Subject: SMML VOL 1419 Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 01:29:32 +1100 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Corticene 2: Helldivers 3: Re: Helldivers 4: Re: Helldivers & cutting PE 5: Re: LCAC model kit 6: Re: Parts, PE and Outerspace Portals 7: Re: Norfolk 8: Helldiver (was: Graf Zeppelin) 9: Re: Norfolk 10: ME-109T 11: Re: Graf Zeppelin 12: Graf Zeppelin 13: helldiver & swordfish Vs Me109 14: Raven and Roberts British Battleships of WW2 15: Aquila 16: LCAC 17: PC 1261 WWII 18: Samek USS Texas is here!! 19: SBC-3/4 vs SB2C-1/2/3/4/5 "HELLDIVERS" 20: Re: LCAC model kit 21: Re: LCAC 22: Re: World's Smallest Ship Model 23: Colony Class frigate HMS Cayman in 1946 24: Re: LCAC model kit -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD INDEX 1: Your assistance is wanted 2: Re: Helldivers -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: clary townsend Subject: Corticene Maybe someone out there can help, I am building a 1/96 model of the HMCS Kootenay ( ex-HMS Decoy, "D" Class Destroyer ). Was the Corticene on the Quarterdeck and Forecastle Deck maintained or was it removed during WW II - 1939-45. Thanks for any help. Clary H. Townsend -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: "Ralph Nardone" Subject: Helldivers Hello, all...... >> American carrier planes are not my specality but are you sure that Helldiver was a biplane??? << The SBC series were biplanes, yes. The later SB2C series were monoplanes. In fact, the name Helldiver was a traditional name for Curtiss Navy fighter/bombers....IIRC, there was the F8C Helldiver earlier than the SBC series..... Hope this helps.... Ralph -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: ALROSS2@aol.com Subject: Re: Helldivers >> American carrier planes are not my specality but are you sure that Helldiver was a biplane??? << There were two distinct series of "Helldivers". The SBC variant was a biplane. Its successor was the SB2C, a large monoplane that saw service late in WWII. Al Ross -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: Rod Dauteuil Subject: Re: Helldivers & cutting PE Yes, the SBC-4 Helldiver was a late 1930's biplane versus the more familiar SB2C Helldiver which was the wartime monoplane. BTW, for cutting PEB, I use a new sharp X-Acto chise blade against a hard surface, and gently rotate the blade upward while applying pressure. I find it acts like a scissor, and the part doesn't go flying due to all that energy created when the blade breaks through. Rod -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: iamnot@edsamail.com.ph Subject: Re: LCAC model kit >> I worked on some minor components for LCAC back in 1987 and obtained the drawings to make a model. I began work on a 1/350th scale model and have progressed quite a ways, but discovered that many components would have to be photoetched. I then began developing my home-made photoetching process, but got side tracked onto some more essential projects. If there is an interest, and a cottage industry willing to support the project, I'd be interested in helping make LCAC a possibility including help with the photoetch design and master building. I just did not feel it would be of any interest since there are no 1/350th Amphib model ships or modern armor to be carried on the LCAC(another ambitious project of mine to build a 1/350 USS Tarawa). Let me know if there is an interest... << How about a 1/35 (yup, 1/35 not 1/350) scale model of an LCAC. Then add a Marine M1A1-HA on it, several crew figures, and voila! You got yourself a diorama of a Marine amphibious landing. Very ambitious alright, but me thinks it is very rewarding. Which leads me to the next question: Is there a 1/35 scale of an LCAC? Good luck and enjoy! Tomas -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: iamnot@edsamail.com.ph Subject: Re: Parts, PE and Outerspace Portals It not only happens to small parts but also in certain cases, to decals! In this case, even after the application of some setting solution - really a space-time matrix that fuses the decal atoms with that of the surface atoms - somehow, a wormhole powered by an inexorably strong solar wind, with enough gamma radiation, is created that sucks the decal to the fifth quadrant of another galaxy. In most instances, it stays there, lost forever. In very rare instances, it appears on the floor. I assume that the latter result happens when the space-time matrix manages to realign itself but only in the wrong position. On small pieces flying off to another dimension despite active and continuing observation prior to its being cut, I use a high frequency sonar on active mode that searches for the missing piece, tracking and theorizing its ballistic trajectory much like a radar assists