Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Yesterday
  2. Last week
  3. Thanks Bill. All the sub assemblies have been completed. The missiles took quite a long time to paint and apply decals. I got this kit at a swap meet from a vendor. After a closer inspection of the kit, I noticed that it had been subjected to a lot of moisture. There was actually a light film of mold on top of the decal sheet. With a damp rag, it wiped right off. The staples were rusted on the instructions. The decals were a challenge. I experimented with pre-shading on the rudders, and elevators. I did something pretty stupid. I assembled the wings with the leading edge slates installed , WITHOUT looking at the instructions first. When it came time to attach the wings to the fuselage, they would not fit. After using a few #11 blades to carefully remove the slates and some sandpaper, the problem was fixed. I'll never do that again. Regards Christopher
  4. Looking great so far! As for another big kit, it isn't...it's ultra big. Cockpit looks fantastic. Bill
  5. This build is the 1/48 Hasegawa Ki-45 Toryu (nicknamed “Nick”) and the scheme is the Manchukuo Air Corps version. The Ki-45 is a twin engine heavy fighter and was used for ground attack and as an interceptor. Manchukuo was a puppet state of Japan in located Manchuria that aided Japan in their Indo-China operations and later intercepting U.S. B-29’s that were fire bombing Japan. For this build I will be using the CMK resin cockpit detail set. I started by removing all the parts from the resin casting. The cockpit tub required very little trimming to fit in the fuselage. After some detail painting and adding some photo etch accessories I started installing the cockpit. I then found some errors in the CMK instructions. The first was the instructions show the dashboard mounted too far forward and does not show the control pedals. I had to remove it then relocated it to the correct position and added the control pedals. The second issue is the instructions do not inform you that the top of the dash on the kit needs to be notched in order to fit the cannon gun sight. Once these minor issues were corrected the cockpit tub fit in without any problems. I am now moving on to the wings and engine/landing gear bays. You can follow along on my blog in the build log at https://davidsscalemodels.com/build-log/1-48-ki-45-toryu-nick/
  6. Took several reloads just to read this message. Edit: and the submit button took about a minute to post this response.
  7. Just had the same problem, and it's not the first time. The message also says our site is taking too long to respond, so that's the reason given for not connecting. Ed
  8. Actually, any ranking would be by the individual entrant. It would be a personal choice same as in other groups. There may need to be a provision for those that need to be move to a high skill level, but like winning in the shallows. Why? If the choice is a personal one, why would you resent others who whish to play in deeper water. The real problem will be those who think they are grand masters when they are actually dilettantes. Those will be the types the most resentful. I have always said the OOB stuff is outmoded and should be eliminated. This would absorb some of the cost, if any. OOB would no longer be needed because there would be a place for those to enter without having to swim with the big fish. While I agree with the basic premise, I have found in application it doesn't hurt to remind people to do things. Like making sure the breaker is tagged out before working on a system. Some people always need that reminder. If putting up a sign at a show, or a paragraph in the newsletter, helps reduce the unhappiness of those that enter the contest, it is a cost effective why to go. Dak
  9. Lately, when I access the site I often get the above message. It will go away after reloading once, sometimes twice. I don't know if it's on my end or if it is the site. I don't have issues with other sites though. Just a head's up. it might be nothing.
  10. We all know that people won't read the rules. So, that's on US? No, it should be put on THEM. They don't "win" and want to grouse? "Hey, read the rules. If you had read the rules, you would know how we evaluate models." Done often enough, the point will be made. As for the "sloppy insignia" and the like, YES, that's why you should document EVERYTHING on your model. Here's the deal--if it comes down to two models for the top spot, the one with sloppy markings gets relegated to Second in my book UNLESS the person who built the model tells me it is supposed to be like that. If they don't, sloppy paint is one of the evaluation criteria, no? Could we do skill levels as the system is now? Sure, but it needs to be developed and thought out better than the "Premiere" awards from several years back. If ever a system was devised to give "participation awards", that was it. I have already addressed the awards at the National level--let IPMS/USA develop a "field award" (medals are cheap--I pay about $3 each on an order of 300, and that can serve two shows), and use it from show to show. Buy in bulk and save, as it were. When you buy in quantity, you have a reserve for one show, and (since they're not dated or otherwise tied to any one particular show) you can use the surplus for the next show. Yeah, I know--"I got the same crappy award last time!" THAT right there is why IPMS needs to re-evaluate the system. It isn't--or shouldn't be--about the awards. It should be all about the models. A Master level shouldn't create animosity. Done properly, it should act as an incentive to build better models. But HOW one achieves Master must be examined carefully if IPMS wants to go that way. Whatever system IPMS chooses to use, they need to involve the membership, and have the membership buy into it.
  11. In southeastern Poland runs the beautiful, but powerful San River. The San winds its way through the steep mountain gorges on its way to the Vistula River. Before it gets there, the river widens and is used by a number of hamlets along its banks to power various watermills and all manner of machinery. Some of that machinery is diminutive lathes and the other assorted machines common to a tool and die maker. It is within this environment that we find ourselves in the company of a number of gnomes working diligently on various tasks. It is this skilled work force that Master Model of Poland utilizes to manufacture their ever-expanding line of small scale, after-market brass replacement parts. One of Master Model's newer items is a set of gun barrels (three), antenna base, and pitot tube for a 1/144th scale MiG-15. While these items will work nicely for any small scale kit, the one kit that I immediately thought of is the lovely series of MiG-15 offerings from Eduard, for which this particular set of brass replacement parts seems to have been designed. read more View the full article
  12. Monowheel Background (from the instructions) Lois & Co. was a British industrial combine, a group of businesses manufacturing military and sporting bicycles, motorcycles, iron castings, machine tools, and hard chrome process. It was founded by Spencer Lois, who had a passion for new innovative ideas, in the city of Birmingham. Motor bicycles were added to bicycle products in 1910. The Lois & Co. Monowheel Mk.I was exhibited at the 1913 Olympia Show, London for the 1914 season. In November 1916 Lois & Co. launched their first military monowheel after a big contract with the British Ministry of Armaments. read more View the full article
  13. Personally, I like the skill level idea. I remember my very first contest of ANY kind...which just happened to be the 1978 IPMS Nationals in Atlanta. To say I was in over my head was an understatement! The skill level idea does open up other cans of worms..... 1) The first "gut" reaction would be that we need to triple the categories.... needing one each for the levels of "novice", "intermediate", and "master". That's not really true of course, since you could design the novice AND master cats to be more general on the theory that those two will have the least amount of people in them by comparison. 2) "The awards costs would be too much"....true, if you simply tripled the standard Nats awards....but why do we have to do that? IF (and I say IF) we were to go to 3 levels of competition, then you have 3 levels of awards: Certificates for the novices, ribbons for the intermediates, and medals/plaques/trophies (whatever) for the masters. This saves money AND also gives an incentive to move up in the rankings. 3) "There'll be a resentment to being "ranked" by your building ability within IPMS"....could be....but then isn't there an un-official ranking among IPMSers now? Don't we all KNOW who the honchos are? And based on our own personalities, don't we either admire or resent their "celebrity" and ability to repeatedly win? And if IPMSUSA was to allow you to select the ranking you compete in to BEGIN with (until you rise by dent of winning), then how could you complain about having to compete on the level you chose? 4) "Creating a MASTER CLASS of builders will create resentment among the lesser members"...sort of a caveat to the above...and I think it's disproved by the many other societies that DO have "master modelers". They're generally admired and the desire to join THEIR ranks is the general reaction to being in their club, competition, and company. I'm not sure it could be done at this late date, but I do think the idea has some merit. If YOU think back on your decision to join your local club and IPMSUSA, I'm betting there was some intimidation you had to overcome. "I can't join them...THOSE guys are good and know what they're doing"! It's the same when it comes to contests....you have to overcome the intimidation of going up against "honchos" and learning to swim in the deep end as things are designed now. Adding skill levels lowers the level of intimidation, allowing newer members to start in the shallow end if they feel the need to build their confidence before stroking for deeper competitive waters. Gil
  14. I was contacted by this company as a result of the Chattanooga folks having reached out to them for raffle items. They are offering a discount to IPMS members on an extensive catalog of aviation, armor, marine and figure kits made in Bulgaria. The entry point for the discount is a bit steep but it includes free shipping, so if a Chapter were to get together and make a group order substantial savings could be realized. Here's their website: https://modelsvit-eshop.modelsvit-shop.com/en And the offer is as follows: 10% discount on retail prices on our web-shop + free delivery to USA – for orders above 500$; · 15% discount on retail prices on our web-shop + free delivery to USA – for orders above 720$; · 20% discount on retail prices on our web-shop + free delivery to USA – for orders above 1000$; John John Noack IPMS/USA First Vice President
  15. Is the tour to Huntsville still a go? Mike
  16. Absolutely true, but there is a difference between putting something in the rules which a large number of people NEVER read and say posting a sign at the registration desk telling people to note out of the ordinary stuff, or the judges may consider it a mistake. This needs to be a deliberate public campaign within IPMS, not just a note in the rules.That is my point. This all depends on your point of view. I have always viewed such things as part of craftmanship because we....IPMS.... are predominately historical in our subject matter. Even the Sci-Fi types will have fits if you mix Star Trek and Star Wars. If you are going to allow anything anywhere, then why consider "craftmanship" at all. Go ahead, let the builder do crude, hand painted markings....maybe the ground crew was in a hurry and didn't have time to do it properly; maybe the stencils were blown up in an air raid. Maybe some other pilots painted a finger print on the canopy as a joke and the builder is just duplicating that effect. What if an extraneous decal got place in an odd spot.....like a RAF tail flash slipping to the horizontal stabilizer? Is that something to give the benefit of the doubt? I have a picture of a real drop tank with the FWD arrow pointing to the rear. If I saw this on a model, as a judge, I would like to know if this was deliberate or not. A good friend of mine recently put some fuel tanks on his Mig-21 backwards. He did a smash up job and they looked very nice. Do we just ignore things like that? Many things are to strange to be believed, but nothing is too strange to have happened. It is not just quality of the application of parts and markings, but getting them in the right place going the right direction, which is good craftmanship. Sure, I want to know what was scratch or modified, but I have found many seem to believe giving a rivet by bolt account of the construction is helpful, which I don't find the least bit helpful. If someone is doing a Type 21 Zero in Defense of the Luftwaffe markings, I'd like to know the origin of the markings. Particularly, if it is up against a perfect Fw-190D in the same markings. It could be done within the current system; there is no reason to go to a GSB system to address skill level. Dak
  17. Regarding accuracy and reference material, since we are explicitly not judging based on accuracy, then while it can be interesting, the only time that extensive documentation of historical material would really matter would be if you are intentionally trying to do something that is accurate but which could be mistaken for poor craftsmanship such as markings that were hastily applied in the field, surface detail that happens to resemble mold lines, etc. Rather, I think it is more important to include details of the build on the entry form. As both a judge and an passer-by, I find details info such as which parts were scratchbuilt or modified, how you achieved certain effects, etc. to be more informative and interesting than proof that this specific tank with this specific serial number had this specific marking on this specific date. Also, "showing your work" helps with judging scope of effort. This then brings up the question of, if we are not judging for accuracy, does it really matter whether something is a "what if" or not? And do we really need to have separate categories for this sort of thing? If I did a Mig 29 in the colours of the air force of Tannu Tuva, would it make more sense for it to be compared to other modern jets of the same scale, or to a biplane in the colours of a fictional country from Tintin? Of course, this, and the issue of skill level that was raised, could be both addressed by going to GSB, but that's a whole other topic.
