Jump to content

ghodges

IPMS/USA Member
  • Content Count

    6,291
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    155

ghodges last won the day on May 9

ghodges had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

468 Excellent

About ghodges

  • Rank
    Lord of the Sprue

Profile Information

  • FirstName
    Gil
  • LastName
    Hodges
  • IPMS Number
    10803
  • Local Chapter
    IPMS First Coast
  • City
    Orange Park
  • State
    Florida
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1,379 profile views
  1. Finished the Trumpy Vigi this evening. The build was more enjoyable than I anticipated, with the fit being a little better than expected. I used the Nautilus laser-cut wood re-enforcement set for the interior, since Trumpeter designed it with the traditional left/right half fuselages, which leaves the top and bottom center seams weak if not beefed up somehow. I also used a Black Box resin interior I had for it. It fit almost like a glove. The only adjustment to it was to make it mesh properly with the Trumpeter nose gear well, which had to be removed from the kit cockpit structure. The wing fold is a kit option, as are the deflected leading and trailing edge flaps. One of the major drawbacks to the kit is a lack of intake trunking....Trumpeter provides two complete engines, but they just "sit" in the fuselage interior with nothing leading into each of the engine fronts. I left the engines out and added plastic card intake covers. That meant I had to do so cutting and fitting of the engines to install the rear halves of the engine exhausts so they'd fit within the Nautilus supports; but that wasn't difficult, and also allowed me to paint and add the burner cans at the end of the build. I used MM enamels for the gloss white and 36440 Gull Gray. The metal leading edges were done with Alclad. The weathering was done with a wash made from Mig pigments dissolved in water with a drop of dish washing soap. The panel lines were done with a brown colored pencil. I used some Two Bobs decals that came with the very first issue of Aerospace Modeler magazine back in 2005. The markings are for a Vigilante based out of Albany, Ga @1970; just a few years before I lived there. Rumor had it that the Vigilante pilots would take back to back tours of sea duty just to avoid going back to small town "Allbenny"....Anyway....on to the pics! Now I have the recce RA-5C to go along with my A-5A Viglante bomber conversion I did years ago. Questions, comments, and critiques welcome as always. Cheers! GIL
  2. 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
  3. Great progress on a myriad of projects Duke! If I might suggest for the canopy glass on the Widgeon.....IF it is essentially a series of flat glass panels, then use clear packing tape. Tear off a piece and then carefully stick it in place over one side, being sure it's a part of the tape with no fingerprints or smudges. The, using a brand new blade, cut off the excess leaving a thin piece of "frame" where it's stuck to your fuselage. Then paint that thin strip of clear tape to match your fuselage. Repeat as needed to form the 3-4 panels for the canopy. NOTE: BE SURE to completely blow out and eliminate ALL dust and sanding residue from the interior before doing this! Anything left floating around inside will end up sticking to the inside of your tape glass! Hope this helps! GIL
  4. Very cool conversion! It's really nice to see some old-fashioned kit-bashing going on! Thanks for sharing! Rusty: The round circle on the canopy connects to a round device on the canopy ledge. It was present on the F-84G's, and may have had something to do with helping partially pressurize the cockpit, but I cannot remember for sure. In any case, I believe the round area provided direct access to the device. GIL
  5. JIM: the reason I asked was because there are no winners listed prior to 1992. That means there's no listing, let lone picture of the Judge's Grand Award winner (before G. Lee's name was attached to it) from '64-'91. It would seem like a good idea to flesh out the list, with pics whenever possible, in order to make it complete. It's true that the farther back you go, there are no pics to glean from the Journal, Quarterly, or Update; but that's where members such as myself may be able to help out, especially if we know what model to look for within our own private convention pics. GIL
  6. Nice! And for those who call us the I. PLANE M.S. society....only 5 or so of the past 28 Winners were aircraft..... Question: Are you looking for more past pics of winners? I may be able to provide 2 or 3 myself....and if so, who/where do I direct them to? GIL
  7. Nice heads up on the cameras! Question: Are you going to have panels open on the nose to see them, and if not (knowing how lousy most clear camera windows are on models) how will you show off those nice items? GIL
  8. Superb conversion! That's some real skill, doing that much cosmetic work and still being able to put a great looking NMF on the model. Congrats, and thanks for sharing! GIL
  9. If you, as an IPMS member are happy with how IPMS is (like Nick), and you don't care how the rest of the modeling world views us; then as mentioned above YOUR mind is made up and YOU'RE not going to change. However, DAK is absolutely correct: we have a real PR problem with too many modelers. As the saying goes....perception IS reality! You may tout the PR problem as springing from mere myth, but remember that myths usually have a truth they spring from. The idea that IPMSers are rivet counters and color Nazis springs directly from our hair-splitting competition. Sure, we can amply justify the hair-splitting. We can explain that the hairs were split over basics and not accuracy; but all that outsiders see is that we got VERY nit-picky! And even we judges KNOW of several quite famous times when the WRONG hairs were split and deserving work went by the wayside. The base of the problem has NOTHING to do with the Nats. This almost all stems from local and regional shows, as well as club meetings. That's where the non-members are in as great or greater numbers than the IPMSers.That's where the opinionated local members are who don't actually belong to IPMSUSA.That's also where the least trained and experienced judges are, which leads to questionable results which in turn leads to those horror stories about how IPMS is counting rivets and condemning wrongly painted models to a pantheon of shame. And MOST of the time, the judges making those mistakes are NOT IPMS members! And MOST of the time the attendees or local club members who are making snide know-it-all comments about models are not IPMS members (nor judges). However, since it happens under the umbrella of an "IPMS show or meeting", WE are responsible and WE get labeled. It may be wrong, and perhaps even unfair, but THAT is the reality of the PR problem. We have a label hung around our necks that cause many others to take one look at us and quickly run for cover. I share Ron's frustration in that there's no easy answer or silver bullet. This is not a problem that can be solved in a year with any sort of ad campaign or new slogan. However, I do differ in that I do believe that if we ARE willing to change and adapt, then we CAN overcome our bad press over time; and by time, I mean a decade or two. How? We need to take competition at our shows down a notch or two. We need to dial back the hair-splitting by allowing more good models to be recognized. This is why I keep touting the need for IPMS to start embracing GSB at their shows. It allows us to keep the requirements of good basics and solid building and finishing. It allows us to set standards where you have to EARN an award. BUT, it also allows us to award one model without eliminating any other one in order to do so. That elimination of so many deserving models is what makes IPMSUSA look like a dog-eat-dog "winning is all that matters" group of modelers. It will not keep us from ever needing to split hairs...but when we do split them, it will only affect the model in question, and no others! And this MUST be done from the BOTTOM up. As I said before, our PR problem stems from the local and regional shows, not the Nats. It's the local and regional shows that will need to finely hone GSB to the point that the Nats will finally adopt it as the "norm" and to conform to the rest of the country. What else? Nick had a good point....stop trying to apologize and trying to get absolutely everyone to like us! IPMS is for modelers who do like to compete! While I think we need to dial it back, I do NOT think we should try to be a display only society. What I'm for is making some changes and then proudly putting those changes out there for everyone to see. Tell people they are welcome no matter what they build (unlike many other genre-oriented clubs), but if and when you compete, we're going to demand that you meet certain standards in order to be awarded; feelings be damned. I freely admit this may or may not actually succeed. It will take years to accomplish. GSB, or some sort of less cut-throat competition will need to become the norm and the non-IPMS members who attend those shows will need to see us be less cut-throat and more rewarding over a substantial period of time. That way when the "myth" of rivet counting arises, the new comment will be: "no, that's they way they were; but since they dialed back their contests, they're not that way anymore". At least that's my hope! GIL
  10. Mike: Will there be extra Desert Bar tickets available for purchase on Thursday? I may need one if my wife decides to attend with me.... GIL
  11. Here's a link to a build review on our IPMS forum; it talks about the fit of the wings and other items....:http://www.ipmsusa.org/reviews/Kits/Aircraft/trumpeter_32_su-27/trumpeter_32_su-27.htm GIL
  12. As for me, I'm always overwhelmed by the amount of projects you have going at once! I can barely keep one or two organized! That turret does look amazing.....I was going to suggest counter-weighting the back of the guns to offset the weight of the barrels, but it seems you elegantly solved the problem! GIL
  13. Amazing work, but it raises a question....You sill have a lot of painting to be done. Do you have any special way that you will be able use to mask all of that delicate detailing? It seems simply using tape, even the lowest tack type, would potentially destroy some, if not much of it. GIL
  14. I'll take some credit for influencing (infecting?) you over the years with the desire to build such old beasts.....and this is one I'd skip! Not only did you do a great job in building and detailing an older kit...but any of those WWI designs that require rigging between the struts as well as rigging multiple wing bays is pretty much off of my list! By the way, what paints did you use for the PC10 and Clear Doped Linen? I know Humbrol makes those, but they're tough to come by down here. Did you use anything else that might be more easily available? Nice one Ron! GIL
  15. Very neat looking job! Assuming you're using superglue, what tool are you using to apply it in such a precise manner? GIL
×
×
  • Create New...