friendly artillery in counter-battery fire. Tomas -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: Sills O'Keefe Subject: Re: Norfolk Werner, >> This may sound a bit strange, but what's to see in Norfolk, VA. Or to bemore precise, are there going to be any ships in port in mid December or is basically everything at sea at the moment? << There is a lot at sea at the moment but there is almost always at least a couple of Burke-cl DDGs, Spruance-cl DDGs, and Ticonderoga-cl CGs in port. Also, the Enterprise battle group just got back about a week ago and after eight months, the Big E ain't going anywhere soon. Also, as I came back from Williamsburg yesterday, I saw at least two Amphibious carriers as well. What will be here in mid-December, I have no idea. The Navy is no longer announcing deployment schedules for obvious reasons. >> Battleship Wisconsin is there too, right? << Wisconsin is permanently moored downtown and only a couple of outside decks are open to the public. Still, it is very much worth a visit. The Nauticus Museam next door has a good display on the ship and also houses the Hampton Roads Naval Museum, which is run by the Navy. Finally, right up the road in Newport News, about 30 min. away, is the Mariners Museum. This is an absolute MUST SEE for every ship modeller. Have a good visit, Sills O'Keefe -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: "Kevin W. Woodruff" Subject: Helldiver (was: Graf Zeppelin) >> American carrier planes are not my specality but are you sure that Helldiver was a biplane??? << Yes the SBC Helldiver was a biplane. http://aeroweb.brooklyn.cuny.edu/images/scaled/aec00546.jpg It was the predecessor to theVought SB2U Vindicator and the Douglas SBD Dauntless. The later Helldiver (SB2C) http://www.aero-web.org/museums/ny/isasm/unkn2449.htm was meant to replace the Dauntless but in fact never really did. In fact there was even an earlier Curtiss observation biplane (O2C) also known as Helldiver http://aeroweb.brooklyn.cuny.edu/images/scaled/aec00518.jpg Kevin -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: SeaPhoto@aol.com Subject: Re: Norfolk Werner writes: >> This may sound a bit strange, but what's to see in Norfolk, VA. Or to be more precise, are there going to be any ships in port in mid December or is basically everything at sea at the moment? << There will always be some ships around a Naval Base - just back from deployment, getting ready, under refit, etc. Should be plenty of gray hulls for you to see. There are at least three different harbor tours available that cover differnt areas. >> Battleship Wisconsin is there too, right? << Yes, tied up a Nauticus, which is worth seeing as well. Also, there is another museum in Portsmouth which, though small, has some nice models. Also, the Mariner's Museum is worthwhile for the very nice Gibb's and Cox warship models on display. >> And maybe one more, if I may. The New Jersey is now open in Philadelphia? << Camden, New Jersey, which is across the river. Not sure what her status is just yet, and how much, if any of the ship is open to the public. You might want to call ahead on that one. The Olympia is in Philadelphia, and is well worth a visit. >> We might then do the three battleship tour (Mass, Wisconsin, and New Jersey). I am open to suggestions, if anyone wants to be a tour guide ;-) << Check to see what the status of the Washington Navy Yard museum is, in Washington DC. If open, it is a fantastic museum. If you are willing to drive south from Norfolk to Wilmington, North Carolina (about a 6 hour drive), the USS North Carolina is on display there, very nicely preserved, and of course the only one of her class anywhere. Have a great time! Kurt Greiner SeaPhoto Maritime Photography www.warshipphotos.com Now taking credit cards via Paypal! Warship Models Underway www.warshipmodelsunderway.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: Richard Sweeney Subject: ME-109T Actually the landing gear stance on the ME-109t was closer together that that of the Spitfire and Wildcat, not a lot, but it was narrower. Making the ME-109 more tipsy. Nobody said landing a Wildcat or a Spitfire on a pitching deck was a treat. Richard -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: Tom Kremer Subject: Re: Graf Zeppelin >> With regards the landing gear of the Me109T. While indeed close together they were no closer than those of the Wildcat or Seafire yet these aircraft where used on escort carriers which pitch and rolled far worse than would a carrier of the Graf Zeppelin size would. << Fred: Landing gear width aside, the flying characteristics a purpose-designed carrier plane like the Wildcat are nothing at all like those of the Spitfire/Seafire or Me109. The Wildcat had much lower approach