single piece of the newest kit, I'm heartily sick of looking at them . . . BUT.......I think it needs to be done << I support this manufacturer on two points. Point 1) I can appreciate the point that living with a project eats you up from the inside. Been there. You get to the finish and you don't care if you ever see her again. I think that all of our fellow modelers have been to a similar point in the construction of their beauties. How many of you have 50% completion sitting on the shelf? Tell me these kits are not being completed because the instructions were deficient. If you want to complete a model . . . it will be done. This is up to you. Point 2) He also acknowledges that the instructions could be better . . . even makes the point that he intends to make improvements based on the consumer comments. He made a bow to the consumer, what more could you ask for? Myself, I have two Modelkrak kits on order. I know what to expect, therefore, I have also ordered some appropriate detail spurs to make things go better. Suggest you do the same. Regards, The Colonial RhinoBones -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: "John Sutherland" Subject: Liberty Ships and other merchant ships- colours Hi all, I am currently finishing off the two Skywave Liberty kits. Skywave state the decks are Blue and the sides dark grey. Their box art suggests that the superstructure is a light grey and the hull sides a darker grey, contradicting their painting instructions. I find it difficult to believe the deck was blue except perhaps those that went to the Pacific. Seems to me #4 Grey 20 was more likely in the Atlantic? But I have no clues as to the superstructure and sides - only photos I have seen are B&W and I am no good in interpreting shades. On this subject - I understand British and Allied cargo ships, colliers, tankers, etc. were given a coat of overall grey in WWII? Is this correct? Anyone help out there? Thanks John Sutherland Wellington, NZ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Model club & SMMLcon Infomation -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Porno! >> That still leaves us with the photos of Rusty in his Speedo. << I've GOT to keep those blinds pulled in those hotel rooms! Rusty White Flagship Models Inc. You can now pay using your Visa / MasterCard http://okclive.com/flagship/ "That's mighty bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: wem Subject: Re: Chicago Nationals >> Please let us know what you want to talk about. Anything goes except Caroline's yellow bikini, John has vetoed that. That still leaves us with the photos of Rusty in his Speedo. << Eat yer heart out Hugh: Caroline was working in the garden most of the day in her bikini. What I want to know is: how did you know it was yellow, Mate?!! Trust you'll post the photos of Rusty in his Speedo to SMML.... Cheers, John & Caroline -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the SMML site for the List Rules, Backissues, Member's models & reference pictures at: http://smmlonline.com 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