The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Wed Oct 20, 2021 5:13 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 364 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 15, 16, 17, 18, 19  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Aug 13, 2021 7:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2006 7:36 am
Posts: 577
Location: Vigo, Spain
Hi all modelers again,

Going on with the paint job week, and considering how to highlight the smaller details, I have made some testing on redundant elements, first darkening with a mixture of Humbrol dark grey Matt 79 and light grey Matt 64, and then clearing with Mat 64 again, the standard procedure. To upgrade this with different combinations of light grey Matt 64 and light grey Matt 147 produced no visible effects that were worth the action, and applying Matt 147 pure seemed to go too far, as the effect was pretty much like a toy, and not too realistic. Too bad. As for now, I will leave the things as they are with only a wash and light grey on top of it.

I have already finished the Mk.37 fire director, with three coats of grey and a wash. The shadows allow to see that the wash is subtle, and that it can be accepted.
Attachment:
(823).jpg
(823).jpg [ 291.83 KiB | Viewed 647 times ]

Attachment:
(824).jpg
(824).jpg [ 255.7 KiB | Viewed 647 times ]

The radar antenna will be a different story, I am afraid, but as for now the basic tower is there.

And the Mk.56 fire director as well. I painted the windows with a 0.05 marker, and refined the frames with a very fine brush. A nasty experience, as my hands are no more what they used to be. Had I known before what kind of garden I was stepping into, I would have made the frames in stretched sprue, and would have filled them with the said marker, way easier and mistake-proof, but it is useless crying over the spilled milk.
Attachment:
(825).jpg
(825).jpg [ 281.63 KiB | Viewed 647 times ]

Attachment:
(826).jpg
(826).jpg [ 322.94 KiB | Viewed 647 times ]

I hope you like it, and best regards from this side,

Willie.

_________________
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 13, 2021 11:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 3504
The experts at weathering effects are probably the model railroaders? These are all individual taste decisions and there is no "wrong", only everyone's opining. As the old saw goes, "everyone has one".

I find the armor guys like to combat wear and destress things a lot. As Willie stated, the result if overdone, becomes cartoonish. Even using colors from chips such as Snyder and Shorts for mixing or buying colors, yields a very "saturated" model. My APA is very saturated as it lacks the diffusion and scattering effects that viewing a real ship brings aboard. If one was very sophisticated they would design and paint for a pre planned lighting brightness, density, color temperature, spectrum etc. I'm not that sophisticated. Most of us end up with a builders style model, just out of dockyard with a shinny brass prop. I'll plead guilty. In the saturated light and distance under which we view our models things maybe look a little too sharp and defined. For WWII USN vessels employed in the Pacific there is a lot of atmospheric diffusion. Adding washes to bring out the detail that we have strived mightily to achieve achieves a certain effect. Is this the overall effect we want? Perhaps, perhaps not.

Such choices make the modelers art. Just because we might have an opinion does not (present culture not withstanding) make us right or wrong. Very exciting to see and appreciate all the styles!

Cheers: Tom


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Aug 19, 2021 5:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2006 7:36 am
Posts: 577
Location: Vigo, Spain
Hi there Tom and all,
Fliger747 wrote:
If one was very sophisticated they would design and paint for a pre planned lighting brightness, density, color temperature, spectrum etc. I'm not that sophisticated.

You don´thave to be. Running the risk of becoming pedantic, there is what I would call scale effect: what is acceptable in 1/35, 1/48 or even in 1/72 would not be in 1/144 and higher scales. A shadow in 1/48 can be 0.3 mm. wide, for example, which is my limit, but in 1/72 my limit stays the same, the same as in 1/144, but in relationship to the scale, my limit makes shadows larger and larger the bigger the scale becomes.Think of 1/350 and 1/700 adopting methods of 1/48, as I have often seen, what turn an otherwise excellent construction into a mere toy.

Just a thought.

Nice going from across the seas,

Willie.

_________________
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Aug 19, 2021 2:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 3504
Ships mostly live outside in natural light. Exceptions might be FRAM at the "Skips museet" near Oslo and U Boats in a "pen". I really like taking my models outside into the sunshine, but of course they can't live there. They don't live under the studio strobes I use to photograph them either.

Your components look quite convincing and it will be a treat to see the bits and pieces begin to form a ship!