and stall speeds, stable and predictable low speed handling, lower wing loading, good pilot view during landing and an extremely robust airframe and forgiving landing gear. The Seafire and the Me109T had none of those desirable carrier aviation characteristics. Look at the crippling operational casualty rates suffered by the Seafire during WWII. It was a bad carrier aircraft, the Me109T would likely have been even worse. Many ex-Spanish Me109s came into the hands of private collectors in the 1960's and 70's and they earned a reputation as difficult-to-fly airplanes which often cracked up on landing due to a nasty stall response. Of course great pilots could have landed one on a carrier deck but it is not an airplane that could have ever sustained high tempo operations at sea. Tom K -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: Richard Sweeney Subject: Graf Zeppelin Hello D.P. D Przezdziecki writes... >> I do not think what pilots of any nation actually wanted counted for much during WWII, and weather during the last phase of the Bismark chase wasn't at all bad as a matter of fact. << Well, that may be but having yout fighters flipping over on deck fouling flight operations really decreases operational efficiency. Your point is proven by the whole use of the Me-163 Komet though. >> You seem to forget (the) most vulnerable part of the Swordfish which was it's crew!!! two men with just a fabric for a protection. than there was the torpedo, the fuel tank. IMO the whole squadron would have no chances at all and got shot down long before getting into torpedo release range. << Not at all, but the crew is a small physical percentage of the entire area taken up by the aircraft the fuel tanks also a small percentage of the whole. To specifically target the crew or the fuel tank would take a remarkable marksman. To target the firing pin on the Torpedo?? Man I'd like to meet the man who could hit that!!! The rest was inert until it was released. Also If the Fairly swordfish was so poor an aircraft, why did it outlast the Fairly Albacore which was meant as a replacement for the Swordfish. Teh swordfish was described as having "Excellent flying qualities, robust construction and uncomplaining adaptability." (Kenneth Munson, "Fighters and Bombers of WWII" Peerage Books, London England, copywrite 1969, pg 258.) And Were there no Fighter planes in Italy When the British attacked the Italian fleet at Taranto with the same planes? >> American Carrier planes are not my specialy but are you sure that the Helldiver was a biplane? << I specified the Curtis SBC-4 Helldiver, Unfortunately with American Naval planes, The Same names were used on multiple planes. Yes, The SBC-4 Helldiver was a biplane, (Heller and Matchbox both make 1/72nd scale models of it and Classic Airframes made it in 1/48th scale.) if you are thinking of the Other Curtis Helldiver which was a monoplane, that was the Curtis SB2C-1C, that was delivered in June 1942 to the Navy. During WWII there were Two Curtis Helldiver in service and over the years Vought/Vought Chance built three Corsairs, one was a Naval Observation plane flown from Crusiers, battleships and Carriers in the 1930's , A gull winged fighter flown from carriers and land bases during the Second World War, and a later Jet aircraft called the Corsair II (though it was really the third Corsair) Regards Richard -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: "Andrew Jones" Subject: helldiver & swordfish Vs Me109 There was a biplane helldiver (was to serve with the Brit's as a bomber but was delegated to training, the French had some but their carrier was in the Carribean & only some had been unpacked & the only combat seen was by some USMC on the G'cannal & maybe an army version in PNG), as like most planes they name the names again & again eg the C-17 Globemaster that is i think the 3rd plane to be named with Globemaster & probably will not the last Swordfish VS Me109: remember the channel dash by the german heavy ships, the swordfish were murdered by the heavy firepower by the covering Me-109's ,if i remember correctly an entire squadron was eliminated by the 109's & out of that squadron only 3(?)(no hits) were able to launch torpedoes & as soon as they fired the "fish" & mind you they last victims that launched their torp's were just full of holes & had their wires cut, just held together by not taking any sudden movements, just like the Fairey Battles that attacked the Orne (?) bridge, they charged into the valley of death, this 20th century version of the charge of the light brigade. Im sure with the Swordfish & the Batle crews they knew that they would not be coming home, if memory serves me correct i think only 1 swordfish made it back (it pieces & crash landed) & 1 or 2 crews were rescued by RN destroyers or Air-sea rescue craft, but they went in without aircover & they had a job to be done. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: IBea351423@aol.com Subject: Raven and Roberts British Battleships of WW2 According to the latest catalogue from Christian Schmidt from Germany, a reprint (?in German) is coming soon. This must surely mean a full English reprint as well? Ian Beattie -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: "Andrew Jones" Subject: Aquila Part 2 from the November issue of World War 2 www.thehistorynet.com The Italian airforce was not so accommodating of its navy & with naval leaders focused on the Mediterranean, they did not see a need for sea-based aircraft & Mussonlin's statement of Italy being an "unsinkable aircraft carrier". And so with the leader & with the air force not being co-operative, the navy dropped plans to convert a passenger liner to carry aircraft & instead focused on its battleships. After Taranto the Italians disted of ftheir plans for the carrier & the air force planed to convert the re-2000 fighters for it. The first plans were to convert 2 passenger liners SS Roma & Augustus, when converted to be called Aquila & Falco (later Sparviero). work was started in Genoa in 1941 & Roma was first taken in & started to be workd on.The germans provided the catapult equipment, elevators & technical work from the work being done on the Graf Zeplin.Both carriers had 2 compressed air catapults capable of pushing a 9,000lb aircraft to a speed of 87mph in only 27 yeards. the air flasks, however, could only support 9 launchings each, & then required 55 minutes to re-charge (imagine this during a full scale British air attack on the Fleet!!). the italians planned to arm the carier with 8 x 150mm guns, but had to reduce it to 8 x 130mm guns to save weight & time & also 20 x 37mm (later changed to 82 x 20mm)To cut corners the italians substituted a steel armoured belt for 24 inch thick concrete & that cut the speed down to 22knots. The re-2001 were flying by 1942 & thought that the technical problems could be fixed by 1943 & the carrier would be ready for sea trials by 1943 as well. the plans for the Re-2001 were fighter cover & torpedo carrier & bomber. With the Italiuans surrendering in '43 the Aquila fell into german hands. The germans rushed crews to the ship trying to get it in service, but fuel & other problems they could not get it in service. The ALlies bombed Genoa several times & damaged the carrier in july 1944 & the Gemans repaired it & it survived the next 3 raids with little damage, but the allies finally crippled it in a combined anglo-italin commando raid on april 19,1945. The Germans scuttled her 2 weeks later & she was broken up & scrapped in 1952. Both Germany & Italy saw their carrierrs as support ships providing recon & fighter support for the fleet. But also look at that both parties were fuel starved to sustain a carrier each & they lacked airpower leaders who would press for strong carrier doctrine, so who knows what might have happend if they were built in 1937 or 1938, picture the hunt for teh Bismarck or the battle of Cape Matapan of if Axis commanders been knowledgable in their use. The Allied price for victory probably would have been much higher. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: O'Connor Subject: LCAC Peter VanBuren said something about LCAC's being "piloted " as if they were aircraft, although flying very low. While I do not necessarily disagree, US Navy flying officers refer to the guys who drive the ships into harbor as "pilots", and themselves as "Naval Aviators". Just the distinction of driving a ship vs. flying onto and off of the pitching deck of a carrier out of sight of land.... Just a thought.... Bob O'Connor -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: JRKutina@webtv.net (John Kutina) Subject: PC 1261 WWII Shane, Need your help please. I received this message but the return address is incorrect. I have info for their 77 year old father who served on the same type of USN vessel that I did in WW II. Please print this or if you or any other member recognize the name, please send me the correct address. >> From: "Barbara Jean Dixon" Subject: PC 1261 WWII John, Came across your message about First Ship Sunk. Yes it was my Father In Law's. Since Dad is 77 I am looking up some information for him. Any information would help. Thanks nick << Thank you, John Kutina - Seattle -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: "Jana & Pavel" Subject: Samek USS Texas is here!! Dear SMML'ies, A knock on my door this afternoon revealed a Biologically clad Postal Person with a escort of FBI Agents and a small brown box. After verifying that