Subject: SMML VOL 2054 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:38:22 +1100 SMML is proudly sponsored by SANDLE http://sandlehobbies.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Accuracy 2: Re: C2 Greyhound 3: Re: C-2 Greyhound 4: C-2 Greyhound kits 5: Re: Big gun recoil 6: Re: 1:1200 scale rigging 7: Accuracy/Sources for ISW Brooklyn 8: Comments on the new USS Hornet 9: Re: Sources for ISW Brooklyn 10: Re: Carrier names 11: Two quick notes... 12: Re: Aircraft Carrier names, a British view 13: Essex aircraft sets 14: Re: Last shot 15: Re: Subchasers 16: Re: BB's paint scheme @ Pearl Harbor 17: Re: Nautilus Model Kits ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: Summers David H Col Subject: Accuracy I don't understand the big to-do about accuracy! Has it occurred to anyone that it would be way simpler to modify the original 1:1 New Jersey, for example, rather than forcing tens of thousands of modelers to spend hundreds of hours each to modify the injection-molded kits? Let's shorten the hull by 30 feet, move the turrets and paint it Testor's gray. --After all, it's just sitting unattended in mothballs. It would give the mothball attendants something useful to do! If we cut off all the original railings, think of the savings in aftermarket PE sets no longer needed! They could even tilt the mast 45 degrees port, to accomodate less experienced modelers. Convert the rigging to 10 foot thick furry cable, with a substantial sag. Sufficiently motivated, the workers could even mold gigantic fingerprints into the steel plating on the bow... The Brooklyn is an even easier task, since the original has long since passed into ship heaven. Mr. Lambert can do plans based on the Krombrig model--way easier than searching moldy libraries! SMML can designate those plans as "official, definitive, and emaculate". [Who says the Library of Congress is more authoratative than the SMML?] --With a monopoly, Mr. Lambert can then sell the definitive plans to non-list members for megabucks! Likewise, Mr. Wiper can sell the "definitive" photo album, with pictures "digitally enhanced" to conform to the Krombrig model. (Ask any Hollywood computer graphics expert for guidance in achieving flawless historical accuracy) Did you learn nothing from reading 1984 in high school? David Summers, after an exhausting day at work ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: "Geoff Baker" Subject: Re: C2 Greyhound >> I'm wondering if you have any idea where I can locate a plastic model kit of a C-2 greyhound, navy cargo plane? << The Only option i know is a vacform conversion for the Fujimi kit in 1/72 by Falcon http://www.hannants.co.uk/cgi-bin/search.pl?Mode=view&Database=cat&R=FNC009 or a resin one http://www.hannants.co.uk/cgi-bin/search.pl?Mode=view&Database=cat&R=RVHP7245 using this kit as a basis http://www.hannants.co.uk/cgi-bin/search.pl?Mode=view&Database=cat&R=HE80349 (I know its by Heller with French decals but its just a reboxing of the Fujimi kit) Cheers Geoff ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: "Hank Lapa" Subject: Re: C-2 Greyhound Falcon models of New Zealand did a conversion in 1/72 to be used with a Fujimi/Heller E-2. Check Aviation Usk Nebraska or Hannants websites to see if it is still available. Hank ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: raisingirl@mindspring.com Subject: C-2 Greyhound kits hello all.... DTSARATOGA asked: >> I'm wondering if you have any idea where I can locate a plastic model kit of a C-2 greyhound, navy cargo plane? << Your best (and, to my knowledge, only) bet is to get the 1:72 Falcon vac-form conversion fuselage, designed for the Fujimi/Heller E-2 (it should also work on the Lee E-2, since the Lee kit seems an AWFUL lot like a pantographed copy of the Fujimi kit). Falcon marketed this in one of its numerous (and excellent) Triple Conversion Sets. The C-2 was in the same set as the AD-5W and the FJ-3. Aviation Usk (http://www.aviationusk.com) should have some available -- the 2001 catalog lists it as item #FV709. jodie ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: Edd Pflum Subject: Re: Big gun recoil Franklyn wrote: >> How is the recoil absorbed from the huge turreted guns on the big battleships? My take is that most of the energy produced from the burning of the propellant is indeed used to hurl the shells into the atmosphere, some of it is dissipated as heat, some as light, and some is absorbed as recoil. But where does it go from there? << Franklyn, When the guns are fired, the energy produced by the propellant forces the projectile out the muzzle with a given velocity (muzzle energy = mass of projectile X velocity of projectile.) In addition, there is a smaller but significant "rocket effect" resulting from the hot, high pressure gases also exiting from the muzzle. Field pieces and tanks often have "muzzle brakes" to redirect the blast to help reduce or counter recoil. An equal and opposite force is applied to the gun, mounting and ship (Newton's Second Law of Motion.) Hydraulic (usually) or pneumatic cylinders and/or springs are used to slow, and therefore spread out over time, the recoil reaction, reducing the magnitude of the forces applied to the mounts and supporting structure. However, in the end, the ship receives a backward "push" equal to the force applied to the projectiles. For a typical broadside, these forces can be resolved into three components: downward, sideways and rolling. The downward thrust is the reaction to the upward path of the shells. The hull is forced deeper into the water, until the resulting buoyancy force equals the recoil. The hull then rises back to the normal waterline as the recoil is dissipated. (Actually, there will be several decreasing up and down cycles before the hysterisis--internal friction--of the fluid medium--water-- and gravity damps out the motion.) The sideways component forces the ship to the side. In a broadside, the keel area of the ship resists this motion. The sideways motion of the hull through the water forms a "hole" on the muzzle side of the ship. A "hill" of water forms on the opposite side, The hydrodynamic forces tend to force the ship back the other way, dampening the movement, but in the end, the ship will acquire a slight sideways drift. Water resistance will soon dissipate this drift for a single broadside, however multiple shots could theoretically be used to maneuver the ship (don't try this at home kids!) Because the guns are mounted above the center of buoyancy, firing will cause the ship to roll away from the muzzles. Again, hydrodynamic forces will resist and damp this movement. In short, all the energy is fed into the structure of the ship, and thence into the water where it is dissipated as waste heat. The entire ocean warms up an teeny-weenie fraction of a degree. As you said, Entropy prevails. I recall an overhead shot of an Iowa-class battle ship firing a broadside. You could clearly see the ripples in the water as the guns fired, just like giving a model a sharp push downwards in the tub (you do play with your ships in the tub, don't you?) Edd ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: Edd Pflum Subject: Re: 1:1200 scale rigging Dan wrote: >> The problem in the rigging. If you take a look at the second URL that gave above you will see a beautiful model with very attractive lines attaching the sails to the hull. The kit doesn't come with those, nor does the figure have holes drilled to put them in. How on Earth does one go about rigging a pewter ship in 1/1200 scale? What size line, what type of material, how the heck do I drill the holes in the masts, and where do I get the super-cool-looking webbing that they have in the picture? << Two solutions suggest themselves. First, obtain a common spider and train it to spin the rigging (this idea has been suggested before.) Most spiders are predators and therefore aggressive, so this will not be simple. Tarantulas are said to be gentle, however, due to their size, they may eat your model. Selective breeding or genetic modification may be helpful. This is obviously a major project, but far easier than attempting to rig a 1.25" sailing ship by hand, Second, build and paint your ship without rigging. Photograph the ship with a digital camera and load the result into Photoshop or similar. Draw in the rigging lines. As long as all that are ever seen are the photos on your website, no one need ever know. (Certainly, YOU'LL know, but the long-term psychological problems caused by the guilt will minor compared to the frustration of trying to model that @%#%$&* rigging.) Glad to be of help! ;-P Edd ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: FBustelo Subject: Accuracy/Sources for ISW Brooklyn Ok, I may regret sticking my nose into this.... Darius, Who made you the ship model accuracy police? I have looked at various ship modeling sites and I have not seen any of your models. It just seems to me that you have some motive in trying to discredit the work on Jon Warneke/Iron Shipwrights. You made similar inflammatory remarks about Jim Baumann's work. If you do not like a particular ship model kit, then say so, don't buy it and then move on. There is no such thing as a perfect ship model - kit or scratchbuilt. You do the best that you can, that is what I do. There is constructive criticism and then there is out right attacks. Granted, I do receive samples for evaluation and construction from ISW - I also have