  18. All the things you noted in the first part of your post has been addressed in the Modeler's Guide to Contests: Accuracy. Absolute accuracy is a noble, but probably unattainable, goal. Despite the fact that no scale model is ever 100% accurate, some people urge that models be judged principally on their accuracy. This is a real minefield. While gross inaccuracy is easy to spot in some instances, the situation quickly becomes murky past obvious things and can lead to unfairness in judging. For example, suppose one of the aircraft judges spent the better part of twenty years as the crew chief of a particular aircraft. That judge will probably be able to find inaccuracies of one sort or another on every model of that type of aircraft entered in a category. But, there's a real risk he will unfairly penalize those who entered those models if he judges solely on the basis of accuracy as he can readily spot their flaws while he may miss inaccuracies in other aircraft types with which he does not have the same level of expertise. Along the same lines, modelers who know the minute aspects of a subject often mistakenly believe judges also have similar detailed knowledge. This may or may not be true. It's simply not possible for all IPMS judges to match the expertise developed by our disparate and incredibly knowledgeable membership. The Chief Judge and Class Head Judges take pains every year to remind the judges to be aware of these problems and to be fair to all on this issue. You can also help yourself by not assuming the judges know all the details you know. Help them and yourself by putting such information on the entry sheet or any other display material you put with your model. Judges are instructed read that stuff and it could make the difference for you. Lest we get too wrapped up in the accuracy debate, remember that IPMS/USA judges concentrate first on the modeling aspects. A model with every component built absolutely accurately probably still won't win if seams between the components aren't filled properly. Conversely, a superbly built model containing an inaccuracy could win if it is, in all other respects, the best model in the category. Dual national insignia, King Tigers in North Africa--those are all accuracy issues, not craftsmanship issues (modeling aspects). The problem, as it has always existed, is that people don't bother to read the rules--even when doing so could greatly improve their chances. Cheers! R
  19. Someone suggested https://ghostmodels.com but I'm not sure they buy collections... Eric
  20. Thanks Gil! I appreciate the comments and compliments. I'll file that idea away for another build as this bird has a curved canopy with no frames on it.
  21. Ed is is magnificent! I am amazed at how closely those wings and intakes look like the ones on the prototype F-105. Way to go Ed!
  22. That's one beautiful bird man! You've captured the essence of that aircraft. Way to go.
  23. I have participated in three types of judging methods in the past two weeks. In one, Oklahoma's SoonerCon, I was also a judge. One thing I noted as a judge was the reticence of many entrants to fill out any notes on their model, even when the model exhibits out of the ordinary features like duel national markings. This always puts the judges in a difficult position....if the model is well done, but grossly incorrect in a big way.....the judges must decide how that effects craftsmanship. If they ignore the faux pas, then many will think the judges are no-nothing idiots. If they figure it in as a demerit, then the builder says they were elitist and rivet counters. While I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt to some areas and subjects, certain outrages are too far out. Things like Tiger II tanks at El Alamein, A6M5 in Russian markings at Stalingrad. I have no problem with weird stuff, but there are categories for that. Encouraging contest entrants to let the judges know what they are looking at and what the builder was trying to do, would go a long way towards helping the judges make better decisions. Another thing I noted was that the non-IPMS groups often take into account skill level. When everyone starts talking about GSB vs 123, they don't seem to mention skill level. I am positive this effects some people. A newbie who enters for the first time and gets thrown in the deep end with the old hands can feel really worked over when they don't place. (Sometimes they win big, which is even worse.) So, perhaps rather than try to change our awards system, we should look at modifying it to take into account skill level. Novice, advanced, and master, for example. Less ridged judging for the newbies and tighter for the masters. Thoughts? Dak
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...