I was who I said I was and not an ill Intended Person I was handed a parcel. In the box was my long awaited Samek order, courtesy of my In- Laws who live in Prague, Czech Republic. Hull: nice shape, lots of detail and the tumblehome is there. Anti-aircraft positions are correctly represented according to "Battleship Texas" by Hugh Power. The length may be short 3mm. Beam is 1mm too narrow. This is nit picking however as the shape and look is good. There are undercuts on the casemates and generally a clean busy look to the deck. I did have a small AA Shield broken off on the starboard side. Main Turrets: these are good. Blast bags are moulded on. Superstructure: Clean and crisp, and lots of it. Miscellaneous: There are large amounts of anti-aircraft platforms, and ships boats, two kingfisher aircraft, 40mm AA, smoke stack,ete. Photo-etch: aircraft catapult, crane, 20mm AA, ladders,anchors, chain, radar's and yardarms. Decal: four small #35's and what looks like two decals for windows. Pros: looks nice, crisp and clean, the standard of casting is what we now expect from Samek and level of detail is high. Cons: I seem to have received a kit with no instruction sheet, the technical data sheet is there however. There is no brass rod for the leg support on the fighting top. Most disappointed in the packing. A lot of the thin gun barrels were broken. The hull had worked loose from the tape, in fact it had broken through the plastic bag. This is partly the postal service loving care, but the Prinz Eugen and Strasbourg have an insert of Styrofoam to hold the hull in place, and this is sadly lacking in the two kits of the Texas that I got. Not a major problem, and I will e-mail Mr. M. Samek tonight to advise him of this problem. I will report back. For those of you who have one on order, I do not think that you will be disappointed. I think that this is a good quality kit and the problems I have are not kit but packing problems. I have the Viking Texas and a direct comparison is not worth the effort. The Samek kit is light years ahead. Regards Pavel -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: "Loren Pike" Subject: SBC-3/4 vs SB2C-1/2/3/4/5 "HELLDIVERS" D.P. asked if the Helldiver was a biplane. Yes...and No. The SBC-3/4 were 1930's era Biplane divebombers manufactured by Curtiss. The SB2C-1/2/3/4/5 were 1940's era Monoplane divebombers (contemporary of the TBF/TBM of Grumman manufacture) and were also made by Curtiss and called -- "Helldivers". Info on distinct variants are in the Squadron/Signal In Action books, #1054 on SB2C and #1151 on SBC as well as American Combat Planes by Ray Wagner. Hope this clears up this little bit of mystery. Loren Pike -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: Bradford Chaucer Subject: Re: LCAC model kit >> I worked on some minor components for LCAC back in 1987 and obtained the drawings to make a model. I began work on a 1/350th scale model and have progressed quite a ways, but discovered that many components would have to be photoetched. I then began developing my home-made photoetching process, but got side tracked onto some more essential projects. If there is an interest, and a cottage industry willing to support the project, I'd be interested in helping make LCAC a possibility including help with the photoetch design and master building. I just did not feel it would be of any interest since there are no 1/350th Amphib model ships or modern armor to be carried on the LCAC(another ambitious project of mine to build a 1/350 USS Tarawa). Let me know if there is an interest... << How large would it be in 1/350?? Actually I was thinking a larger scale to allow for decent detail. 1/72, 1/76 or 1/87 would allow one to use Hasegawa, Roco or HO scale respectively armor models along with the LCAC Regards, Bradford Chaucer -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21) From: Bradford Chaucer Subject: Re: LCAC >> Tamiya's Osumi and Shimokita kits (Japanese MSDF helicopter assault ships) both continue nicely done 1/700 scale LCACs. You get a choice of inflated versus deflated skirts. << Actually I was thinking of something in a more reasonable scale, like 1/72 so it will work with all that Hasegawa and other assorted armor in that scale. Regards, Bradford Chaucer -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22) From: GKingzett@aol.com Subject: Re: World's Smallest Ship Model Boat builder, I am more interested in how they trained the spider. Gary -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23) From: "Tony Ireland" Subject: Colony Class frigate HMS Cayman in 1946 Hi Norman, I agree that there must have been a serious flaw in the design and/or execution of the welded joint where the large main sea-water inlet pipe connected