Subject: SMML VOL 3008 Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 02:09:45 +1100 The Ship Modelling Mailing List (SMML) is proudly sponsored by SANDLE http//sandlehobbies.com For infomation on how to Post to SMML and Unsubscribe from SMML http//smmlonline.com/aboutsmml/rules.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1 Skywave/Pitroad Web Site 2 Re Japanese Warship Design 3 Re Japanese Warship Design 4 172 plastic Models 5 Three Thousand Not Out 6 Webb Warship plans 7 Mr. Potter and the Battle class 8 USS Wolverine and Sable - paddle-wheel training carriers 9 Too real? 10 Reply to Q class destroyer colours 11 damaged ships 12 Damaged Ships -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD INDEX 1 Comics for sale ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From Steve Guzy Subject Skywave/Pitroad Web Site I have not been able to access their English language site for several weeks. Does anyone know if their web address has changed or if they are just down temporarily? Thanks Steve ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From David Wells Subject Re Japanese Warship Design Michael McMurtrey wrote >> I have some questions for all you experts out there on Japanese warships of World War II << I'm hardly the world's foremost authority on IJN ships, but I'll give it my best shot. >> 1. Given the influence of the Royal Navy on the Imperial Japanese Navy and the fact that many early Japanese warships were designed and built in British shipyards, were Japanese warships of World War II designed to English or metric measurements? << I'd guess metric. Most of Japan's equipment was metric. Japan officially adopted the metric system around 1920-21, though the conversion was not instantaneous. On their battleships, which also showed some British influence, their home built 16" and 18" guns were actually metric. (41 cm & 46 cm) Also, on cruisers, their guns were 200mm (at least for they Type I) and 155mm. >> 2. What about weapons? Japanese naval guns seem to be metric for the most part, but what about torpedoes? Were the '24-inch' Long Lance torpedoes really '24-inch' as most sources state, or were they actually metric? << 24 inches is almost exactly 61 cm. All of the measurements in Lacroix & Wells (no relation) suggest that the Type 93 Model 1 was designed using the metric system. (see pg 247-248, "Japanese Cruisers of the Pacific War") "There seems to be something wrong | David R. Wells with our bloody ships today" | Adm. D. Beatty, May 31, 1916 | http//home.att.net/~WellsBrothers/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From "Daniel A. Kaplan" Subject Re Japanese Warship Design Hi, Michael- To answer your questions 1) Metric measurements 2) Phrases like "24 inch" Long Lance are really English language conventions formulated postwar. To the Japanese, these torpedoes were Type 92 torpedoes with a 61cm diameter; most weapons & equipment were referred to by year (in relation to the beginning of the emperor's reign, model # and mark designation.) HTH, Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From "LES ROGERS" Subject 172 plastic Models Are there any other 172 model warships as the Revell Flower class Snowberry (or similar) available by any manufacturer to build.I found the Snowberry a delight to build as the scale is easy to handle, Thanks in advance Les Rogers ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From HGYL@aol.com Subject Three Thousand Not Out Just returned from a trip abroad (although not to Telford) and caught up with Email messages. Congratulations Shane and Lorna! I echo John Lambert's words about that first gathering onboard USS Salem but I have to add meeting those who attended the gathering in San Francisco and the wonderful parties that Jim Baumann and Katrin so graciously hosted in conjunction with the 2001 (when it was a great pleasure to meet Shane and Lorna among many others) and 2005 IFOS events at Portsmouth. The members of this list are indeed a fine group of people. Regards to all, Yours aye, Harold Lincoln ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From MRCSCARDON@cs.com Subject Webb Warship plans Are these available anymore? I recall someone posting about availability in Australia. Thank you, ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From "Tom and Cindi Gardner" Subject Mr. Potter and the Battle class Mr. Potter, could you please drop me an e-mail at the office jagco@bellsouth.net It has been a while since I last heard from you, and as we discussed, I was interested in some information you had on the Battle class destroyers. Thanks, Tom@JAG ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From "Reid, John (AFIT)" Subject USS Wolverine and Sable - paddle-wheel training carriers There was a recent thread on these interesting ships. SMMLies might not readily notice that there is an article on them in “The Aeroplane”, December 2005, pages 22-27. This UK magazine will presumably appear on news-stands in the rest of world soon. One nice island-from-flight deck shot of Sable that I have not seen reproduced before would be useful for modellers, otherwise mostly building and operational history. One note many references, including Friedman, imply that they never carried large numbers of aircraft – there’s a shot of Sable with 12 Wildcats and an SNJ tied down crossing the lake in June 45. They are folded but not dense-packed. Does anyone know whether they were used as aircraft transports at war’s end as distinct from training duties? John Reid Rome (but who was in UK last weekend) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From Subject Too real? >> the end result of a damaged ship is dead and dying men,thats not what I think we should be recreating or attempting to do. << So we should paint the decks of our ships red again? I have to disagree, I understand totally that some people want to celebrate the majesty of a warship, and the effort and expense we put into it reflects the pride in our own work and the passion for the subject, it is probably the main reason probably why we are reluctant to add different patches of grey and bits worn to primer or rust. But at the end of the day a warship is designed for battle and inevitably many of us are going to contemplate at some point trying to capture that event, and when doing so it is incumbent on us to remember modelling is an art form and when you start "beautifying" reality using art you risk glorifying war and before you know it you have the same mind set pre WW1 when the vast majority of people thought of was as a wonderful colour pageant with the uncomfortable bits safely in someone elses back yard. My current main project is a ship I remember from a glorious cruise around half the world showing the flag. But when I come to do it I will show another ship as I last saw her and best remember her, butchered with bombs, sinking and the dead abandoned in a neat row on the flight deck because the helicopters would only take the living. And if it offends anyone then I will just shrug and say, "That is how it was". If blood be the price of admiralty Lord God we ha' paid in full ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From "David Goldfinch" Subject Reply to Q class destroyer colours The problem when trying to use WW II black and white photos to work out the colour scheme is that the actual colours can "wash out" into rather strange shades. Also there is the added complication of what the light source was at the time of the photo being taken. Different shades of grey in a B&W photo can often look as if it is indeed white. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From "The code" Subject damaged ships As far as damage go..in most cases it is a subtle thing.. Weathing well I worked the deck of Nimitz and it was a grubby dirty place.. When we returned from our med cruise you could barely make out the no 68 on the bows from all the rubber and dirt ground into the deck.. cheers ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From Tom Ruprecht Subject Damaged Ships Regarding >> the end result of a damaged ship is dead and dying men, thats not what I think we should be recreating or attempting to do. << If one chooses to see things in that light, I can understand if one would model only liners, tugboats and merchant ships. It is obvious that a person who states such an opinion should not be modeling *any* warship, damaged or otherwise. I support your freedom to hold such an opinion and to choose your subjects accordingly. Rupe ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From SANDLE Hobbies Subject Comics for sale Hi all, I know it's OT, but I have just listed a bunch of comics on the SANDLE Site for those who may be interested in such things - hell we even have some Starblazers there ;-). We need to get rid of some of my collection to free up space for the business (so it's sorta on topic) and to save on extra packing when we move early in the New Year to a larger house. Just go to the Reference section of the site and peruse the second hand section. Regards, Shane SANDLE Hobbies http//sandlehobbies.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the SMML site for the List Rules, Reviews, Articles, Backissues, Member's models & Reference Pictures at http//smmlonline.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume