Leaderboard

My model is the Italeri 1/72 scale Fiat CR-32 Chirri." It represents an aircraft assigned to XXIII Grupo Caccia, Aviazione Legionaria. The unit was led by Lieutenant Colonel Andrea Zotti and based at Puig Moreno, Spain, June-July 1938. The unit formed part of the Italian contingent fighting for the Nationalist cause during the Spanish Civil War. I used the Osprey Fiat CR-32 Aces of the Spanish Civil War (Aircraft of the Aces 94) for inspiration; profile 28. I wanted to model Zotti's aircraft; he flew "3-4", but I only had the decals for "3-6". The model was built out-of-the-box except for the rigging. Took me 3-months to figure out I can't paint Italian camouflage with an airbrush freehand and another 3-months and a lot of Tamiya tape to manage that effort. I enjoyed the build; never worked harder to complete a model...

This is the Platz 1:72 kit with Eduard photoetched interior panels, modified control columns, and True Details seats. I added wiring the seats, scratch-built the canopy piston housing and the canvas cover over the rear panel from CA-impregnated tissue paper, and cut the kit canopy. The wheel wells were detailed and the airbrakes were re-built and their bays were detailed. Anti-torque scissors were stolen from an F-80 photo etched sheet. The decals were sourced from 14 different sheets from Iliad, SuperScale, Fox One, AeroMaster, an Italeri B-66, and even a MicroScale railroad sheet. Weathering was limited to a wash and some scuffing on the non-skid panels. I finished it just in time for a club contest - but, since only four or five people finished their T-33s, the contest was moved to March!

http://culttvman.com/main/a-modelers-guide-to-painting-the-starship-enterprise-by-gary-kerr/ http://culttvman.com/main/a-modelers-guide-to-painting-the-starship-enterprise-pt2-by-gary-kerr/

Happy New Year! This will be my first build of 2020. It is the Hasegawa 1/48 AH-64D Apache Longbow Attack Helicopter. I will be adding details from the Eduard photo etch cockpit detail set, the Master Model chain gun detail set and using the decals from the IPMS 2010 National Convention. This set covers the AH-64D Apaches from the 1-285 Aviation Battalion of the Arizona Army National Guard. The specific aircraft will from Charlie Company Lobos. Starting with the cockpit, The Eduard set comes with placards for the display screens for the dash. These were cut out and trimmed to fit. A few photo etch accessories were added to complete the dashes. The control pedals and seats were then added to the cockpit tub. The cockpit tub was then installed into the fuselage along with the engine and base of the rotor assembly. You can follow the build in my build log at https://davidsscalemodels.com/build-log/1-48-apache-longbow/

The Hasegawa 1/48 AH-64D Apache longbow is now complete! As typical with most Hasegawa kits this one went together very well. The kit decals that I used worked very well and the IPMS 2010 convention decals worked out perfectly. The detail of the kit is very good by itself. The photo etch set add the super detailing and the Master Model chain gun is great. If you are looking for a nice kit of the AH-64D, this is the kit I would recommend. Thanks for following along. See you next week for the next build. You can see the entire build from start to finish in my build log at https://davidsscalemodels.com/build-log/1-48-apache-longbow/

Hard to believe how old this kit is, but you made it great. Your motto should be MAGA 'Make Aurora Great Again".

The ancient Monogram HU-16E Albatross, built OOB. Markings are USCG early 1960s, from the Print Scale sheet. The mold dates from 1957, kit was real pain to build. I glued the “moveable” gear in the down position to make it sturdy, and added some lead shot to keep the nose down. Paint is Tamiya white and some of my hoarded MM “Coast Guard Red-Orange” from their discontinued Marine colors line. All the orange bands and black stripes were painted- lots of masking there! I was impressed with how well the Print Scale decals went down over the big rivets... DUKW is the Italeri kit, in USCG colors from the same period....also OOB. Photo courtesy of Pip Moss.....

The next build is an F-16C from 61st Fighter Squadron. I am using Tamiya’s F-16C as well as Ares resin accessories. The Ares accessories include the resin cockpit, resin wheel wells, and the resin exhaust. This is a commission build for a veteran who worked with the 61st FS at MacDill AFB in the 1990’s. The decals for this will be custom made for this aircraft. To start with I washed, trimmed and shaped all the resin parts. The ejection seat uses photo etch details like signs, seat belts, and handles. It was weathered with pastel chalk. Moving to the dashboard I used a photo of a real F-16C dash and made decals for the digital screens. Added some photo etch details and detail painted the rest. For the cockpit tub I added the photo etch details and detail painted the knobs, switches and joystick. The cockpit side walls were added completing the cockpit. There will be some trimming required to fit the resin cockpit assembly into the fuselage which I am working on now. You can see all the other photos in my build log at https://davidsscalemodels.com/build-log/1-48-f-16c-from-the-61st-fighter-squadron/

I just got my first box of True North paint in. Haven't used it yet and know nothing about it beyond their website and a couple of telephone conversations with the company president. I'll let you know what I think about it as I start using it. About all I can tell you right now is that I'll be using it in my next Modelbuilding Guide ebook, I opened a couple of bottles and I like what I see, definitely thick enough to hand brush nicely, still thin enough to airbrush without being prethinned AND it isn't an acrylic. Oh, yeah, one more thing. The FS numbers are on the back of the label in font that's large enough to actually read. Odd place, you say? Well, it beats having it squeezed down to the point you need an Optivisor in order to read it on the front of the label.

Here are some more photos of the build. The model was pretty easy to paint; overall MM Acryl Army Helo Green (FS 34031) on the outside and on the inside I used Tamiya NATO Black. Other shades were also used to break up the overall colors. The inside of the engine area was MM Yellow Zinc Chromate with a mist coat of fluorescent green from the square bottle in the transmission area. Adding the Zactomodels exterior set really helped the kit also. So, here they are... I used Lite Bright pegs for the screens on the IP. I wired up the Disco Ball and the tail area. On the rotor, I placed dots of red, blue, green and yellow with a toothpick for the maintenance indicators. I also made umbilicals from the fuselage to the weapon stations. After everything was together I gave it a dry brushing with Tamiya weathering powders.

Dang Nick....learn the difference between a VALID question and a complaint.....All of us know how well our volunteers do. Gil

I thought long before writing what I am about to write, but finally decided that I would do so even if I take flak for it, or risk crossing a line. I do not understand why this question was started here on the IPMS/USA website, or what it has to do with GENERAL MODELLING, All About Building Models. How does asking this question relate to building models? We are not supposed to bring politics into discussions on this site, but that is where this thread appears to be headed where people state their personal biases on what they do, or do not build and then make comparisons to current politics as justification. I do not believe that anyone has deliberately tried to be insulting, but I have read comments that I believe are biased and if I were thinned skinned could cause insult, and for that, and the above reason, I do not think that these types of discussions belong here on a modelling site such as this one. I feel that this discussion should be shut down before it goes any further, if for no other reason that it has nothing to do with modelling. Thanks for reading, John

1/48 Accurate Miniatures Wright Patterson AFB P-51 NA prototype 1/48 Ta 1831/48 prewar Tamiya Zeke

Excellent work. Just for comparison, here's the first model of this vehicle in 1/35/2 scale, the old Monogram one. What a difference 40 years makes.

Nick, I am not the only moderator here. I can't read/moderate everything, on every forum, so I must rely on my fellow moderators to help out. Sorry if you're feeling I'm picking on you. I promise you I'm not. I can only answer for what I see. And yes, I have made mistakes or just missed things in the past and unfortunately will do so again. For that leniency I apologize, but not for enforcing the rules. I have chosen in the past, to give everyone a little leniency with the rules for the sake of debate, but apparently you are calling me on the carpet for that. So, in the future I will call it when I see it. I'm not looking for respect or anything else here. I'm just doing my job as best I can. All I ask from everyone, is common courtesy so we can all enjoy your and Dave's comments and lively debates.

OK, its not a real TNH, but the Tamiya 1/48 Panzer 38(T). The tank was developed in Czechoslovakia just before the war started. As a matter of fact, it wasn't even in service yet when the conflict began, so this example is rather spurious in its markings. The Germans thought so much of the vehicle they modified them slightly and equipped whole armored divisions with them (Rommels 7th in France for one) right up to the Russian campaign. The 37mm gun was as good or better as that mounted on any German tank at the time (with the possible exception or the Mk IV, but that 75mm was a short barreled infantry support weapon and besides that there were very few of them, even in France.) the armor was comparable and it was very dependable. The camo is typical per-war Czech camo. The little flag on the turret is from my imagination. I can't find many photos of pre-war Czech armor in Czech service, but it seems logical they would have some sort of national markings on their vehicles. I did this one strictly OOTB. These 1/48 Tamiya kits are just a delight to build. Fit is excellent and detail is very good. Tjhe length and link tracks are nicely done, but can be fiddly to get right and you can see a couple of my problem areas if you look closely. If you're not an armor builder but wonder what all the fuss is about with armor models, give one of these 1/48 kits a try OOTB. I bet you'll have fun with it.

Personally, my preference for GSB isn't based on a lack of confidence in my abilities or any other personal failing (of which I have many!). While I do occasionally have that self-hating artist streak, I will gladly enter into both 123 and GSB local and regional contests. And, not to brag too much, I do have a decent collection of hardware from both, so I would say that I can at least hold my own in my area of expertise. For me, the crux of the matter is that I believe GSB promotes and encourages a much healthier attitude towards competition and towards the hobby in general than 123.

This week’s update on the Thunderbolt is for the detailing of the fuselage. The oil cooler vents just behind the cowl, like the intercoolers, has nothing behind them and the detail kit does not provide anything as well. I searched thru my miscellaneous photo etch extras and found some oil cooler grates and used these along with some styrene stock and added details behind the vents. Then I started on the engine. For the firewall I drilled out the lower intakes and added photo etch details. I then added some photo etch details to the engine cylinders and painted them aluminum. The fuselage was then assembled and now I am working on the engine mountings and the wiring. Also I am checking out a new paint source. The interior of the fuselage was painted with yellow zinc chromate. In order to replicate this color I ended up purchasing paint from Mission Models. The color is very accurate and the paint goes on very well. For this being the first time using this brand I am very happy with the results. Will need to try other colors later. Now onto the photos. You can see more photos and details in my build log at https://davidsscalemodels.com/build-log/1-48-p-47d-thunderbolt-bubbletop/

My largest misgiving on this whole survey is that it put the cart before the horse. I stated such when work began, I said so when the questions were being written, and I'm saying it now. The first question that needed to be asked is "What does IPMS/USA envision the purpose of it's National Model Contest to be?" Does IPMS/USA want to simply pick the best models presented at that show on that day? (OR--Does IPMS/USA want to recognize well-built models and more or less ignore the rest?) If that's the goal, they already have it in the 1-2-3, comparative/triage judging currently in use. Does IPMS/USA want to aid modelers in their efforts to become better modelers? (OR--Does IPMS want to offer structured feedback and advice to the modeler in an effort to help them help themselves?) If this is where the aim is, look to the AMPS system. Does IPMS/USA want to recognize a modeler's body of work entered in a given show on a given day? (OR--Does IPMS/USA want to reward a modeler for their effort on that day?) If this is what they're looking for, check out the MMSI Chicago System. (As an aside, I note that several of the IPMS Open Judging systems in use on the local level--Jaxcon, Chattanooga, etc.--are a hybrid of all three.) Those questions needed to be asked before the survey questions were issued. They needed to be asked before the questions were written. Next, a rudimentary structure for said Open Judging system needed to be developed before the survey was released. Why? We now have four (maybe five by now) pages in this thread of "why". The way the survey is worded is akin to asking your kid if he wants baked chicken for dinner, or "something else". When the kid asks, "What's the something else?", the only answer you have for him is "I don't know, and I can't tell you until you choose it--it hasn't been defined." So, the kid either goes with chicken, something he knows and kinda likes, or--if he's adventurous--takes a stab at the pig in a poke, which could be pizza. It could be liver. Or, the kid could spend the next day speculating as to what "something else" is and go hungry. The smart kid goes with the chicken. What infuriates me is the President's Column in the July/August Journal, where Ron Bell stated that, and I quote, "We just thought it was time to get this issue settled once and for all and put it behind us, one way or another." (Emphasis is mine) What this tells me is that the E-Board has a closed mind and has no vision of growing and changing the Society with the times per the membership's wishes. This attitude, I believe, has caused people to leave IPMS/USA and go to AMPS and to other organizations (even forming other organizations--look to the South Carolina Modelers Association as an example), never to look back. I personally know at least a dozen former IPMS/USA members who left and won't come back. One (a former E-Board member, no less) once told me that he tried to change the system, but was met with, as he called it, "the IPMS/USA Good Old Boy's Stone Wall." When I asked why a stone wall, he stated that "it is cold, deaf, uncaring, and unyielding." Couple that to the IPMS/USA Chief Judge's attempts to color the current system as "The Best. Judging. System. Ever.!", and paint Open Judging as an effort to see that "everyone wins a trophy", and it indicates that the E-Board is using this survey merely as an attempt to look like they are listening to the membership without intending to change a thing. The motion will fail, then they will say "We've done that, it failed, end of story" the next time this same issue is brought up. In this thread alone, there's already an IPMS/USA Past President doing that very thing, looking back to a failed effort in 2004--as if nothing changes over time. I am a proponent for Open Judging, believing that a well developed, uniform system could yield good results over time. A well-defined, thought-out system CAN work--but it will require several things to happen. Most importantly, it requires a buy-in from the majority of the membership. If the membership doesn't believe in it, it won't matter what system is used--it will fail. It will take time and a lot of effort to change--it won't happen overnight, and will probably require a years-long phase in. Start at the local level, iron out the bugs, take it to the Regional level, work out the new bugs, then move it to the National level--where, undoubtedly, more issues will come to the fore and will need to be dealt with. Rome wasn't built in one day, nor will any sort of new-to-the-organization judging system. My vision for an Open Judging system extends to more than the Nationals--it needs to be a UNIVERSAL system, required to be used by ALL IPMS/USA Chapters at ALL IPMS/USA sanctioned contests, whether they be local, Regional, or National. Judges will need to have formal training and periodic re-training. Whatever system used needs to be applied consistently and reviewed periodically, updating it as needed. Without these things, all you will wind up with is an Open Judging version of what we have now. The current system is only required to be used at the Nationals--local contests can simply say they will hand out medals to every fifth pink model that comes through the door and call it an IPMS contest, if that's what the host Chapter wants to do. The word, and I've used it many, many times before, is Standardization. Have a standard, uniform, universal system that is required throughout IPMS/USA. "But, how can you require us to do anything?" Easy--it comes with the deal. You wanna be an IPMS/USA Chapter? You agree to the terms set out by IPMS/USA. Period. Don't like it? Don't play. But that probably won't happen. If we talk about the Chicago System, some see it as "limiting the number of models on the table"--when, actually, nothing is limited EXCEPT the fact that the entrant, if the scored model in their group scores enough points, takes home ONE award for their body of work. AMPS, likewise, encourages the entrant to self-asses their work and only enter one model per category. Why? Because they will only take home the award for their model that scores the highest in any given category, so even by entering eight M4 Shermans into Allied Armor, WWII will only yield ONE medal. "But I want the feedback!" Usually, as the models are judged, the same faults are found on all the models entered by that person. How many times do you need to read "Watch the floating tracks" before you realize that you need to do just that? The examples above also serve a purpose--it eases the burden on the judges. They don't have to judge 500+ (or 1000+, or 10,000+) models, the judging goes quickly, and the end result is the same. This is why "Display Only" has been a standard category for AMPS for as long as I've been a member. Submit your best work for evaluation, put the rest in Display Only. The goal of the show isn't about "winning" or "losing", it is about showing off your work. But I am not optimistic that any of what I just wrote will come to pass. IPMS/USA has slowly evolved their contests into bloodsport--the winner take all, "I'm the GOD OF STYRENE!" attitude has eroded any semblance of friendly competition. Even the survey says it--Advantage #2 of the 1-2-3 system is stated as "models vie head-to-head for awards, creating a healthy (really?--me) spirit of competitiveness amongst (sic) our members." And why do we feel the need to compete, anyway? I get it--'Murica and all that. But a very vocal minority has taken an enjoyable pastime and twisted it into yet another way they can climb to the top of the pile, beat their chests, and wail at the moon... I will now go back to my position of a few years ago--Exhibition only, no contest, no awards. Make it about the models, NOT the medals. After all, everyone says they enter shows to show off their work, right? So, by their own admission, the awards don't matter--and following that logic, that means the method used to determine the awards likewise doesn't matter, but some will NEVER enter a contest judged by a system they don't like. Funny, that... Club stands, SIG stands, vendors, food, and friendship. Hang out with a bunch of like-minded people and enjoy the show by looking at, talking about, and sharing techniques for scale models. Screw the contest, screw the judges, and screw the awards... Ralph

Continuing forward I assembled the wings and detailed the main landing gear bays. I assembled the rear gun using the resin version and the photo etch gun sight and mounted the cannon gun sight above the dash. I then mount the wings. Found another issue when mounting them. The kit has spars to support the wings. I ended up cutting these off the kit assembly and attaching them to the fuselage. It was not difficult and the wings lined up very well to the fuselage. The engines came then. They were detail painted and then the copper intercooler for the intake was installed. The engines were then put into their cowls and mounted to the wings. The wings were then installed and the entire fuselage was painted with the base coat. Weathered and added the belly 37mm cannon and then the landing gear was painted and installed. Next up will be the camouflage painting. You can see all the photos and details from the start in my build log at https://davidsscalemodels.com/build-log/1-48-ki-45-toryu-nick/

Scale Motorsport has just announced a new super detail set for the Revell GT 40 kit. It is not on their web site yet, but it is up on their facebook page. No information about what will be included but if I know Matthew Wells(and I do) it will be outstanding! Glad to see new product coming out! It has been a while.

Two models completed in one year so far!! WooHoo!! 😁

Kudos for one of the Head Judges and NCC member for monitoring and stepping up to answer a rules question in a concise manner. This gives us an authoritative determination of the rule, as opposed to the rest of us offering our opinions. I hope more Head Judges follow this example! GIL

It's now halfway through March and I'm finally able to post something finished. These are my two latest finished armor models . This first one is of the Military Wheels 1/72 scale Soviet SG-122. It's a 122mm cannon mounted on a PzIII chassis and hull and covered with a casemate. It was a stopgap project that only had a bout a hundred or so built before the SU-122 was accepted: The next one is the Trumpeter 1/72 scale Russian SA-6 Gainful. I made this as an East German machine that was repainted with the West German insignia after the German re-unification: My apologies for the poor pics. These look better in person. Well, that's all I have completed so far. Stay tuned, I have more to come.

Let me now provide the history of the preparation of this ballot It began after last year’s National Contest with the annual forum debate on open judging (GSB) vs. 123. I joined the discussion and innocently made what I believed to be a practical suggestion: attach a simple tear-off ballot to the National Convention Contest registration form, deposit it in a box at the time of registration and add them up. That was rejected by the IPMS leadership, but, to their credit, they asked a working group of those interested in the question to create a ballot that would be included in an issue of the Journal so members could vote. I was one of the group, as was Rusty White. Again, to the credit of the leadership of IPMS, we were to be allowed to prepare the entire ballot. Our goal was to prepare a dispassionate, objective description of each system. It would be brief, fair, balanced and unemotional. At the beginning of the preparation of this ballot, I offered to write the initial description of our current 123 judging system for this ballot. However, Rusty White, who, from the start, had arrogated to himself the position of working group leader, rejected this offer and unilaterally decided to have someone from IPMS administration prepare the portion of the ballot that would describe the 123 system for the voters. I can only assume that Rusty decided that I, who he perceived as having some deep-seated and unalterable pro-123 bias, would somehow scupper the attempt to create a fair ballot. No one else in the group was allowed any input in this decision.There was never any question about the group’s other members being able to be objective about GSB open judging. I, however, was apparently not to be trusted to be fair. The irony is that I worked as hard as anyone in the group to prepare an accurate and fair description of open judging. We argued back and forth to create what you now see as the “position paper” for open judging. I insisted, as did others, that it take the form you now see. We wanted to provide basic facts and let the members decide. The Forum can provide the platform for debate and comment. We did not want that discussion to take place on the ballot. Then, without any warning or preparation from Rusty, the entire ballot suddenly appears as you see it. The working group was not permitted to sign off on it in it’s entirety. We never would have! And that is because the “position paper” for 123 was everything the group wanted to avoid. It is not brief or fair or balanced or unemotional! It is electioneering ON THE BALLOT by the very people who will be counting the votes. If I sound like I am whining, it is because I am. I am trained as a scientist. I want facts obtained honestly and objectively. I also have great respect for fairness in any vote. This ballot, as presently constituted, is not fair and should be seen as an embarrassment to this organization! I worked hard on this project. So did the others. We deserved the opportunity to produce something we could take some satisfaction in, regardless of the outcome of the vote. That opportunity was taken away from us by the very person in the working group who assumed the leadership position for himself and got out- manouvered. Please don’t blame me. Thank you. Regards, Nick Filippone, Senior National Judge.,

I think what's interesting is that the 1-2-3 description actually is written as a NEGATIVE towards GSB! Here are some examples: 1) " Entries aren’t compared to any “ideal”, “perfect-model”, or “national-standards” criteria". Strictly speaking that's true, but they make it sound like having a standard to WIN an award (NOT enter the contest) is a bad thing. Every club that does GSB KNOWS that to be false! And there IS a Standard in GSB... Those same BASICS! 2) "Judges are your IPMS peers"... Seems to imply that GSB uses wizards or outsiders from the GSB galaxy to judge at those shows. Nope! Turns out it's ALSO your "IPMS peers"! 3) " Recording results for just the 600 winners now requires 8 staff, transcribing scoring from just 200 sheets of paper" (etc)...Implies that GSB judging would be IMPOSSIBLE at the Nats because of the logistics of how 1-2-3 is done. FAILS to point out that EVERY GSB system used or proposed does NOT use that 1-2-3 system of recording. IF GSB were ever to be used at a Nats, the system would be entirely different. 4) " How many ‘extras’ of each award level should a host chapter plan to order, ‘just in case’? Just one per category (200 more)? Two or more per category? 2,350 awards – just in case?" This next paragraph rightly points out the differences between the number of awards needed between the two systems. However, it WRONGLY implies that you could NEVER know how much you need! This is dealt with by EVERY GSB show in the nation EVERY year; so it IS something you can "learn". Would GSB be a "higher cost" system? YES! But then THAT is the crux of the debate: Should IPMSUSA look to reward MORE deserving builds than they do now? And with the profits that are being made, IPMS CAN afford to by some more awards! The debate, and the PURPOSE of this survey is to try to determine if the general membership thinks that's a good idea or not. 5) " Our convention attendees want a ‘contest’ "; THAT is a BLATANT assumption, and actually not true! There's enough of a question about that to lead to this survey being done! It also implies that GSB attendees aren't looking to "win" (as opposed to "contest" attendees). Baloney! GSB contestants want to win as MUCH as they can; they just prefer to do so while NOT "beating" anyone else, and (when they do win) not limit anyone else's ability to win. 6) " How many ‘For Display Only’ entries do you ever see at any of our conventions?" What has THAT to do with models in a CONTEST, be it GSB or 1-2-3? People who want to compete enter the show, be it GSB or 1-2-3. Those who prefer to display do that, no matter what format is being used there! 7) " Want to be the one of the few entrants not even good enough to earn a Bronze award – ‘not up to national standards’? MISLEADINGLY implies that a Standard that determines WINNERS (not the ability to enter the show) is somehow mean. Well, how does it feel in a 1-2-3 show to go home EMPTY HANDED and not knowing if you even made the cut? BOTH systems still have "losers"...but GSB will have FEWER "losers" than 1-2-3! 8- " Our contest results and awards are a fair recognition of our entrants’ outstanding model-making accomplishments" BLATANT BALONEY! In ANY 1-2-3 category with 10-25 entries at the Nats there are 7-22 that go home with NO idea of how they did!! There are HUNDREDS of outstandingly built models that go COMPLETELY unrecognized because the judges decide that there are 3 there THAT day that are "better". The "fair recognition" is ONLY truly fair for the top 3 winners! There's a LOT of advantages for 1-2-3 in IPMSUSA, and the system has some positives that make it preferable to many. There was NO need to write the above in such a negative way. Instead of touting the positives and advantages 1-2-3 offers IPMS members, it's written to PUT DOWN GSB. As the IPMS USA Chief Judge, I could understand if Mr. Persechetti wrote an enthusiastic support for 1-2-3. However, he chose to write it as a condemnation, and actually showed his ignorance of GSB in doing so. I'm greatly disappointed and disgusted with his lack of character and honesty in this matter! Gil

Trumpeter KV-5 built as a BeutePanzer. Because why not. Needs some minor clean up before paint. Added lots of pieces from the spare bin or items I recently picked up at local shows. Lionroar tow cable ModelKasten clamps Tasca jerry cans with scrap PE bracket Aber tow loops for the Tiger 1 MIG productions resin tail light Copula, Notek, horn, etc from Dragon bits and pieces Still need to make the brackets to hold the spare wheels and tracks. A couple of color studies:

Staying with the sculpts of John Dennett, I picked up his new release in the form of Ebeneezer Scrooge. This is the Alastair Sim portrayal from the 1951 film. The kit comes in just 2 parts ~ the bust and the base. The first decision was whether to do the figure in B&W or color. Despite the box art being in color the movie was in B&W. I spoke with the sculptor, who sent 2 colorized pics at the same time I found my own. This is the one I went with - Starting to add color - Then once again, I got into a groove painting the facial features and forgot to take WIP pics. I used a splatter technique on the base and then applied the woodland Scenics snow with a few layers of PVA. Thanks for looking.

Now Blue Oyster Cult is stuck in my head! Great build! Dave

Alcohol! Two parts single malt scotch to 1 part water chilled to 17 degrees Fahrenheit.

Dak, you make a valid point. However, I would suggest that it isn't limited to the IPMS/USA. The current "I'm Offended" culture that has developed in this country has to be a major factor. Keep in mind that practically anything that exists has the potential to offend anyone, but it has gotten completely out of control. Consider the efforts to make the Washington Redskins football team change their name because 'Redskins" is offensive to one small tribe. Other people are offended by the use of certain words, while others by actual historical events. Look at the complaints that started with objections to the Confederate Battle Flag...actually the Battle Flag of Northern Virginia...and expanded to statues of Confederate heros and schools that were named for men who had virtually no connection to the Confederacy other than fighting for the South. Political views are now subject to similar bias. Liberal viewpoints are widely publicized, while those of a conservative bent are castigated or banned. I was unable to market an article to a magazine I wrote for because the model in question....a Peterbilt 377 with an American Bald Eagle w/crossed American & Confederate flags on the air dam....was refused because "it might offend someone". If I did that model today as an ebook, I would be forced to apologize for it, accused of being a racist and required to remove the ebook from the marketplace. And if you want to get an idea of just how hypersensitive people are getting...as well as ignorant...I very recently had a magazine article corrected by my editor because "I've never heard of it, so I'm sure no one else has ever heard of it!" What was it? Believe it or not, a Mexican Jumping Bean. Instead, the editor changed Mexican Jumping Bean to simply 'jumping bean", thereby identifying every bean on the planet as a jumping bean! And if you think all of the above is a recent development, it's just the extreme result. Tony Weddel, a deceased aviation artist and my friend, quit doing heavy combat aviation art back in the late '70s or early '80s because he could no longer sell the art or prints. Why? Because people didn't want to purchase art that depicted violence. Result? He wound up doing pretty paintings of aircraft against storm clouds or toned down combat...unless a client specifically requested heavy combat. That, by the way, leads to your comment about viewing scenes of violence in model dioramas. Incidentally, it's also the reason why I've never created a crucifixion diorama of my own....it would offend virtually everyone who saw it. I have no idea where this is going to end, but if you build models, dioramas, articles and/or books for a living, it's already having an impact on what you can produce without offending someone. And it doesn't matter if it's a group or a single person. Dak, in case you're wondering, I'm 76 and I have no more problem viewing real life scenes than you do. I knew a preacher who I offered a copy of my P-38 CD-ROM to, warning him that it had a lot of nose art images containing pinup or semi-nude figures. His response? It's history. It'll be interesting to see what kinds of responses I get to this little tirade. Richard

Anyway, here is my last acquisition I got last year as a Christmas gift to myself. I didn't post it above because for some reason the camera could not focus on the box and all my pics were blurry. This time, after considerable effort; I have a pic to show: I had wanted that since it came out. I figured it was time since I had Christmas money to burn. I hope to get started on it this year.

What's an allowance?

Just got the Tamiya engraving set. Stupid expensive at $30.00 a blade, but far and away the best panel line engraver I own and that is saying a lot. I have a drawer full of panel line scribes. The difference is that these give you a flat bottom with square sides and no ridges on the top. They are so expensive because they are tungsten carbide and are very sharp. Don't bother buying the special handle for them. They fit in a pin vice with the proper collet. I use my large Tamiya pin vice and really like it because it has a decent diameter and with the knurling it is easy to control the angle of the blade. As to the cost, well they are $30 from Tamiya but if you shop around and buy them all together(so you only pay one shipping fee) and they can be had for less than half that. Oh and although my photo shows all 4 blades they are only sold individually and each one comes with the case for all of them. Not sure why but that is the way it is.

Seems I'm a broken record in this area with my Airfix locomotives. I get one a year and do them. Nice kits of interesting subjects and they are something different to build. This one is of a Battle of Britain Class locomotive used in the 50's and 60's. Each engine was named after a fighter base, or ace or something linked to the Battle of Britain. This one is the Biggin Hill, a fighter base around London. One quirk is that the name plate on the engine side should have an RAF blue background and not red. Other releases of the same kit have the blue, but I got 'lucky' and go the wrong color. The decals were old and yellow, so they spent sometime in a sunny window and then a coat of gloss coat to keep them from shattering.

After seeing this figure on the Nats table.....Had to have one.....

Real Life has kept me away from the workbench over the last 7 months, but more free time recently allowed me to finish the Accurate Mini kit of the Vindicator.

I did find the Batmobile on eBay for a decent price. My local Hobby Lobby has listed the Tamiya Gama Goat for $12.49 on clearance. I bought two. They were regularly $49.99 so it was 75% off.

Rusty says it best and I wish I could instill that attitude in all my model buddies. While I go to contests and enter models I no longer worry or care about not winning. I still chat and discuss when something wins that I feel shouldn't have (as all modelers tend to do). My theory or mentality is that if I win I was fortunate enough that 3 fellow model builders (hopefully) thought my entry was better than the others presented on that day and time. If I don't win.....Guess what? I will still build models to the best of my ability and will still enter contests until I can no longer build.

Latest finished piece.

Personally, I've never thought of them as smelling pleasant; just stronger or not so strong. And, I've always used enamels and lacquers which have the heaviest fumes. That said, I do have a "fondness" for the smell of paints, thinners, and glues; but I think it's simply because I associate them with the fun of model building; not with any direct olfactory stimulation. To paraphrase Robert Duvall in "Apocalypse Now"...."I love the smell of Dull Coat in the morning".... GIL

Hey Ron...First off...I think you'll enjoy build scale cars, if you like 1/1 cars. OK..to try and answer your questions... Personally... I strip all the chrome(using concentrated laundry bleach...Clorox is what I use) from every build that I do. The Chrome that's applied to most of the the kits are way too brite for the smaller scales. I will leave the chrome for 1/12th and larger builds. To re-chrome....I shoot a Black or Blue High gloss base coats. Alclad II has Chrome that has a little learning curve. You can use Alclad polished Aluminum as it works good too. I also use ALSA Mirror Chrome which has a small learning curve but does not rub off when dry. If you want to leave the chrome and just touch up where it was cut from the sprue...then you can use a small paint brush( 3 0 or smaller) and a dab of Model Master Chrome Silver #FS 17178. Model Master has another chrome paint but it's not as good. I've used both and this one works the best between the two. Put a small amount of paint in a mixing pallet and add a drop or two of Lacquer thinner. Don't mix it in just let the thinner hit the edges of the paint and then load you brush and apply to the spot on the part. NOW...since MOLOTOW has come out with 3 paint pens and a refill bottle...all one has to do is just touch the part with it and it's rechromed. But...the small down side of it is..it takes at least 3-4 days for it to dry. It's is remarkable how well this paint looks when applied. If you can work with the dry time...then Molotow is the way to go. You can do a search on the web and watch a a few videos that's out there on it. Well Ron...I hope I've shed a little light on the chrome thing for you. Just remember there's no right or wrong..it's what ever works best for you. Gary

Yeah, it was so streamlined that it hardly impeded the airflow. 😲 In a strong head wind, at max speed I think it could hover

This kit is based on the new trilogy of the Planet of the Apes, and it is an excellent story for how it all began. This is a simple kit of two parts the bust and the base. It is expertly sculpted by Mark Van Tine and casted by Paul Gill. It all starts with a black primer. The base looks like it's brickwork covered in stucco, so that the way I went. Thanks for looking.

David, FWIW, this survey has nothing to do whatsoever with IPMS/USA switching to GSB. It is merely an informational survey that the E-board asked several members put together to provide an accurate and up-to-date accounting of the memberships' judging preference. It's been a good five years since the last GSB/123 survey was done and the E-board felt it was time for another. IMHO, it should be done every five years since the membership constantly changes.

Main rotor blade leading edges took sometime to mask off, but their done. On most of the photos that I have seen, the color looks like silver with a touch of gold. I added sandpaper to the gear bays for a non-slip surface. Everything is closed up now. On the main rotor cowling, there are two round windows on the actual aircraft. I'm guessing to check fluid levels. I drilled them out, and added some clear parts from my scrap/leftover box. Forgot to added the rest of the decals to the main rotor head. Had to add nuts, and bolt heads from MENG to the rotor arms as well. The blade holders are done now to. Adding rivets took sometime. They are great to use. One thing you need to make sure before you prime, is that you blend in the edges of the decal film with Solvaset. My first time using Mr. Finishing Surfacer. I sprayed it into a plastic cup to decant it. Let it sit for about 5 minutes, then put it in my airbrush.

EJ, In the photography forum under "on the bench" there are more pics from when I started this kit back in 2014. I will add some other pictures soon. I used the Squadron "USS Wasp In Action" book for reference and internet photos. I don't know if thatSquadron book is still available. Thanks for looking. Mark, Thank you. This took on a life of it's own and I'm glad it is over. I enjoyed most of the time on it but it did get to me after awhile. Thanks Tony; always appreciated. Bill

Thanks for the tip.