Subject: SMML VOL 3086 Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 01:44:52 +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 Gentlemen, PLEASE! 2 "Good" and "Accurate" models and kits (was HMS Nizam) 3 Trumpeter Hood's imminent arrival 4 USN S-Boat Submarine Colors, P.I. 12/8/41? 5 HMS Welshman Camouflage 6 HMS Nizam ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From "Danny Blackburn" Subject Gentlemen, PLEASE! The "HMS Nizam" affair has begun to turn into a personal shoot-out. Both sides present valid points, but let's not get any further into these personal aspects, shall we? It detracts from the issues at hand! I cannot speak for other subscribers, but I am definitely seeing diminished returns for the amount of ongoing text invested in the thread. Please, let's move on....k? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From Dave Swindell Subject "Good" and "Accurate" models and kits (was HMS Nizam) I have to say I disagree with some of Leslie's definitions and arguments regarding "good" and "accurate" models and kits. A kit can be judged whether it is good bad or indifferent on the quality of the parts supplied, how well they fit together, ease of assembly, the instructions and information supplied, the packaging it is supplied in and the after sales service and support provided by the manufacturer. Accuracy is irrelevant in this analysis, a kit is still good if its parts are well moulded, fit together easily as shown by clear instructions even if it is inaccurate. A model can be judged whether it is good bad or indifferent on the quality of workmanship and finish of the completed model. Correct assembly of parts, filling of seams and blemishes, quality of paint finish, application of decals and rigging etc. will make or break a model, and this is what nearly all competitions are judged on. A well finished inaccurate model will beat an accurate model poorly finished every time. Determining whether a kit or completed model is accurate or not one would think would be a simple exercise, however this is not always the case. Published data and plans often have conflicting information, and indeed builders plans and the actual prototype often differ. If the basic dimensions, outlines and proportions are close to published data, is a model or kit accurate? Is a model that is very close to the published data but devoid of detail more accurate than one which only loosely fits the data, but has every last door, hatch locker and gun shield included? Some kits can be at best described as a fair un-detailed approximation and will build up easily out of the box into a recognisable model of the subject, whilst another highly detailed and allegedly accurate kit is virtually un-buildable. Accuracy is usually discounted in competition as the judges don't have the time, references or broad expertise to judge all models to the same standard. Glaring errors on well know subjects may get penalised, but small dimensional differences between two models of the same ship would most likely go unnoticed, and even if noticed a judge would be hard pressed to determine whether one was correct or both were wrong. So, what's my point? Whether a kit or model is "Good" or "Accurate" is for the most part a subjective judgement by the reviewer. With the quality of kits on the market today two different kits of the same or similar subject will have pros and cons which may lead reviewers to different conclusions. It is then up to the reader to decide what they want from the model and whether it will satisfy their needs. I would encourage different points of view being expressed, especially if the authors give the reasons and sources for their verdicts. However, I would discourage reviewers from straying from the product they are reviewing and airing personal opinions of other reviewers and their motives in a public forum such as this. It doesn't do anything for the reviewers concerned, or the list; if you must continue a personal debate, I would suggest personal email would be more appropriate. Remember, the object of the hobby, whether you're building for competition or to put a model on the shelf that no-one else will see, is to have fun and enjoy it. Dave All too often at sea ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From martz58@ihug.co.nz Subject Trumpeter Hood's imminent arrival With the imminent arrival (according to retailers) of HMS Hood in 1/350 scale by Trumpeter it would be great if some well known and knowlegeable modeller was able to do a quick "In box review" ASAP for all us modellers out here who want to build her. I note that some retailers are offering the kit at variances of US$50.00 from the top to bottom price. I understand that this is a good marketing ploy to get the buyers in. What ever the price is? This much anticipated kit of a very famous Battlecruiser, we are all, (I'm sure) eager to get a handle on it's in box quality. Graeme Martin www.shipmodels.co.nz ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From Ned Barnett Subject USN S-Boat Submarine Colors, P.I. 12/8/41? I just finished the brand-new Osprey book