Subject: SMML VOL 1473 Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 10:10:36 +1100 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: New uses for worst kits 2: The mother of all worst kits 3: LCI(L) 4: Worst kit 5: Heller HMS Victory - apologies 6: Worst Billing kits 7: Worst Ship Kits? 8: "Worst kit"/Atlanta show 9: Re: Canadian Cape Class 10: USS Forrestal Doomed 11: ICM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD INDEX 1: Re: Naval Base Hobbies -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: Derek Wakefield Subject: New uses for worst kits While reading through this thread some things came to mind. Not trying to start a heated debate as much as offering a different point of view. There are some really bad, stinky kits out there. The Lindberg/Revell line comes to mind here. Most of those I had in my collection have since been discarded because I felt they would cost way more manhours to correct than it would cost me to break down and buy a more expensive resin kit Then I found that old Revell Pittsburgh I'd been looking for ages for, and I looked back to do some reflection. I tend to get more of a kick these days out of researching a subject than building them. I haven't built anything in years (the pile keeps growing -- lots of winged things added this past year), but I've done a metric buttload of research for the subjects I did want to pursue. Sometimes, it seems I have more fun figuring out the "how to" than I do "doing it". Buttfirst disease....it's terminal in my case. No space to build/display anything is another prob - small house, way too much junk. This has been discussed...no changes. When I can afford my own place, I shall start getting down to business. It's a to each theirown thing, okay. So I've been rummaging about through the books I do have and websites looking at Baltimores. Still having to wait for the kit to arrive, but thought I'd go ahead and get started doing what I could. First realization, no matter how hard I work, this Revell Pittsburg is never going to look as good as Dave Judy's ISW 1:350 Pittsburgh unless I decide to do some serious time/money investment and recast every part in the box. However, while the ISW kit is on my "wish list", I went the nostalgia route for now. The second ship model I ever built was the Aurora 1:600 St Paul sometime around '73. Like all kits built by kids around that time as toys, it didn't survive very long. In the late 70s/early 80s (early in HS) I stumbled upon the Revell 1:480 Pittsburgh and picked it up on a lark. It was summer, I was bored, it looked interesting. I still remembered enough about the Aurora kit to notice the Revell kit - if not exact - was similar to it in a lot of ways. As such, this one has always stuck in my mind. Once I got a taste of what resin offered, I figured why spend all the time, money, and manhours needed to fix them into something that would only half-way resemble the original. So, last year I got rid of most of my old Revell kits - giving them to a friend who had just moved into a new house and wanted some models to display on his barren shelves. Then came the Pittsburgh again. Why...it's a pretty horrendous kit. Answer - Nostalgia. A friend of mine collects Lionel and American Flyer trains, which to me have always seemed overly simplified upside the HO offerings. He collects those he owned as a child; good memories of a simpler day. Okay...hard to swallow in ways, but I understand where he's coming from. This really hit me when I started looking at the Pittsburgh offerings again recently. Fond memories. So what can I do with this Pittsburgh? Build it right out of the box...my nit-picker attitude these days won't quite let me do that anymore. First thing I had to accept is "it's not going to be a 100% right", but maybe I can spruse it up enough that it looks half-way decent, yet remain a nice memory piece of those kits I build way back when. Moreso though...even to do that I'm going to have to research the ship to make those mods. This will give me the know-how to tackle the more expensive resin kit when I can afford to get one. Until it actually gets here, I'm not sure how to tackle this project. I'm having to work on memory....not the most accurate thing anymore. There's a lot of things I'm thinking about. Cutting off or shadowboxing the lower flat bottomed hull. Generic 1:500 brass. Fixing the 5/38s. Sanding/Cutting off the overly thick gun tubs and replacing them with sheet styrene. Fabricating new 40 and 20mms. Scratchbuilding SC-1 Skyhawks for the cats. Hoping there's brass replacements for the cats, cranes, and radars. Brass or styrene rod for the masts. See if perhaps there's some boats out there that can be either had or salvaged from other kits. Until it does get here and I can compare the partswith the plans, it's hard to really visualize what can andcan't be done. Serious amount of work, but how much am I going to learn fighting this particular kit before I'm finished. And when I'm finished, I'll have something that's a cross between accurate and a nostalgia piece. And I'll have fun doing all the research. I've seen some pretty amazing work done with these older kits over at the IMM site (and others). They may not match the accuracy one can achieve with newer resin kits, but for those like me who remember a lot of those older kits and their crude qualities, it's pretty stunning The one that comes to mind is what one gent managed to do with the old Lindberg 1:600 Cleveland cl kit. I figure, if I could manage to achieve the same level of accurization with the Revell Pittsburgh, I'd certainly be happy. Another kit I have for this type of work is my old 1:426 Arizona. After getting the Banner and Trumpeter kits, it seemed redunant to build it in it's 41 guise. I thought about giving the two I have to that friend, but instead decided to slate it for a ambitious what if project - what if the Arizona wasn't blown to hell and was rebuilt after PH. I've heard some folks here doing similar what-ifs with the Hood based on how it was projected to be reconstructed, so why not an Arizona. I originally planned to work it up along the same lines as the Pennsy, but have decided to take a different route. Given how all the old battleships were all refitted rather differently after PH, I doubt if the Arizona would've looked exactly like the Pennsy. I briefly flirted with the idea of the "ultimate reconstruction" as the Tennessee, California, and West Virginia received, but it didn't seem feasible, practical, or likely. Perhaps if the war lasted into the late 40s and we got really really desperate... Otherwise, the ship was probably too old to qualify for that level of reconstruction. I'll leave that concept to someone who's really brave, because that would be a real PITB. It's impossible to know what extent of damage the ship would've received had the magazines not exploded. I don't have an alt-reality crystal ball, so I accept the fact the only thing we can do his theorize this. Based on what I know, I would think it would've been on par with what the Nevada rec'd, so it seems unlikely she would've sunk, but would've been hurt. The only non-sunk PH BB that was given the ultimate reconstruction treatment was the Tennesee, and why that was remains a factoid I've yet to fully comprehend. Instead, I started studying how the other old BBs - Nevada, New Mexico, Mississippi, Idaho, Tennessee, Colorado, Maryland, etc - were refitted during the war. There was no standard pattern or design used in the refitting of these ships that I can tell. Thus, the most logical way I've come up with to approach this project is to work up a design based on an amalgamation of the features seen in those ships for my Arizona c.1944. It's a what-if....who can say what's going to be right or wrong. The only think I'm certain about is using a MS32/6b camo scheme because I think it would look interesting. I'm leaning towards more of a Nevada or Mississippi look at the moment. For this purpose the old kits are great because even if they aren't accurate as what they're intended to represent, you only using them as a starting point for something completely new. Sometimes challenges like these that have been described here are frustrating, but everytime you run into a problem such as these, you're skills are bound to improve because you have to develop new techniques and roundabouts to deal with them. And there are those of us who just can't leave anything alone. It seems that we thrive on challenges. That or we're masochists by nature and just don't want to admit the fact. I say this as I look back at the Jolly Roger and wonder if I should pass it on like the proverbial Christmas Fruitcake. Derek Wakefield -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: "michael thrupp" Subject: The mother of all worst kits The Ne Plus Ultra of worst kits has to be the Pyro USS Maine - this was their kit of the USS Olympia (itself a none-too accurate essay) which was sportingly accessorised with two sponsons, the location of which was left to the imagination of the builder - I have no hesitation in saluting this kit as the supreme champion inthis category. Regards Mike Thrupp -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: "Kenneth Pearson" Subject: LCI(L) Looking for model kits, plans, photos and any useful gen on this type of vessel. I served aboard one of these in the RN, which was on Lease-Lend from the United States at the end of WW2, and was a crew member taking her back to Norfolk, Virginia. Possibly aiming to make a small model of the class, nothing approaching museum class, maybe 1/600 or a little above. Any suggestions from anybody who knows anything about the "roll on a tea-leaf" craft welcome. Ken P -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: "Ron Wild" Subject: Worst kit I have to agree with Al Ross. I,too, bought the Billing Jylland and did as Al did... Threw it out half built. My plans and instructions were printed only in Danish...no help there... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: "Robert Lockie" Subject: Heller HMS Victory - apologies I was looking for something else today when I thought to seek out the review to which I referred a few days ago. After going through a year and a half's issues of Scale Models, I found what I was looking for in the August 1979 issue. There was only one problem - it was a review of Heller's "Le Superbe" and not HMS Victory. The reviewer, John Tilley, was impressed by the artistic touches but identified several technical inaccuracies, as follows: No plank edges are visible, giving the impression of the hull being made from a single tree Copper sheathing upper edge follows the wale and not the waterline Decks are flat instead of cambered Cheek pieces of gun carriages are parallel instead of following the barrel taper Rigging diagrams provided are beyond inaccurate Belaying pins should not have pointed ends. I mention the above only because the reviewer comments at the end that he hopes the forthcoming kit of HMS Victory will be more accurate. However, it might give you a few clues about what to look for in it. Unfortunately, I do not own a review of the Victory kit so someone else will have to write one. Anyway, apologies for misleading anyone with my earlier comments - personally I am amazed that I even remembered having seen the thing. Robert Lockie Swindon UK -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: "Victor M. Baca" Subject: Worst Billing kits >> Without question, the worst kit I have ever built is the Billings DANMARK. The wood and engineering are atrocious, the plans vague. I could have scratch-built it quicker. << Ditto for their Krabbenkutter and USCG 44' MLB. They just came out with a USCG 32' Ports And Waterways Boat using plans I drew for Radio Control Boat Modeler magazine. RCBM did a fair job in inking the drawings, but I shudder to think of what Billing Boats will do with "my" PWB-32344! Victor Baca Model Ship Journal -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: "Victor M. Baca" Subject: Worst Ship Kits? Horrible ship kits, huh? I wonder if manufacturers of fine models ever write to each other asking who has seen the worst butcher job done to one of their beautiful kits? Do they have nightmares about their kits on fireplace mantles done up with thick, hairy rigging thread from the wife's sewing basket and glue fingerprints over gloppy paint on the hull? Victor Baca Model Ship Journal -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: Jodie Peeler Subject: "Worst kit"/Atlanta show hello all.... About "worst kits," I think the two that bring the biggest semi-chuckles to me are the ITC s/s United States (that Glencoe has re-released) and the 1:720 Essex-class carrier that Revell did. The United States model looks much more like a toy in the Ideal release, squished end to end, and while its beam scales out to about 1:350 it comes to 1:400 or so in length. I'm not sure what Ideal's original intent was in this kit, whether it was to do a semi-accurate kit or to produce mainly a toy for the kids, but I learned about it the hard way when Glencoe re-issued it. I bought it five and a half years ago, gave it a try...and then gave up. (The Revell United States in 1:600 is only marginally better; it looks more like the real ship, but still has lots of scale problems, and besides it's a vintage "flat-bottom boat" with all the simplicity attendant thereunto.) The 1:720 Essex...man. The thing that sticks out in my mind is how flat that hull looks, and how little hangar deck clearance it'd have it scaled to real size. Reminds me of some of those 1920s design studies you see in Friedman's carrier design history book. Revell's stuff, thankfully, has taken huge leaps forward in the years since, even in the last 20 years. I read recently someone who had a bad experience with Revell kits and now stays away from them. That's a little sad, as the new tools made in the last 10 years or so rival anything from the "quality" names. The Revell F-86D reminds me in some ways of a Tamiya or Accurate Miniatures kit, and by all accounts clicks together like a dream (I haven't built mine yet).... John Collins wrote about the Atlanta Model Expo on February 1-2. If you can be there, it's well worth the trip and a lot of fun -- I look forward to it every year. Lots of fun and lots of great vendors to peruse the wares of. My beloved Ralph and I will be there, and might actually be bringing some models for display, no less! I'm easy to spot -- look for the tall redhead who's enjoying the vendor tables maybe a bit much and/or who hangs out with the airliner guys.... :) jodie http://www.mindspring.com/~raisingirl -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: Chris Preston Subject: Re: Canadian Cape Class Hi Everyone. Happy New Year. Fred was looking for information on HMC Ships CAPE BRETON and CAPE SCOTT for a model. I think the book "A GREAT FLEET OF SHIPS - The Canadian Forts and Parks", ISBN 1-55125-023-3 has enough information to get started. The book includes a 2' AX 4' sheet of general arrangement drawings, and hull lines and stations, in 1/192nd scale.UP.158 also has a small scale (1/700?) side elevation plan of HAMS CAPE BRETON, and several photos of both ships in both RN and RUN service. The Iron Shipwright does a kit of a Liberty Ship in 1/350th scale for $165.00 (US). I think it could be converted into one of the "CAPE" ships without too much difficulty. Hope this helps. Happy Modeling. Chris Preston, Victoria, B.C. Canada -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: Dave Shirlaw Subject: USS Forrestal Doomed Shallow Support Stalls Ship Museum Campaign Tampa January 13, 2002 (MOR) - The campaign to bring the USS Forrestal to Tampa has foundered, and the promoters who fought to bring the ship here for three years say they've scuttled the idea. Needing $400,000 to pay debts and conduct required studies, the USS Forrestal Sea, Air, Space Museum Inc. has voted to close its offices. “We've suspended operations,'' said Frank Eurice, a member of the local museum group. “You can only beat that horse so many times.'' The move ended years of frustrating efforts to bring the carrier here as a floating museum, hurricane shelter, convention center - or as a potential campground for Boy Scout outings. “We're all very disappointed,'' said John Kercher, chairman of the museum group. “We had hundreds of volunteers who gave thousands and thousands of hours. But, it's time to move on.'' Although the office has closed, the group's nonprofit corporation remains in force, in hopes of a future wealthy donor. “If someone would write us a check for $400,000, I think we'd be back in business,'' Kercher said. Neither Tampa nor a competing group in Baltimore could satisfy the Navy's requirements for the ship donation program. And the competing efforts helped kill chances for both cities. “You had one group trying to raise funds here and another trying to raise funds there, and it was detracting from both efforts,'' said Eurice, who once chaired the Baltimore group. Both boards shot down a suggestion to join forces and create a single fundraising group, Eurice said. In Tampa, promoters raised about $1.2 million. But only about $350,000 of that was cash. The rest was pledges and in-kind services. The group owes $182,000 to consultants for previous studies. The group's biggest problem, Kercher said, is a “continuing inability'' to raise the necessary money. “People said, `When you get the ship, call me and we'll be happy to make a contribution,' '' he said. “The Navy was saying, `You've got to show us you've raised X amount of money before you get the ship.' '' As the fundraising effort wore on, criticism of the plan to dock the Forrestal here grew. Opponents said the carrier would become an expensive white elephant, ignored by tourists while sucking up thousands of dollars in maintenance costs. “It's a great idea, but it's an idea that takes a lot of money,'' Tampa City Council Chairman Charlie Miranda said. “I don't think the revenue would equal the amount of money you have to put up to get this thing.'' Even the Forrestal's massive size - it measures 1,086 feet - worked against it. “The ship is so large it scares people, and that was another obstacle,'' Eurice said. “People were just awestruck, and they overinflated what it would cost to run it as a heritage museum.'' The Forrestal, however, is not an active duty ship, he said. “On a ship like this, just sitting by the pier, the maintenance costs are reduced dramatically.'' Politics and economic self- interest also played a role in the battle to bring the carrier here, advocates say. “There were certain business entities in Tampa that were working against the Tampa group, and likewise in Baltimore,'' Eurice said. “In Baltimore, we were viewed as competition by another naval heritage foundation.'' Edwin A. Roberts Jr., editorial board editor for The Tampa Tribune, was a staunch backer of the campaign. He said the basic problem was simple: a lack of well-to-do donors. “It got off to a roaring start among people who were enthusiastic but who were not in a position to write the kind of checks that needed to be written,'' he said. In the end, Kercher said, time helped doom Tampa's campaign. “This was a 3 1/2-year effort,'' he said. “You can't keep a community's interest that long.'' The Forrestal sits at a berth in Providence, R.I., next to its sister ship, the USS Saratoga. The fate of the two carriers is intertwined. A group is raising money to turn the Saratoga into a museum ship, Eurice said. If they do, the Forrestal probably would be stripped for parts. “If those guys are successful, I would fold up the tent,'' he said. Both Eurice and Kercher, however, say they've heard rumors of another group that might be eyeing the Forrestal. “I got a call from a wealthy man in New Orleans who said, `If you guys have really backed out, we'd like to pursue it,' '' Kercher said. For now, they said, the Navy is waiting to see whether another city comes forward to take the Forrestal off its hands. “If that fails, then it would end up being sold for scrap,'' Eurice said, noting that, even as scrap metal the ship is worth $16 million. To recoup its losses, the museum group plans to hold an in-house flea market to sell office furniture and Forrestal memorabilia it has accumulated. A golf outing to raise money is set this month. It is a sad ending, supporters say, to a campaign that aimed to bring a piece of nautical history to Tampa. “It's unfortunate for both Tampa and Baltimore that a very big tourist attraction has come and gone,'' Eurice said. But, he added, after he spent nine years trying to save the Forrestal from the scrap heap of history, “It's hard to get the fire up to restart and rekindle the embers. “It was a huge millstone, it really was, but we turned it as much as we could.'' Dave Shirlaw Editor, Seawaves Magazine www.seawaves.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: Shane Subject: ICM Hi all, I recieved the following message from Earl Martell of NKR Models http://www.nkrmodels.com.au (Victoria, Australia). Earl imports a lot of models from Eastern Europe and his infomation is usually pretty damm good. >> You have probably heard the rumours about ICM going out of business and the denial by ICM U.S.A....well here is what is 'actually' happening:- ICM Ukraine is having serious financial problems which could have forced it out of business (they were getting support from the Ukraine government but the plug was pulled when there was a change of government)...however, a Russian food company has now stepped in and has taken a large number of ICM moulds to Russia where the kits will be issued under the brand name IDK...it is expected there will be nearly 90 ex-ICM kits released by IDK by the end of this month!! The future of ICM Ukraine is still not 100% assurred, but with the Russian money they should be able to keep going...hopefully with 'new' releases and not 'copies' of other company's products..as happened with the P-51s! << Regards, Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: "Shaya Novak" Subject: Re: Naval Base Hobbies Dear Mike, I have answered your emails and I did try to call you back. I apologize for the lateness. It is not unusal for the delays at this time of the year. The decals you are referring to do take longer to get from my supplier. I try to have them in stock. The decals and photoetch has to be ordered in larger quantities from specific manufactures. I try to juggle the items so it's in a timely fashion. Your photoetching has been sent. Let me track it down for you since you have not recieved it yet. Shaya Novak Naval Base Hobbies The Store for The Model Ship Builder www.modelshipbuilding.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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