Dick Montgomery

Vallejo Washes and AK Washes.

Stunning work!.....thanks for the pics. They really help to see how the finish develops as you add color and other techniques.

Lots of nicely done mods..... looking forward to more and thanks!

Yep. That's the one. Thanks for the help. Now we'll just stand by while Maj.Kong and the crew get restocked....

Thanks for the info gents. I'll see what I can dig up.

I'm wondering who manufactures the "Major Kong Riding the Nuke" model that I've seen at a couple of model contests?

I had a WNW DVII suffer some major damage....landing gear struts broke off, some wing struts broke . I just put the model and its display case back on the shelf and didn't touch it for months. SAC came out with a set of metal replacement parts and that's all I needed. The DVII is back on its wheels and all is well.

Derek, Welcome to the forum and glad to see you're back into the hobby. If you will contact Larry Randel, he may be able to locate some other IPMS members in the Tri-City area that are unaffiliated with any clubs. There is a possibility that Larry can put you into contact with them and, as a group, it can be possible to form a club. It's worth a shot. To find Larry's email addy 1. go to the IPMS Home Page 2. Pull down the "About" menu 3. Select the "Officer Directory and Email option" 4. Larry is the Director of Local Chapters....Row 4, left side.

Very well done! I have a fondness for dino models and the skin/bone "weathering" on your Anklosaurus (is that right) is excellent!

Thank ye, kindly.

Thanks, progress has been made in that regard.

Does anyone have contact with any modelers in Bogota, Columbia, or any modeler in that general area? There is a family there that is looking to sell the modeling portion of their father's estate.

Mark, First, very sorry to hear about your health issues. I'm sure that everyone wishes you the best of wishes and thoughts, and that you will, indeed, see a West Coast Nats. Thank you for your reply to my request for an expanded explanation. In that expanded version you said, "The impression to these members was that the board didn't seem to care about ever scheduling a Nationals in a West Coast city as the attitude seemed to be that the west coast was too expensive and difficult for the majority of the members to get to." I can tell you that during my time on the EB there was no such attitude presented by any EB officer toward a bidder. Perhaps there is a different explanation, that being that when a decision doesn't meet one's expectations then a tendency would be to blame the decision makers for being biased or unfair. I submit that this is the most probable explanation for the attitude that you describe in your post. I would point out that another statement in your reply appears to contain a bias....and that statement is, "Still, I would think that if all modelers in IPMS USA were equally important to this organization, then Phoenix should have gotten the nod and Omaha gotten it in 2018" It appears that you are advocating that the bid should have gone to Phoenix even though Omaha had the better bid. Your statement shows a bias for those on the West Coast. Whether a bias favors East or West, it is still a bias, and as such, does not have a place in the decision-making process. I suggest that the better bid should always win out regardless of what part of the country it comes from. It is up to those presenting a bid to put forward a bid that they think is competitive and reasonable. It is up to the EBoard to select one bid as being superior. Not everyone will be pleased and that's the nature of the process.

Thanks Ron. (504/c/$67.39 !!!! That's funny!) Being a 501c-7 does require controls over funds and the current financial system being used facilitates that requirement. It has little to do with the Local vs National question. I know two things to be true: 1. The current system is not static. It is under constant review and revision. It is an evolutionary process and not a revolutionary process. 2. The one person who has the responsibility of monitoring and steering the convention process at the national level (which also provides guidance to the local leaders) is the 2nd VP. The current 2nd VP is the person who, in my view, knows more about the convention process and its evolution to its current status than anyone else in the Society. And the only person who has announced their candidacy for that office has a wealth of experience gained from his role as a leader in a convention that was a huge success. The office of the 2nd VP is, and will be in the immediate future, in experienced and knowledgeable hands. It is unimportant that I may, from time to time, disagree or question a decision made by one or both of these gentlemen. The main point is that I have immense respect for their knowledge, for their experience, and for their judgment. I trust them to make the proper decision, based on those characteristics.

So, it appears with the information and map presented to this point that there is no concerted effort on the part of the EB, or others, to prevent a West Coast Bid. In fact, the West Coast does have chapters that have submitted a bid (Thank You!...Please do it again!). A conclusion that can be drawn from this information is that West Coast Chapters can submit bids and if the numbers are good they stand an equal chance of receiving the bid.

I do not believe that this step is necessary. Let's take a slice of conventions and look at them, say............from 2000 to the most recent show in Columbus July, 2015. Identify what the most significant problems were at these conventions. In my view, the biggest issues were that the local leadership were not communicating effectively with the 2nd VP regarding their intentions and procedures. When some of the procedures went "flat", the EB in office at the time, took steps to establish guidelines and requirements that narrowed the potential for repeats of those issues. Those guidelines and requirements, still in effect by the way, have an excellent track record. So why, with a string of successful conventions, is there a need to replace local leadership with national leadership...which you advocate gets paid to do a job that is currently being done well by the locals for free?

Mark, Can you expand on the comment you made in a previous post? You said, " Another point to consider: I've heard several AMPS members got the impression that the board making the decision could care less if the Nationals was ever awarded to a West Coast city. This is this incorrect, then lets see money where mouths are; everyone knows talk is cheap." I want to make sure that I interpret your comment properly.

I look forward to the local ambience and atmosphere associated with the National Convention. I hope that future conventions continue to have that "local" appeal that may go missing if a centralized committee were to be created. I do not favor members of a future central committee getting a free ride to the convention. I do not favor a central committee being given the power to run the convention with the locals serving as minions. This centralized committee arrangement may lead to the institutionalization of a person serving in a particular role year after year. All sorts of negatives come from such arrangements in the long run, and those negatives far outweigh any positives from such an arrangement. While some bid cycles have seen only one or two bids, and some cycles have seen bids that come in very late in the cycle, no year has seen zero bids coming in, at least in "modern" history. The problem isn't a lack of a national central committee....the problem is a lack of information about bid preparation and a lack of interest on the part of a local club due to the perceived work load or lack of understanding of the work load involved in bid prep. Both of these problems are easily addressed. The 2nd VP is the person to whom questions about bid preparation can be addressed. Perhaps a higher profile on the website might lead local chapters toward the 2nd VP? Perhaps semi-annual or annual email reminders to that effect can be sent to the chapter contacts by the DLC or 2nd VP? Perhaps a reminder in the Journal, which provides the contact info for the 2nd VP can be printed in lieu of the Editor's column once a year? The 2nd problem, that of a lack of understanding of the work load, can be addressed, once again, without resorting to a central committee. Perhaps a Tips Sheet could be made available that would take much of the mystery out of the process and offer a rather thorough description of what is involved. I know that if I were involved in a bid prep I'd contact the leadership of the teams that ran the last two or three conventions and solicit their advice. This kind of information can be documented and provided to the "bidding public". I just don't see the need for a central committee. That would introduce problems that are best avoided and there are other workable solutions to the problems a central committee would be founded to handle.

Kev! Way to go!

Yep, Kevin. You've got it. Our trip to Columbus this year was two weeks and 5,000 miles, and 13 states. A "straight line" shot is about 2,600 so we definitely wandered around a bit. One of the greatest joys for me at a convention was to be able to spend some time in Disney World while at the Orlando convention. I spent plenty of time and not a small amount of cash in the vendor area so they got their pound of flesh, as it were. Seeing local sites is, for me, part of the experience and certainly one of the prime motivations and should not be considered a distraction.

I do not favor a single site for the national convention, or even a rotation through three sites. (West, Central, East) I believe that we would see a decline in attendance, a centralization of location of winning entries, a very rapid burnout of the local club(s), and a social and organizational stratification of membership based upon whether one is a member of the host chapter or non-host chapter. None of these problems currently exist due to the location of a national convention. They will become issues if IPMS goes to a single location. I agree with Vlad.

Nice "bit o' armor" there Michael. I was recently in Jackson and Memphis, on my way home from the IPMS Convention in Columbus. I enjoy the scenery there immensely. Welcome to IPMS and to the forum.

Income, much less profit, does not come solely from members. Consider that there is an amount of "Day Pass" traffic who are not IPMS members, and then there is income from vendors. An attendee can determine if pricing for accommodations, banquet, and any entry fees are out of line by simply comparing these expenses with the same expenses from previous conventions, or if available, numbers from non-IPMS conventions in the same facilities with the same room/night scenario.

I can speak from my own experience as one who made decisions regarding bids. I never saw any hint of "by default" voting that discriminated against any area of the country. If your intention is to claim a bias toward Central/East coast bids then you are in error. Clearly, not putting together a bid package out of concern of losing to some other club will result, 100% of the time, that the "some other club" will received the bid. Put together an excellent bid package or don't. It's a choice.

I remember the OKC Nats as being an excellent experience and very well executed.