on US Submarines 1941-1945 (which, by the way, is one of the best short reviews of the technology, tactics and operational use of USN Subs out there - highly recommended if you want a nice, concise booklet on the subject), and was reminded again that I do not know what color scheme the six USN S-Boats in the PI used on day-one of combat. The Osprey book shows a pre-war photo of one of them, in the light-gray-over-black scheme (with pendant numbers on the conning tower) - but by 12/7/41, I understand that the Pearl fleet boats were in Measure 9. Anybody got solid info? I'm building the 1/350 resin S-Boat, and want it right for the Asiatic Fleet on the day the war started. Thanks Ned ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From Sanartjam@aol.com Subject HMS Welshman Camouflage Hi, I recently purchased the White Ensign 1/350 Abdiel, and am very, very pleased with it. I am thinking of building it as the Welshman with the three- or four-color camouflage pattern she carried. The pattern is different from the one the Abdiel carried in 1943. Does anyone have any thoughts as to what colors were used in the pattern? There doesn't seem to be a very dark color such as MS1. There are photos of the Welshman in that pattern in the Warship Profile on the Abdiel class. Thanks! Art Nicholson ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From "Christopher & Kayo" Subject HMS Nizam A photograph? There are 12 photographs all with enough detail and clarity to judge the quality of moulding. We also have a scan of the instructions and a view of the etched brass. As I have noted it offers no improvement. Note I did not say that White Ensign was better than the Niko just that there was no improvement. I also did not try and get anyone to buy either model. Loading davit? To help you recall what I actually wrote I am reprinting the section on accuracy >> The rear area is a mess - the wings of the aft deckhouse did not have supports and no liferafts were located there. The TSDS is incorrectly represented (the third depressor paravane is missing) but this is a flaw shared with the White Ensign version. Also the platform between the mast legs is missing. This model will build an early Juno, K class or N class. For the other early J class ships you would need the White Ensign model which includes the funnel with the galley funnel moulded on it. The colour scheme is also wrong - JKN ships did not have green coverings on their weatherdecks - it was grey. << The quarterdeck is a mess - it is not correctly represented at all - ask yourself where the depth charge outfit is. The TSDS depressor paravane is missed off entirely - this weapon system was a vital part of these ships function and should be included correctly. Given that I took the trouble to write a book on these ships in which I presented all the information with accurate drawings of the relevant areas this slackness is not acceptable - the book was published by a respected maritime publisher and is easily available. If Niko could not afford to buy a copy there are ways of borrowing it. This is an expensive resin model - it is not a mass produced item where compromises usually have to be taken. When you buy a resin model you pay for accuracy otherwise why spend the extra money - why not buy a Matchbox Kelly? It is basic and needs work but yes you can correct it and it builds into a nice model. You can build the leader and the basic destroyer from the same kit. It is also cheaper. Once again I will return to the point why post photos of a model on your website unless you intend people to judge it? Especially clear photos. >> You say that they put clear and detailed photos on their site so the buyer can make a decision and then say they are trying to hide information? Make your mind up. << What are you talking about? It is clear that your knowledge of the subject is limited. Your comments show that you do not have the background or level of research to comment about the topic and as you go on this becomes clearer. You also do not know how to evaluate photographs. Now this may sound harsh but the truth often is - take a look at the photos - take a look at the White Ensign model. You will see no difference between them in moulding quality. In certain parts White Ensign is better and in others Niko is. This kind of information can be extracted from photographs with ease. Read some naval books and see just how much information can gleaned from black and white photographs - you will be amazed. Modern colour photographs are easy by comparison. Go and learn about the subject (about how important TSDS was for British destroyers) - learn how to evaluate photographs - then you will be able to offer something. And please understand this is not a matter for relativism - if you have the knowledge your opinions can be treated with respect but if not then you do yourself no justice. Christopher ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the SMML site for the List Rules, Reviews, Articles, Backissues, Member's models & Reference Pictures at http//smmlonline.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume