Subject: SMML VOL 1734 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2002 12:57:30 +1000 SMML is proudly sponsored by SANDLE http://sandlehobbies.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: 1942 ensigns 2: Subs in the 60's 3: Re: A message to authors and publishers 4: The War of Northern Aggreshin (or Southern Confusion?) 5: Re: Sub Question from Target Builder 6: 1942 rank Flags 7: Authors and publishers 8: Re: Dimensions of Southern Rail Road Track in 1861? 9: Re: RR gauge 10: Re: A message to authors and publishers 11: Jecobin Plans -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: ZMzimmerman@cs.com Subject: 1942 ensigns I can't answer all the questions but I can answer one. In 1942 the USAF did not exist as a separate service. That didn't happen till 1947. In early 1942 it was still the Army Air Corp, in late 1942 early 1943 (I am sure someone knows the exact date) it became the Army Air Force. As far as I know rank flags and pennants are the same as the Ground Forces until 1947. Michael Zimmerman -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: O'Connor Subject: Subs in the 60's Ralph, I was in Scotland in 68-70, and saw Holy Loch's USN sub base, as well as Faslane, the Royal Nay's counterpart (essentially colocated). Holy Loch was a deep water inlet open to the Irish Sea and the Mull of Kintyre, where my dad was stationed, at RAF Machrihanish, or as we called it, the end of the earth!!! It seems like it was always cloudy and dreary- a very forboding setting for all the Nuke boats there. The mountains came almost right out of the water, indicating the depth was probably pretty good there.-somewhat similar to a Norwegian fjord. I recall seeing the USS Simon Lake (sub tender on semipermanant assignment there) and numerous boomers there, and I do not recall attack subs. That is not to say they did not come and go, but I just don't recall seeing any. That was a strange time-the cold war was at it's height, and we heard of what I'm now sure was scuttlebutt on our little base, of Soviet subs landing spies ala WWll, as well as Sov subs sneaking and peeking up into the entrance of Holy Loch, tracking the outgoing boomers (probably real). One local Scottish fishing boat was pulled for a ways (backward) by a submerged sub in the closeby north Atlantic- they cut thier nets and kindly released the sub (the ultimate in "catch and release fishing"), never knowing if it was one of ours or one of theirs. Cost the poor crew a lot of stress, damage to the hull and engine, and the loss of nets. I believe the Brit Government repaid them for their losses, which might indicate it was a "Bloke" sub as opposed to one of ours or a Sov boat. Hope this helps- more tale than info, but part of my childhood adventures as a navy brat... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: JOHNEME@aol.com Subject: Re: A message to authors and publishers I, too, agree with Robert Lockie about the need for proof-reading. One area where I disagree to a point is regarding how to refer to a system. Yes, the Germans used 8.8 cm to describe the famous anti-aircraft gun, but it was more commonly known in the West as the 88. And since this was the common usage in the language in which the book is published, I would want that usage, with perhaps a note to explain that the German usage is as an 8.8 cm. This frequently happens when crossing language barriers, so I would stick with the usage of the publication language. Another problem is that more and more books are getting away from being text-based to being photo-based. So the need now is for effective captions rather than effective writing. That, however, is a market-driven reality. John Emery -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: Joel Labow Subject: The War of Northern Aggreshin (or Southern Confusion?) >> Well, them thar tracks were standard gauge, for the most part - there were a few "narry-gage" lines scattered about, but they was in the hills an such or just outright deceptions placed by Yankee infil-traitors before the War of Northern Aggreshin. Now whut means is that them rails were about 3-1/2 feet apart, normal << US Standard guage means that the rails were (and are) 4' 8 1/2" inches apart. "Narry-gage" tracks varied but 3 1/2' was a common guage. 'Down east' in Maine we always figured that narrow guage was popular in the south because they had trouble counting up to four and beyond. The cross section of railroad rail was fairly standard for both standard and narrow guage...the size of the rail was measured in 'Codes' which are the weight of a 3 foot piece of rail. During the Civil War heavily used mainline track might be code 70 (i.e. 3 feet of rail weighed 70 pounds) and lesser used track might be code 30 or 40. Joel Labow (recovering model railroader and unregenerate Yankee) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: NAVYDAZE@aol.com Subject: Re: Sub Question from Target Builder Well, first of all the nicer submariners refer to surface ship crewmen as "skimmers" not targets. With that, if you do not want to offend any submariners with your diorama, then I highly suggest you get some submariners involved in your project. Trust me, they are a tight bunch and anytime I do a sub painting I make sure I have checked with a few of them for accuracy. You could ask your technical questions on the forum at Submarinersailor.com - http://www.submarinesailor.com/forum/display_forum.asp?fid=1 But be prepared to be "Pinged" by a few that do not like non-submariners - most of them are pretty nice guys though. However, my suggestion would be to go to one of the web sites of one or all of the boats you plan to tie up to the tender and see if they have any photos or the web master can answer any of your questions - also the tender or one of her sisters will most likely have a web site, again run by an ex-crewman. Submarinesailors.com also has a complete listing of all the sub's web pages: http://www.submarinesailor.com/BoatHomePages.asp Hope this helps Mike Donegan NAVYDAZE Naval & Aviation Artist -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: Richard Sweeney Subject: 1942 rank Flags Hello, it's probably not of a lot of help, but the USAF was the USAAF until 1947, or United States Army Air Force, Therefor all Army airforce Rank flags would have been the Gold Star on the Red Back ground like other Army Rank flags. Take Care. Rich Sweeney -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: "Robert Lockie" Subject: Authors and publishers Michael I fear that you may be right. However, in the couple of years that I have been reading, and occasionally contributing to, this list, I too have seen the responses meted out to those who offer criticism of certain products. I had intended to write a review of one of the books, but seeing what had gone before persuaded me that this approach might be better, at least as a way of avoiding a largely unproductive thread of attacks. I just wish that people wouldn't take it all so personally; I appreciate that while for most of us, this is only a hobby and for others, it is a business, but consumers are entitled to express their views just as much as producers. Ultimately, we get the products we deserve, because the manufacturers who deliver what we want will prosper and the others have to sharpen up their acts or disappear (as I recall has been said on this list of at least one, apparently unlamented, resin manufacturer). Reasoned argument will (I hope) always prevail and it is a great shame if someone's valuable work is brought to a smaller audience by dint of undeservedly low production values which put off certain potential buyers. They, and we, deserve better. Regards Robert Lockie (not yet felt the need to move house, as if I could anyway with all the books and kits&.) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: MDDoremus@aol.com Subject: Re: Dimensions of Southern Rail Road Track in 1861? John, All I really know is that it wasn't standard. While the North had over 20,000 miles of interconnected (4' 8 3/4" or some such width) RR track, the South had only about 9,000 miles of track, almost none of it interconnected. When freight had to be moved through rail centers like Chattanooga or Atlanta, it had to be taken off of one train, carried over to another depot and loaded on to a new car. You might want to check and see if the NMRR folks have any good historical information. Mark Doremus -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: "Steven P. Allen" Subject: Re: RR gauge >> Well, them thar tracks were standard gauge, for the most part - there were a few "narry-gage" lines scattered about, << With all due respect, that's not quite true: A very large portion of railroads in the South were actually wide gauge: 5', 5'6", and even some 6' gauge. "Standard" gauge was anything but until the latter part of the 19th century. The result was that interchange with Northern roads was very difficult--relying on switching trucks and adjustable axles--making logistics during the war a nightmare. The same roads often were regauged numerous times as first one side then the other controlled them. Locomotives and rolling stock were fairly small, and the rail was fairly light, often 6" or less in height. Roadbeds were usually not very well ballasted, especially those ripped up and relaid by the very efficient railroad demolition and engineering battalions. The contributions Gen. Hermann Haupt made to the Union war effort was one of the most important and most over-looked. Steve Allen -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: SteveWiper@aol.com Subject: Re: A message to authors and publishers >> To Robert Lockie I say a hearty, "Hear, hear!" Unfortunately, mate, I expect you're pissing into the wind. Have yourself a wee dram or two of single malt in consolation. << Actually, all of the notes from Robert are good construktive critisizum and I take them as a learning expeirence Let me say that I do have pleanty of mistakes in every one of the books I have published. I have made some of the mistakes he has noted and always try not to. I do have two to three proof readers take a stabb at my work priour to printing. I would say that I cannot always take the proof reading to extreams, as I do have dead lines to meat. Stve Wipper -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: Chris.Evenden@ga.gov.au Subject: Jecobin Plans Hi All, Does anyone know of a source for Jecobin Plans? Thanks, Chris -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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