Subject: SMML VOL 2051 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 04:18:56 +1100 SMML is proudly sponsored by SANDLE http://sandlehobbies.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Re: Not everything the Navy launches flys! 2: Re: Frog kit of HMS TIGER 3: Re: Ship Names (Was: New Carrier) 4: Re: Help with Ship Identification 5: 110' Coast Guard Subchaser 6: Re: Last shot at first shot 7: Leipzig versus Koln 8: Hobby shops in Shanghai 9: Re: Not everything the Navy launches flys! 10: Re: Naming New Carrier 11: Sources for ISW Brooklyn 12: Glatton, Gorgon ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: "TIMOTHY BROOKS" Subject: Re: Not everything the Navy launches flys! >> Check this out! These guys must be getting pretty bored! http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=76059 << Loved the pic. Reminds me of the fun and games with the torpedo tubes on DD 676 and 886, shooting up the ships rec gear supply of soccer balls (who in the world played soccer in the 60's?) while firing air slugs for PMS. Of course, it wasn't so funny the day the bozo ST in Underwater Battery fired the wrong tube by mistake and launched the 40+ cans of illegal spray paint we had hidden in one of the tubes out onto the pier. Could have been worse, we had a war shot loaded in the third tube at the time... Regarding the new argument (oh, excuse me, discussion) running regarding the accuracy of ship plans...I believe that it has been said many times that the only possible accurate plans are those drawn from life, as fitted, on any particular day for a particular ship. Official plans are rarely accurate as of day of launch for any but the name ship of a particular class, and not even then (check out a set of "official" Navy plans for USS Long Beach and admire the tubes for the Polaris missiles, or the first "as fitted" set with the Regulas missile and hanger that was never fitted at all, for example). Mostly, on ships that no longer exist, the best we can do is an official plan, revised plan of a particular date, or an as-fitted drawing and some DATED photos of the ship that might show some of the changes. I find those to be perfectly satisfying, and truly enjoy being able to add some discovered little detail to a model derived from photos of same. That all being said, I don't expect manufacturers to produce perfect models of ships. I do expect them to produce models with the basic size and shape of hull and superstructure to be accurate, and with some identifiable weapons fit that illustrates how it looked at some identified date. I am not above adding other weapons to a ship that it MIGHT have carried if some member of the class was known to have had it. I like representational models just fine, even though I might use a favorite class name "incorrectly" thereby. It has been said before, there is a market out here in builder land for kits to "correct" other kits or add features not found in the standard offering. Interesting discussion, though, but lets not get personal about it, guys. Tim Brooks TM(T)C (SW), USNR-R (Ret) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: Brooks Rowlett Subject: Re: Frog kit of HMS TIGER This has one of the more interesting design decisions I have seen. The masts are transparent plastic and the lattice structure is decals to put on them. Brooks A Rowlett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: Edd Pflum Subject: Re: Ship Names (Was: New Carrier) Bill Code wrote: >> I think a lot of these namings are politically motivated. << Gee, Bill, do ya think? I recall in the late '50s or early '60s, Chicago or Illinois politicians wanted to name a section of I-290 the Eisenhower Expressway. The only way it could be accomplished was if a section of I-55 was named the Adlai Stevenson Expressway. Or maybe it was the other way around, no matter. I have memories of presidents from Truman onward, and my own views on their merits. However, leaving such judgements to history seems prudent. The old system of states, cities, battles, fish, etc. was just fine. Edd ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: Michael McMurtrey Subject: Re: Help with Ship Identification Thanks, Shane, for identifying the HMS Barham for me. The film of her sinking has got to be some of the most spectacular footage of the Second World War. What a tragedy. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: Stephen Cowardin Subject: 110' Coast Guard Subchaser A friend gave me an SofB 1/32 fiberglass kit of a 110' USCG Sub Chaser. The kit is about as basic as can be had in that it has a white painted hull, a plain deck and yellowed poorly copied plans with a parts list that calls for lead or tin fittings, guns, crew, etc. In the twenty years since this kit was made does anyone make the same above deck parts in plastic or resin? I want to keep the weight topside as low as I can. Any helpful hints about this kit would be appreciated. Thanks, Steve ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: "Michael London" Subject: Re: Last shot at first shot >> how about Italy's invasion of Lybia in 1925? << For the sake of historical accuracy Italy had no need to invade Libya in 1925 simply because the Italians were already there. Turkey ceded Libya to Italy at the Treaty of Ouchy on Oct 15th, 1912 as part of the treaty that ended the Italo-Turkish War of 1911-12. Michael London ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: Lou Meszaros Subject: Leipzig versus Koln Can someone look in their resources and tell me the differences between the Koln (k-class WW2 cruiser) and the Leipzig (WW2 cruiser)? I have a hull for the Koln (fiberglass) that I would like to use for the Leipzig. I have not been able to turn up much on the internet besides a 1/100 model in Germany (pictures, no text) and the forthcoming model in 1/700 scale. Someone else posted a question on the availability of plans for this ship, but there were no posted replies. This is a very serious issue for me (the conversion), and I could really use some help in determining the feasibility of converting this hull. Right now I have a more "pointed" bow and the stern is tapered and rounded under. I was told I need to cut the hull lengthwise and add 1/4 inch to the beam, can anyone concur? TIA, Lou ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: "enrico villa" Subject: Hobby shops in Shanghai Hallo everybody, does anybody know whether there are good hobby shops in Shanghai (China)? I'm going there for business and would like to do some shopping...maybe they even have the Trumpeter Hornet (in Italy is arriving only in February...). Thanks a lot! Enrico ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: NAVYDAZE Subject: Re: Not everything the Navy launches flys! After the Kitty Hawk finished her drydock and upgrading at Bremerton in 1970 or 71, we then had to take all the dependents and their possessions back to San Diego. So we had a flight deck full of cars instead of aircraft. Women and kids everywhere on that ship (which we rather injoyed). So our Captain announces over the 1MC that we are going to demonstrate the power of our catapults to everyone and he says, "So we have selected one of the dependents cars at random from the flight deck to shoot off the forward cat." Talk about panic! Anyways since I was the First Lientenant's Yeoman, I managed to get up to the bridge on some sort of "official businss" to watch the shot. Needless to say they had picked up some old junker before we left to use as the test shot. However, people were heading up to the flight deck afterwards just to make sure their cars were still there. Good memories! Mike Donegan Navydaze ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: "Katz, Gene S" Subject: Re: Naming New Carrier I, for one, agree with Bill Code on naming of carriers and other warships after living politicians. When the Navy started doing that to submarines, disregarding the tradition of naming them after fish and sea creatures, Adm. Rickover said, "Fish Don't Vote". I don't support it, but that's what the man said and that's the rationale. There are dozens of Medal of Honor winners in the Navy, Marines, and one Coast Guard, that should have ships named after them instead of living politicians and political appointees. Gene S. Katz ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: Jon Warneke Subject: Sources for ISW Brooklyn Hi All, The question was asked what were the sources and what time frame was this kit built to. The kit of the USS Brooklyn was built to represent the ship in the 1897-1903 time frame, since no major alterations occurred during this period and a war was fought. Is the kit completely true to this period, down to the turnbuckles and gratings? No. There's no absolute information available today to give exact dimensions for each part, nor where they were exactly located. It is a representation of the ship from the available sources? I personally think so, although other have disagreed. As I've said before, there are no perfect kits, no matter who's saying there is, and if anyone says a kit's perfect, run away very fast. Which leads to the sources. There are a lot of available source on the Internet I found, and in each I may or may not have got a piece of info there, so I'll only list the ones I know were used more than the others. These were: Naval Historical Center Photographic Section: http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/nhcorg11.htm Navsource Photo Archives: http://www.navsource.org/Archives/home Both of these sources were used for photographs. Next the books used. There were four major ones used: US Cruisers by Norman Friedman US Armored Cruisers by Ivan Musicant American Steel Navy by John Alden The Uniter States Navy from Revolution to Present by Francis J. Reynolds The last book is the edition published in 1918. All were used primarily as sources of photographs, and as a cross reference for the plans below. Finally the plans used. In addition to the sets that can be found in the above mentioned books, four sets of plans, in chronological order, were used: USS Brooklyn from the Transactions of the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, Vol. 1, 1893 USS Brooklyn, taken from work, Office of Superintending Constructor, Navy Yard, NY Jan. 8, 1897 USS Brooklyn, Navy Yard, NY, June 1903 USS Brooklyn, corrected to suit ship, Olongapo Naval Station, P.I., 7/31/1917 Earlier I made reference to a set of plans from Union Iron Works, but these were for another ship and were intermixed with the above plans. No plans came from Union Iron Works for the Brooklyn in 1914. The 1897 plans were the primary plans used for the kit, and the others were used as secondary sources. Photographs were used to confirm details were located approximately where the plans said, but there's no surety that they were located exactly where the kit has them on the actual ship. These are the references used for the kit. Jon Warneke Commander Series Models, Inc. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: "Alan" Subject: Glatton, Gorgon Hello: Does anyone have as-laid down plans for these two WWI monitors. They were laid down for the Norwegian Navy but taken over by the British Royal Navy during the war. I have plans for the Glatton and Gorgon as completed, but not those for the Norwegian ships. I understand the Norwegian ships did not have the large bulges the G & G had, nor did they have the very large tripod mainmast, but were there other differences as well? What colours would these ships have had in Norwegian service? Regards, Alan Vanterpool ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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