The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Wed May 23, 2018 9:46 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun May 13, 2018 11:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 1:10 pm
Posts: 568
tko24 wrote:
BB62vet wrote:
Quite an interesting array of views. Personally, I've seen enough 1/350 IOWA class models to choke an ox. How many more do we all need??? :doh_1:

Since I'm working in 1:200 I've always thought it would be nice to have a like scale MONTANA to compliment my NEW JERSEY. But, probably not anytime soon. Besides, space IS a big consideration.

As Rick has pointed out, there are still PLENTY of U.S.N. cruisers and destroyers that COULD be offered that would help fill the obvious void. And, with the injection of 3rd party 3D designers to provide well designed CORRECT parts - the nautical community would have a much larger catalogue of models to choose from. Variations from the 3D guys are now a constant possibility. All that is needed is the basic kit.

I don't really care for the "what ifs" which somehow never made it into reality. I guess if you were aiming for an imaginary fleet, then these would be just the thing.

Just my two cents worth!!


How about until we get one that's accurate? The Tamiya 1/350 Iowa's have a blunt stubby inaccurate bow shape, the only other 1/350 scale Iowa kits were the very old Lifelike/Revell kits. I'm not impressed with the Veryfire 1/350 Missouri. I don't like the way they split the hull lengthwise causing a blunt leading edge bow stem and those very weird hull plating lines. So I'm still waiting for an accurate 1/350 Iowa class kit. Hopefully the Joy Yard 1/350 Missouri will finally give us a good 1/350 kit of an Iowa class BB. While I have the 1/200 Trumpy kit which is now waterlined, my comments address the lack of an accurate 1/350 kit.


Holy cow, that bow edge is indeed seriously blunt...:

Image

A few of the Fujimi Japanese battleships had a similar problem, the easier to fix being the Kongo class, the worse being the Yamashiro/Fuso, but this is an another dimension...

Gaston


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2018 3:17 am 
Offline
SovereignHobbies
SovereignHobbies

Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2015 9:09 am
Posts: 602
Location: Aberdeenshire, Scotland, UK
At the risk of not sounding like a big fan of the Iowa class...

If we accept that no kit is perfect, and also that as BB-62vet observes we see enough Iowa builds to choke an Ox, we can conclude one of two things:

1) Hardly anyone cares about the inaccuracies discussed
2) They do, but they've learned to use some simple modelling tools and techniques to sharpen blunt bows


To sub-par modellers who demand perfection this may seem like yet another "unbuildable" kit. To the rest of us, this is yet more investment wasted on the same damned subject. Just keep making Iowa kits until one is right I hear? How about "no"?

The ONLY British cruiser injection moulded kit in 1/350 is Trumpeter's HMS Belfast which is infact a bit of an abomination - much, much worse than all of the Iowa kit problems combined yet we have to make do because it's all there is. Many have just built it, whilst those bothered by accuracy have got their modelling tools out of the drawer and fixed it. Meanwhile we get kit announcements of yet another ship that didn't exist, an Iowa or a Bismarck.

So Americans don't care much about non-American subjects? I understand - the reciprocal is why American subjects just don't sell in the UK market. How about all the American subjects that don't exist in plastic whilst Iowas get tooled over and over and over again and yet still someone isn't happy and wants it tooled again "until it's right?"

Every new tooling of an Iowa is a tooling that could have been something that didn't already exist.

_________________
James Duff
Sovereign Hobbies Ltd
http://www.sovereignhobbies.co.uk

Current build:
HMS Imperial D09 1/350
http://www.shipmodels.info/mws_forum/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=167151


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2018 4:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:41 pm
Posts: 1336
Location: Wallburg, NC
I think (at least in my humble opinion) that James (last post before this) has hit upon a basic truth about our modeling likes/dislikes, etc. While we tend to shy away from admitting these "horrible facts", in reality many of us are really not inclined to build models from another country's navy and I tend to follow that general premise. I know that when I got back into this hobby in 2000 that I was quite worn out from all the VICTORY and CONSTITUTION models that were produced (wood kits). The same is true in the plastic world especially with the MISSOURI, YAMATO, and (for a while) the HOOD. And, in all honesty I prefer to build ships that are of U.S. origin over those of foreign countries.

There are many examples of models that could be produced but the kit makers I'm sure are only interested in what brings in the $$$ above any other reason. I recall years ago an article titled "Ship Models that Should Not Be built" - I believe it was written by Naval Historian Howard I. Chapelle and was a fairly matter of fact statement about ship modeling do's & don'ts. While we all want to build something that is attractive and catches the eye, this can't always be achieved - there are UGLY ships out there!!! Should a modeler built one of these? I guess if he had served in it there might be a reason....

Again I agree with James' assessment that the time & effort spent re-tooling the same models over and over could have produced something entirely new - AND possibly molded correctly at the same time!

_________________
HMS III
Wallburg, NC
BB-62 vet 68-69

Builder's yard:
USS NEW JERSEY (BB-62) 67-69 1:200
USS PENNSYLVANIA (BB-38) Late 1940 1:200
USS STODDARD (DD-566) 66-68 1:144
Finished:
USN Sloop/Ship PEACOCK (1813) 1:48
ROYAL CAROLINE (1748) 1:47
AVS (1768) 1:48


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 1:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:06 am
Posts: 963
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
My mouth waters seeing the photos of the hull!! :woo_hoo: :woo_hoo:

Aop

_________________
On the way:
--1/350 Tamiya DKM Tirpitz Nov 1944

--1/350 scratch-build HMS Lion never built battleship (1938)

And our artworks!


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 4:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 5:00 am
Posts: 310
BB62vet wrote:
Again I agree with James' assessment that the time & effort spent re-tooling the same models over and over could have produced something entirely new - AND possibly molded correctly at the same time!


Sorry but I think I'll have to disagree on this last part of the statement. The 1/350 Iowa from JoyYard is only the third go at the subject and Very Fire the second. You make it sound like its been done before and another one was not needed. I had the Tamiya kit not yet built and after the Very Fire kit came out and I had one in my hands, I sold off the Tamiyas (I had four WWII Missouris and one 80's New Jersey). The simple truth is the Tamiya kit is from the 80's meaning the tooling is at last 35 years old, and it shows. Compared to modern kits, the fit is mediocre and worst of all (for me at least) the accuracy put it firmly behind the Very Fire kit (hull shape, turrets, superstructure detail, blocky staircases, raised plank detail on the deck.) One would like to say that modeling skill would fix these issues but I think not. The Tamiya Iowas are frankly quite off in many shape areas that in the Very Fire largely corrects. Sure the bow isn't a knife edge, but like the Tamiya kit sanding will fix that. In all others however, the detail is superior hands down, turrets the correct size and the forward half of the hull shape is waaaay better. A huge improvement on this class of ship overall. The Joy Yard (IF it comes out) is going to have to be a better kit than this for me to care. And its not like I sat down and micrometered the kits to death. I tend not to be super hard about the accuracy, but if I can see that its off then its off.

Now if it had been the 5th or 6th in recent memory attempt at the class in this scale with only small improvements, I'd be more in line to agree. BUt like I said, these new kits are a serious leap forward.

_________________
Aaron Propper
"I don't understand any of this! But when we get in the giant robots, WE MUST FIGHT!"

"This is how Admiral Okita fights."


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 8:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:02 am
Posts: 9509
Location: EG48
Heavy Melder wrote:
The 1/350 Iowa from JoyYard is only the third go at the subject and Very Fire the second.


Incorrect, you missed this one and its numerous boxings.

_________________
Tracy White -Researcher@Large

"Let the evidence guide the research. Do not have a preconceived agenda which will only distort the result."
-Barbara Tuchman


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 9:40 am 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:12 pm
Posts: 1721
I thought it was Revell.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 10:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:02 am
Posts: 9509
Location: EG48
The Revell kit was a reboxing of the Otaki.

_________________
Tracy White -Researcher@Large

"Let the evidence guide the research. Do not have a preconceived agenda which will only distort the result."
-Barbara Tuchman


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 1:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 1:10 pm
Posts: 568
Regardless how many there were, these old kits were all crap (notably for the bilge keels on all the Tamiyas, among a million other things), and I won't begrudge others the importance of getting a correct one, given its historical importance, even though it is not my subject matter.

Not all subjects are even remotely equal, and with many crap releases it has to be accepted that there will be a market for a good one of the most prominent ships.

I don't know what is going to take for people to realize that this is supposed to be a FUN hobby (we could be doing something else after all), and that that is exactly why crap inaccuracies make it NOT fun...

I notice it is precisely the people who tell us we should enjoy the hobby who also tell us we should just correct kit deficiencies if they bother us...

Correcting issues RUINS this hobby for me... We, for instance, still need a 350 Yamato whose hull is not a crap meeting of mismatching radiuses that will never look right... Hasegawa could do it with a cheap and simple kit with a one-piece hull that looks way better once done, but they had to do it in 450...

Tamiya chose for some reason to complicate things while being incompetent at it, and ruined months of modelling I will never get back, probably shortening my life from all the primer fumes I inevitably ingested over months of trying to fix that hull in a way that was not apparent in person...

The blunt bow maybe is "fixable", but it will ruin your fun for a significant while (and the fix will probably still be detectable in person when done)... The less severe blunt bow of the Fujimi Fuso cost me a lot of effort to thin out and that, combined with the huge endemic hull warping, ended up being slightly askew to the vertical: Another few weeks of work, and $350 with AM, down the drain...

And before you say a "real" modeller would know how to fix it, note that none of those I have seen built even make an attempt at fixing the bow's sharpness.

Gaston


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 3:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:02 am
Posts: 9509
Location: EG48
Gaston, you forget that there are many ways to have fun, even in this hobby. For some, the fun *is* in complaining about all of the problems! :thumbs_up_1:

_________________
Tracy White -Researcher@Large

"Let the evidence guide the research. Do not have a preconceived agenda which will only distort the result."
-Barbara Tuchman


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 8:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:53 pm
Posts: 748
*cough*Getting back to the Montana.....*cough*

It's obvious a lot of people in this thread don't want to see a new Montana made. Fine, I guess. But in my opinion, the model industry/community is going stagnant if it keeps producing time after time more Spitfires, Tiger tanks, Iowa battleships, etc., etc., etc. I for one am glad to see more diversity in model kits coming out, especially the "what if" stuff.
For example:
Very Fire 1/700 USS Montana
Squadron Models German WWII Haunebu UFO kit
Modelcollect 1/72 Landkreuzer P1000 Ratte, and also TAKOM 1/144 P1000 Ratte
Trumpeter DKM Graf Zeppelin
TAKOM 1/35 Krupp Raumer S mineclearing vehicle
TAKOM 1/35 Maus tank
DRAGON T95 Super Heavy Tank
........and so much more.
To me, seeing this stuff come out and getting the chance to buy it and build it means more to me than seeing another "same old, same old" F-16 or Arizona battleship, etc. in a model magazine, on a website, or at a contest. The model industry needs "fresh blood" so to speak, and producing what if stuff is a great start IMO.

Will Joy-Yard's Montana model (If and when it comes out.) be accurate? Probably not since a real Montana battleship was never built and there is not much information about the Montana to use for reference. But if Very Fire, IHP, Blue Ridge Models, and Yankee Modelworks all took risks to come out with a Montana, then why can't Joy-Yard too? The greatest risk is not taking one at all.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 11:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:02 am
Posts: 9509
Location: EG48
I would love to see a new-tool Arizona, but I'm not going to complain every time a new kit that isn't Arizona is released. Each new release is going to be enjoyed by at least SOME builders and that's what the hobby is about. I just hope that they all sell well and the companies can stay around for a while.

_________________
Tracy White -Researcher@Large

"Let the evidence guide the research. Do not have a preconceived agenda which will only distort the result."
-Barbara Tuchman


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri May 18, 2018 2:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:51 pm
Posts: 2177
Dragon produced a Maus a while back, I even built it...


Image


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2018 5:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 5:00 am
Posts: 310
EJM wrote:
*cough*Getting back to the Montana.....*cough*

It's obvious a lot of people in this thread don't want to see a new Montana made. Fine, I guess. But in my opinion, the model industry/community is going stagnant if it keeps producing time after time more Spitfires, Tiger tanks, Iowa battleships, etc., etc., etc. I for one am glad to see more diversity in model kits coming out, especially the "what if" stuff.
For example:
Very Fire 1/700 USS Montana
Squadron Models German WWII Haunebu UFO kit
Modelcollect 1/72 Landkreuzer P1000 Ratte, and also TAKOM 1/144 P1000 Ratte
Trumpeter DKM Graf Zeppelin
TAKOM 1/35 Krupp Raumer S mineclearing vehicle
TAKOM 1/35 Maus tank
DRAGON T95 Super Heavy Tank
........and so much more.
To me, seeing this stuff come out and getting the chance to buy it and build it means more to me than seeing another "same old, same old" F-16 or Arizona battleship, etc. in a model magazine, on a website, or at a contest. The model industry needs "fresh blood" so to speak, and producing what if stuff is a great start IMO.

Will Joy-Yard's Montana model (If and when it comes out.) be accurate? Probably not since a real Montana battleship was never built and there is not much information about the Montana to use for reference. But if Very Fire, IHP, Blue Ridge Models, and Yankee Modelworks all took risks to come out with a Montana, then why can't Joy-Yard too? The greatest risk is not taking one at all.


Going to love a Montana in my collection. Curious to see what will be different or not at all between the two. BUT, I think that will depend if Joy Yard actually get their Iowa to market. And besides that Very Fire might beat them to the punch. I wouldn't be against having different version of the Montana either.

Also as a side note I'm with Tracey. A new tool Arizona would be sweet. I held out hope for Dragon but I think that that has fallen by the way side for them.

_________________
Aaron Propper
"I don't understand any of this! But when we get in the giant robots, WE MUST FIGHT!"

"This is how Admiral Okita fights."


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 10:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 6272
Location: In the hills of North Jersey
EJFoeth wrote:
Dragon produced a Maus a while back, I even built it...]

Wait, you actually FINISHED something?

:heh:

_________________
Martin

"Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday." John Wayne

Ship Model Gallery


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 10:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:51 pm
Posts: 2177
Yeah, and it was awful! :big_grin:


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 11:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:02 am
Posts: 9509
Location: EG48
Where's the hand-laid wood decking? Where are the teeny-tiny lathe-turned details? :big_grin:

_________________
Tracy White -Researcher@Large

"Let the evidence guide the research. Do not have a preconceived agenda which will only distort the result."
-Barbara Tuchman


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 2:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:25 pm
Posts: 1311
Location: England
On the subject of accuracy, I wonder if this Montana will have a bridge that is correct as per the design drawings, original model and artists impressions of the ship, rather than the cop-out "just fit Missouri bridge on it" that every other kit has done.

_________________
Vlad

Tired of waiting for a kit? Dare to modify, dare to kitbash! :thumbs_up_1:

http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... index.html


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 3:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:53 pm
Posts: 748
Vlad wrote:
On the subject of accuracy, I wonder if this Montana will have a bridge that is correct as per the design drawings, original model and artists impressions of the ship, rather than the cop-out "just fit Missouri bridge on it" that every other kit has done.


As I said in my opening post for this thread, If I was a betting man, I'd place my money that the model will be in the preliminary design configuration with the amidships boat cranes and boats since that configuration is well known and documented in various books and references. AND........that would also include the early design bridge superstructure configuration which is similar to that on North Carolina class BB's.
IMO, it'll be far easier to produce a kit with a configuration that is well known and documented in books and such rather than a speculative late WWII or later configuration with more 20mm, 40mm, and other numerous changes.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 6:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:45 pm
Posts: 1015
Location: Abu Dhabi
I think is of little relevance how the Montana will come ,they(JOY-Yard/Veryfire) will do whatever they want to make the model more appealing for selling and not minded in accuracy(they only want lots of US DOLLARS :big_grin: ).I will be very interested when the kit hits the the shops and read about of all the complains and inaccuracies the fictional model have :rolf_3: ,maybe I will become another Montana fan and get one.

What really makes me laugh is that lucky Big Montana fans ,now they don't have just one 1/350 model .LUCKY YOU!! TWO BIG Montanas are coming,is amazing how dumb the companies can be. This strange and wierd war between those Chinese companies is interesting, on the case of the Missouri ,maybe was just a coincidence ,but now ,also the Montana, gosh what a mess :heh:

Just dream about the long list of very desirable of REAL 1/350 plastic ships that need to be done :roll:

_________________
No Whine Policy
1.- Modify it
2.- Ignore it
3.- Don't build it


Last edited by Miguel on Wed May 23, 2018 12:40 am, edited 1 time in total.

Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DavidK and 12 guests


You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group