purchased kits from them. Warts and all, I am generally pleased with their products and I point out problems where I see them. So, this is a hobby - please lighten up! Felix ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: Erwin Van Deynze Subject: Comments on the new USS Hornet Hi all! I haven't seen the kit for myself, at least two vendors had the kit at the IPMS Lier show, here in Belgium, this weekend. Unfortunately, they were all sold out whan I arrived. Did have a talk with one who bought the kit. He had a big complaint for the underwater hull: the lines are, according to him, completely wrong, the hull being too wide, especially at the bow. According to him, about 10 cm from the bow, the hull is about 3 cm too wide! He compared the hull with the hull of a freighter instead of a warship! Now, knowing his expertise (or his boasting with it), but also his tendency to emphasize what's wrong with a kit I'm wonder if any-one on the list has any info on it. Could be that he's just using the wrong plans. Wienne ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: Albert Choy Subject: Re: Sources for ISW Brooklyn Ahoy there to all good folks concerned... methinks you need to lighten up. A hobby is to be enjoyed. To each his/her own. Good for you if you like detail to the nth degree. If one does not agree with the detail of a kit or interpretation of source material, one is at liberty not to buy the kit or do one's own research to one's heart's content. A review is fair comment but to be 'evangelistic' in one's criticism seeks to impose one's own standards on others (how boorish) I hate to say this but in the grand scheme of life, who gives a gnat's tail about the authenticity of the detail on a model? :) A ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: Gmshoda Subject: Re: Carrier names David Griffith wrote that several US warships are named after US victories over the UK. There must have been a lot of friendly fire at the Belleau Wood battle for someone from the UK to think of it as an American defeat of the British. I thought the US was fighting Germans at that battle. Knowing how fond the British are of naval traditions and how they tend to reuse ships' names, I (if I were British) would lobby to have all new ships named after the British ships that participated at Trafalgar. Under my naming scheme the following guidelines would be applied. I personally like the idea of naming carriers after Presidents. I think George Bush would not be a disgraceful name for a carrier. However, I think we should restrict the naming of carriers to good presidents. I don't think we should name a ship after Clinton (unless you mean New Yorkers Senator Hilary Clinton or Dewitt Clinton). don't think Secretaries of the Navy or influential senators should be nominated as namesakes of carriers (John Stennis should have been the name of an AOE or the like). Ballistic submarines: States Attack submarines: Cities (no more fish, please) LHD & LPH: Famous ships. There may be more famous ships that need to be remembered than LHD & LPH. In that case, famous ship names could be used in other ship classes, providing that they would be expected to be in the midst of fighting in future naval battles. Therefore, as an accepted exception, famous ships names could be used for attack submarines, carriers, fleet flagships, destroyer leaders, etc.) BB-5 Kearsarge was the only BB not named after a state because the navy wanted to keep the name in use. The navy should want to keep the names Saratoga, Lexington, Enterprise, Essex, Wasp, Yorktown, Hornet, Kearsarge, and Hartford always in use (these ships were famous because they were in the middle of the fighting). Destroyers & frigates have traditionally carried the names of heroes Other ships: Names of more heroes & outstanding citizens or cities. I think there aren't that many ships in the navy these days to name after mountains, rivers, counties, and islands. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: Richard Sweeney Subject: Two quick notes... Hello: To Dan Bostwick, GHQ does some truly beautiful ship models and is very careful in their detailing. Their French 74 gunner "Le Superbe" (Also 1/1200 scale) is fantastic and has a more accurate depiction of her figurehead than the Heller kit of the same ship (Either 1/150 or 1/200 scale). For the "ratlines" Navalis Miniatures makes some wonderful 1/1200 scale photo-etched ones and I believe there is a link to them on Steelnavy.com To Jon Warneke: please contact me of list and let me know where I can get information on getting a copy of your kit of the USS Brooklyn, or when it will be available. Thanks Rich Sweeney Rapam@usa.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: "A Phillips" Subject: Re: Aircraft Carrier names, a British view Hi guys, I've been reading the posts about the naming of CVN-77 and I as an outsider looking in am saddened by the naming policy of the USN. However it sprang to mind that we in the UK will hopefully soon be putting names to our 2 new carriers, already some UK magazines are surmising what the names may be, "Warships IFR review of the Royal Navy 2003" suggests HMS Eagle & HMS Hermes will reappear. I still can't get used to HMS Victorious being a submarine. What do you guys think. Happy modelling Ant Phillips ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: Gernot Hassenpflug Subject: Essex aircraft sets I have seen some aircraft sets advertised as containing 10 aircraft, while others supposedly come with 6 each. Are there many different packages available then? F6F (6 or 10) TBF (6 or 10) SB2C (6 or 10) B-25 (10) Confused, Gernot ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: Darren Subject: Re: Last shot Franklyn scribbled: >> But what interests me more is "Who will fire the last shot?". << That's easy! It was Chuck the cockroach while floating on his matchstick raft made using original builders plans found in an old crackerjack box that he had to redraw to include a miniature 20mm bofors in 1/192scale that was never installed on the prototype and using two photos, each erroneously dated 3 years apart and taken at low angles. Defending himself against the last of the evil centipedes (who was on a coke bottle that had an unintelligible message in it) who was trying to board him. While escaping the flooding of the world. In a snowy August afternoon. In the year 3212. off the coast of Peru. (please note naval modeling content with references and details of encounter that can be argued endlessly, but never proven) Darren Damn! Left the glue bottle open. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: Starline / Fleetline Subject: Re: Subchasers To: Franklyn As our resident expert on SCs :) there is a question I've been meaning to ask for awhile. A few months ago an old film on pay-tv over here was shown, it was called "THUNDER AFLOAT" and starred Wallace Beery (Jnr?). It was obviously made 'tween wars, do you know the type of SCs featured? There were some lovely shots of them steaming line abrest at sea though the film itself is a bit hokey with I think an S-class sub playing a nasty U-boat. Just out of amusement the film guide described it as "The story of battleships versus nazi u-boats". Well the SCs are cute but I think they were going a bit far. Then again our learned media calls everything a battleship these days. Kevin@Fleetline ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: THEGAVEL Subject: Re: BB's paint scheme @ Pearl Harbor >> Eh? Weren't they ALL in Measure 1? Most sources agree on that... and I think most photos indicate that. As for turrets looking white, that is totally dependent on the sun angle - it certainly was NOT part of Ms 1 instructions << OK, I don't wish to belabor the point, but what source says they were in measure 1? As for photos, I think the one below clearly shows lighter upper works on Maryland and West Virginia. You can clearly see the sailors on deck onboard Maryland in white uniform so sun or soot from fires isn't a factor...work with me on this, for a long time I thought they were all in haze grey also. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY -- NAVAL HISTORICAL CENTER 805 KIDDER BREESE SE -- WASHINGTON NAVY YARD WASHINGTON DC 20374-5060 http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/naraord.htm Photo #: 80-G-19949 Pearl Harbor Attack, 7 December 1941 USS Maryland (BB-46) alongside the capsized USS Oklahoma (BB-37). USS West Virginia (BB-48) is burning in the background. Official U.S. Navy Photograph, now in the collections of the National Archives. John Gavel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: "Chuck Messer" Subject: Re: Nautilus Model Kits There is another Nautilus out there. It's base on Harper Goff's design for the Disney movie. It's made by Comet Miniatures and is based on an injection molded kit by Airfix. Apparently, Airfix decided not to produce this kit, so Comet has made it in resin. The parts are just like what you'd find in a styrene kit, with the hull molded in two halves. The kit includes clear parts and the rivet detail looks superb. It retails at Federation Models for $75.00 US. The address is http://www.federationmodels.com/ if anyone is interested. Federation has a good relationship with Comet and delivery on an order is amazingly rapid. Just so you know. Chuck Colorado, USA ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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