to the hull. And I think it is inconceivable that it would have survived the 36 hours punishment the hull sustained as Cayman wallowed without power in that mid-Atlantic storm. I'm sorry I did not ask Danny, our RNVR Engineer Lieutenant, to show me the actual pipe, after it had been re-welded. But the fact that the ship did survive that ordeal suggests that the rest of the ships welding must have been pretty good. Danny did say that our boiler water-tubes cracked as a result of the many hours of hammer-like shocks caused by our bows plunging into the hills of water. In the only comparable severe gale I went through, in December 1950 just west of the Bay of Biscay, I was a passenger in the imposing Union-Castle mailship Stirling Castle, a 25,000 ton liner en route from CapeTown to Southampton via the Canary Islands. That motor-ship, about 15 times bigger than HMS Cayman, nevertheless was forced to heave-to for eight hours, just heading into the huge seas at a couple of knots for steerage way. Even this did not prevent a deck cargo of crates of tomatoes, beans & lettuce on the forward well deck from being washed overboard. I think the most seaworthy craft I served in was the Flower Class corvette HMS Smilax, in 1945, although one had to hang on tightly in rough weather. One full moonlight night east of Madagascar we were rolling northwards through moderate seas on our starboard beam. I and a couple of seamen dashed aft along the low waist to deal with a depth-charge that had broken loose. As we were returning, the ship got out of step with the seas and we took a sea over the starboard bulwark that picked me up and spun me upside down. I felt the receding wave taking me outboard and desperately reached down. My fingers closed over the long handle of an emergency fire-axe fixed inside the bulwark. The steel head was supposed to be kept greased, but its rusty condition withstood my upward pull until I thumped down on the steel deck, then scampered to the ladder up to the bridge deck. My second-closest escape from drowning. BTW - Herman Wouk's 'The Caine Mutiny' is set in a D.E. similar to HMS Cayman, also in a sort of Perfect Storm like our mid-Atlantic one. The most unpleasant ship's motion, I found, was that of the battleship HMS Howe, which seemed to take forever to roll one way. And her long low bow was dangerously swept by seas when she was steaming fast, so that the Exec.Cmdr. of her sister-ship in the Pacific Fleet was washed overboard and drowned in 1945. Must pipe down! Cheers, Tony Hi Tony, Don't you dare "pipe down" mate ;-) We all like to hear your stories. Shane & Lorna -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24) From: AAA Hobby Subject: Re: LCAC model kit >> I just did not feel it would be of any interest since there are no 1/350th Amphib model ships or modern armor to be carried on the LCAC(another ambitious project of mine to build a 1/350 USS Tarawa). << Ralph, The more commercially viable version would be, IMO, a 1/285 scale model. THis is in the armor gaming scale and they are a larger segment than we are. It also allows for a wider variety of loads already on the market. And to really hog wild, make a 1/72 or 1/35 scale version for the real tread heads ... in fact, I am really surprised that one hasn't shown up in the armor diorama categories somewhere! 1/35 would be about 30" long and 16" wide and 8" tall with the skirt inflated. Heck, this would be a nice RC project for somebody. James Corley AAA Hobby Supply email: aaahobby@earthlink.net -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: Lorna Subject: Your assistance is wanted With a largeish order from White Ensign Models due in the next week SANDLE Hobbies is looking to expand it's product range and we would like to know what both our local and overseas customers would like to have us stock next. To this end we have prepared a short survey; if you'd like to help us out by telling us what YOU'D like to see on the shelves email me offlist at: mailto:sandlehobbies.com Thanks in advance Lorna Jenkins Owner SANDLE Hobbies -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: John Snyder Subject: Re: Helldivers >> American carrier planes are not my specality but are you sure that Helldiver was a biplane??? << Yes, it was. We have it in our 1/700 Airstrike range of aircraft. The monoplane Helldiver you're thinking of was the SB2C (which we also have in the Airstrike range, as well as in our 1/350 Flight Deck range). Cheers, John Snyder White Ensign Models http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/white.ensign.models -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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://apma.org.au/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume