Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


jpeeler last won the day on June 21 2016

jpeeler had the most liked content!


7 Neutral

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • FirstName
  • LastName
  • IPMS Number
  • Local Chapter
    IPMS Mid-Carolina/Swamp Fox Modelers
  • City
  • State
  • Gender
  • Location
    the South
  • Interests
    A little of everything, really
  1. Thank you very much, Ralph, for the kind words (I enjoyed talking with you too!). And I have all the respect in the world for what your wife did. What I do for a living (teach college) is nothing compared to what grade school teachers do, and my hat's off to anybody who chooses that as a career. But your wife doing that for 43 years is...well, superhuman levels of dedication, and worth all the admiration in the world. Which she definitely has from me. Jodie Peeler
  2. I had thought of wearing something nice to the banquet in Columbia this year, but circumstances being what they were (and knowing that since I was kinda on duty, getting too fancy would have created some problems if I got called in to do something), I decided to just swap my staff shirt for a nice top and a black blazer, and kept my jeans and sneakers. It struck a decent balance between businesslike and casual, and worked out fine since immediately after the banquet I was all over creation helping with loadout anyhow. I'm not one to tell people what they should wear, with the exception of my firm belief you don't wear a hat at the dining room table or in my classroom (and if you have a problem with that, talk to my mom and dad, who taught me that early on). I'm therefore reluctant to say there should be a dress code at an IPMS/USA banquet. I will, however, state something I tell my students while preparing them for the workforce: how you present yourself not only influences how seriously people will take you, but also indicates the respect you have for where you are, who you're with, and why you're there. Jodie Peeler
  3. I can't find the link this morning for the life of me, but a couple years back I was reading a piece on one of the car sites (may have been the Hemmings blog; may have been Jalopnik; I forget). The writer talked about the tendency for car enthusiasts to look down their noses at the teens and 20-somethings who soup up Hondas and Scions and such...but then said "Before you get too judgmental, do you remember what it was like back in our day? When we were bringing in our Impalas and Chargers and all, the guys with the Cords and the Duesenbergs were telling us that we didn't belong because we didn't have true classic cars. They were looking down their noses at us. Now that we are ones at the top of the hobby, we're making the same mistake with today's young folks. What they're doing with their cars is not that different from how we were customizing and souping up our cars back then. We may not personally approve of what they're doing, but look at what the side effects are: it's making more products available, it's making more technology possible, it's teaching these kids how to work on their own cars, and most of all it's helping encourage a new generation of gearheads." Back at the family home-place is the very first car I ever owned, a '79 Chevy Caprice. I plan to restore it someday if it doesn't rust away before I get to it. The late '70s B-bodies are very popular subjects for skinny tires, hydraulic suspensions, loud paint jobs, and so forth. There's no way in the world I would do that to my car. But I am glad beyond words that those cars are getting attention, because it means there is a market for parts and accessories that the various suppliers will eventually pick up on. And it's the same thing in our hobby. The hobby is alive - not in the way we would choose, mind you, but it's alive. I personally don't care for mecha, but it gets young people in the door, and once you learn the basic skills of plastic modeling you can build almost anything. I don't build Star Wars or Star Trek, but a terrific article in a 1994 issue of FineScale Modeler about scratchbuilding the Galileo shuttlecraft from nothing more than sheet styrene taught me how I could build anything. I don't dig World of Tanks or World of Warships, but I think Italeri's marketing tie-in with those games is a really smart move. It shows imagination - and as I've said many times, the biggest threat to this hobby is failure of imagination. Jodie Peeler
  4. Any time the subject of "why aren't we getting new blood into the hobby?" I'm always left with the same question. I see a lot of anecdotes, a fair degree of speculation, but I really haven't seen any data relevant to the question of why young people aren't getting into our hobby. And it seems to me that before we can address the issue, we need information. Or, at least, that's what I was taught back in the day. Any graduate program in any of the social sciences is going to require its students to have a grounding in social science research and stat methods. (Heck, I have two graduate degrees in journalism and I had to take stat methods. I wasn't any good at it, but I had to take the course anyway as part of my program of study.) I think that may offer an opportunity, both for IPMS/USA to get some audience research and for a graduate student to get some experience in audience research. I'd suggest that IPMS/USA approach the director of a good graduate program in social sciences or marketing/audience research, or some related discipline. Explain what we're looking for, and see if we can engage a graduate student to conduct some research - focus groups, questionnaires, the whole smash - on our behalf. The student gets experience in research (that can become part of a seminar paper or the kernel of a master's thesis, as well as something that can be presented at academic conferences and put on a CV) and IPMS/USA gets current data gathered by someone being trained in research methods and supervised by professionals. I've been in academia for more than 15 years and requests like these are common, and can lead to great opportunities for students. I doubt that IPMS/USA would be able to fund a study of this magnitude from a professional research firm, but working with grad students in the social sciences or marketing/business disciplines might be a way to get some good data so we can pinpoint the issues and put together the right plan for the future. Jodie Peeler
  5. I was hoping to talk about some of this with the marketing discussion folks at the Nationals, but anyone who's been on a Nationals planning committee knows you can never really plan to do anything while your convention is going on, because it's always something. Be that as it may, while the national organization will have a vital role to play in encouraging youth involvement in the hobby, it'll be the local chapters who really have to haul the freight. Some of the things we can all do to help (and Ralph spoke briefly about some of these in one of his seminars last week) include: - Making sure our chapter meetings are well-publicized - Making sure chapter meetings are something a parent would be okay with their kids attending - Making sure chapter meetings have some kind of constructive content that helps build skills - Working out something with local hobby shops to encourage attendance at chapter meetings. For instance, since Ralph has worked at Hobbytown, he's made a point of telling parents who bring their kids in and buy a plastic model that "we have a model club, and we meet such-and-such a location and such-and-such time," and telling them they're welcome to attend. - Focusing on encouragement and education rather than judging and critique - Focusing on participation in the hobby, and not judging subject matter. I personally do not understand Gundam, but young people love those kits, and if it gets them involved in the hobby, I'm perfectly happy and I want to encourage them. A young person who feels their choice of subject matter is being ridiculed will not come back. They don't have to build WWII fighters or modern jets to be part of our world, and we must not treat them like they have to. What matters is that they're building something. - Personal to me, because I've had this inflicted upon me countless times and I'm tired of it: don't act like a girl is some sort of exotic flower, or treat her in a patronizing manner, because she's involved in the hobby. We enjoy it as much as the guys do. (And some of us win first place against the guys in blind judging, too. Ahem.) - And overall, by being good ambassadors for the hobby. There's a hundred ways we can do that, but we need to make sure we represent a positive image of what we do, one that makes people want to be part of what we do. I could be mistaken, of course. Jodie Peeler
  6. Thank you for doing this, and sharing it. I'd love to be doing this kind of thing for our convention media feeds, but anyone whose club has hosted a Nationals knows you're always being pulled away to help solve one problem or another. You've filled the gap in a big way, and we appreciate it. I've shared the link to the convention's Facebook feed. Jodie Peeler
  7. Dave's correct. Aside from "every model tells a story" being an operational nightmare to turn into an award (how do you judge the stories? what evidence do you demand? what if a technically great model has horrid documentation? etc.), our convention theme is meant to be more than a theme and more like a philosophy that transcends competition, judging and awards. The special awards have more specialized stories that more readily lend themselves to awards, but as for the overall theme, our intent is to emphasize that every model you'll see on display, regardless of how it places or even if it places, has a story behind it and means something to somebody. And that, really, is what this hobby's all about. Or, at least, that was our thinking when we came up with the theme all those months ago. Jodie Peeler
  8. Lack of reading on the vendor's part is not our responsibility. We have done our duty by stating it (and gone beyond it by stating it several times over in unmistakable terms, and I've done everything short of putting a flashing neon sign on the website to make this clear). By signing the form the vendor indicates acceptance of the terms, and responsibility for any consequences. I hate to be this blunt, but at some point it stops being our responsibility. Jodie Peeler
  9. As the web coordinator, and the person responsible for turning most of the convention documents into "ready for prime time" PDFs, let me see: 1. On the Vendors page of the IPMS/USA 2016 National Convention website, there is a very clear reminder to all and sundry that explains a Transient Vendor License is required. It includes the words "VERY IMPORTANT" and lots of bold text in that section to drive home that this is not an optional item. We have also made clear that it's the vendor's responsibility, and not ours. 2. In the Vendor Form package (available as a PDF on the Vendors page), which all vendors had to complete, it is stated in VERY CLEAR language on the very first page that a Transient Vendor License is required and that it is the responsibility of the vendor to get that license - and the disclaimer prior to the signature line on the vendor application includes an acknowledgment that the vendor agrees to all conditions as outlined on the form. There is also a reminder on the vendor reservation form itself, and the application for the Transient Vendor License immediately follows that document. All of this has been made known to prospective vendors as far back as August 2015. In fact, we had vendors trying to submit the license applications to SCDOR back then, and I had to put a reminder on the website that it was too early to do so. I tried to make this as clear as possible on the website, and in all documents I was asked to edit and turn into PDFs - in part, because I imagined these very kinds of inquiries would come up, and in part to stave off any accusations that we were just springing this on vendors at the last moment. If we are, then I will eat my hat. I will also say that anyone who gets caught doing business without a transient vendor license at the Nationals will not have "but we weren't warned" as a defense, because the warnings were there, have been there all along, and I have the change logs to prove it. Jodie Peeler
  10. Thanks for those pictures, Steve (the peek inside the cockpit is especially good!). In the second one, if you look closely, you can see where the inboard trailing edge of the wing was enlarged. Instead of the KC-135/707-120-style trailing edge with that little curve inboard where it meets the fuselage, it looks more like what was used on the 707-320B/C. (I can't tell if it also got the inboard leading edge wing fairing that was used on the 720 and 707-120 conversions, but it wouldn't surprise me if it did.) I forget exactly when this wing modification was done, but it's a detail worth noting for anyone building a model of this aircraft. Then again, that's the fun -- this airplane flew in so many different configurations that the fun never stops. There are quite a few of it wearing a fifth engine mounted on the aft fuselage, doing testing for the 727 program. I'm looking forward to getting to the Dulles Annex someday soon to pay my respects in person. Every successful commercial jetliner since owes more than a little to good ol' N70700. jodie
  11. I believe you're right. I looked through my stuff on the -135 today, but could find no evidence of any C-135 types ever having the organ pipes of the JT3C on the 707-120s. Of course, there's always the chance they were tried on one (and if that happened, I would love to see pictures!). Though they were 707 airframes, the three VC-137A (707-153) aircraft delivered to the Air Force for VIP use in the late 1950s were delivered with organ-piped JT3Cs. They were re-engined with JT3D turbofans in 1962 or so and became VC-137Bs (707-153B aircraft). To make things even more of a headache for the 707 modeler, the 707-227s and the early 707-300s with JT4A engines (basically civilianized J75s) used a different sound suppressor pipe configuration. One more thing: in looking through the books this morning, I was very interested to find that at its rollout, the very first KC-135A had the early J57 intake configuration, with the six big inlet vanes and the oil cooler intake (at least that's what I think it is) in the center. I knew the 367-80 had that configuration, but I'd never seen it on a KC-135A before; I'd always seen the configuration we all know, with the little oil cooler inlet on the cowl chin. Always learning...! jodie
  12. Thanks for posting those pictures, Ed. The 367-80 is a fascinating subject, and since it flew so long as a testbed, there's a whole variety of configurations and markings variations for the modeler. It looks like in your pictures the "Dash 80" still had the original blunt radome, too. Compare the "organ pipes" on engines 1 and 3, as used on commercial 707s, with the KC-135-style exhaust at #2 station, and note the 707-style turbocompressor humps atop the engines, too. You can also see the aft main-deck cargo door open in the third picture. The "Dash 80" in its more-or-less original configuration (before the aircraft was converted to turbofan power and the inboard trailing edge of the wing was expanded) isn't too difficult a conversion for the AMT KC-135A in 1:72 or the Welsh KC-135A vac-form in 1:144 (or even a Revell 707-120 kit, with some work.) Cutting the fuselage down isn't difficult (the 707 "Detail and Scale" book gives you the measurements); you could also reduce the fuselage cross-section by four scale inches, but from experience, it's a lot of work and I really couldn't see much difference. When I do another one, I won't do that. (I'll also correct a lot of errors I made the first time around, too.) From time to time I think about tooling a master for the 367-80 in 1:144 for resin and doing decal artwork for this aircraft, but every time I turn around, I'm finding new information. It would never get finished! Jodie Peeler
  • Create New...