I used your dry brushing of the stencils, as best I could, though the acrylic titanium white I use doesn't "dry brush" very well. A model lacquer would probably work better. What really worked well was Phil's suggestion of an initial coat of hull color to seal the stencil. All in all it was pretty successful.

Best regards! Tom


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2021 8:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2006 7:36 am
Posts: 577
Location: Vigo, Spain
Howdy Tom and all,
Fliger747 wrote:
I used your dry brushing of the stencils, as best I could, though the acrylic titanium white I use doesn't "dry brush" very well. A model lacquer would probably work better. What really worked well was Phil's suggestion of an initial coat of hull color to seal the stencil. All in all it was pretty successful.

I am glad it has worked for you too. With a dry brush you can never make mistakes that cannot be mended right away at cost nil.

I am already deeply involved with painting my 3in/50 Mk27´s. The guns themselves are already completely painted with the initial three coats, and ready for the wash and the dry brush. The small glossy spots are a side effect of the amount of necessary thinner to get this fine texture, but will be gone with the dry brush.
Attachment:
(827).jpg
(827).jpg [ 293.13 KiB | Viewed 505 times ]

As for the mounts, I have applied the second coat to the structure and the first to the handrails. While painting the handrails it came to my mind that as far as I can remember, I had never set all the elements together before. While building the round magazines and so on I had counted with 1/2 mm. on both sides of each mount for the handrails, but I had never tested the accuracy of my calculations. Surprising, to put it mildly. As I prefer a single "just in case" now rather than three "Oh my goshes" later on, I wanted to make a dry fit before painting everything else.
Attachment:
(828).jpg
(828).jpg [ 306.62 KiB | Viewed 505 times ]

Attachment:
(829).jpg
(829).jpg [ 341.14 KiB | Viewed 505 times ]

Attachment:
(830).jpg
(830).jpg [ 346.7 KiB | Viewed 505 times ]

Attachment:
(831).jpg
(831).jpg [ 316.58 KiB | Viewed 505 times ]

I am on the very limit, only tenths of mm. to play with, but other than small mistakes in some places I think that everything is +/- OK.

Nice going and very best regards from this side of the ocean,

Willie.

_________________
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2021 10:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:41 pm
Posts: 2099
Location: Mocksville, NC
Willie,

Your 3" gun mounts are looking really nice - good progress!!!

Hank

_________________
HMS III
Mocksville, NC
BB62 vet 68-69

Builder's yard:
USS STODDARD (DD-566) 66-68 1:144, USS-LSM/R-194 1:144
Finished:
USS NEW JERSEY (BB-62) 67-69 1:200
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: Tue Aug 24, 2021 12:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 3504
Willie:

Having previously hand constructed 40 mm Quad and Twin Bofors I have some idea of how complex those are. It is difficult enough to divine how the various parts are shaped and sized let alone actually isolating and constructing them. These will be very impressive when complete and installed on your masterpiece!

Regards: Tom


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2021 3:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2006 7:36 am
Posts: 577
Location: Vigo, Spain
Howdy, Tom and all,
Fliger747 wrote:
Having previously hand constructed 40 mm Quad and Twin Bofors I have some idea of how complex those are. It is difficult enough to divine how the various parts are shaped and sized let alone actually isolating and constructing them.

Tom, the curse (or the blessing, depending on your point of view) of building in such a big scale is that every structure or element that you build turns immediately into a small model by itself, and building them all from sketches and making them to come to the same scale is again another adventure, something that you have probably experienced a number of time as well.

I have already completely finished the hedgehog set, with the usual three coats, a wash and a dry brush. Once set in place it fills the gap, I presume.
Attachment:
(832).jpg
(832).jpg [ 205.76 KiB | Viewed 440 times ]

Attachment:
(833).jpg
(833).jpg [ 231.07 KiB | Viewed 440 times ]

Attachment:
(834).jpg
(834).jpg [ 237.82 KiB | Viewed 440 times ]

Along with mount nr.2 and the bridge structure, the whole lot looks cramped and cluttered, which is my distinct memory of the same place on board USS The Sullivans.
Attachment:
(835).jpg
(835).jpg [ 271.96 KiB | Viewed 440 times ]

Nice going and very best regards from this side,

Willie.

_________________
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2021 5:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 3504
Willi:

Yes indeed even USN derived warships in the post war period when much equipment was removed, still ask for considerable justification for any empty deck or bulkhead space! Even a larger ship such as the APA made it into an obstacle course to do "laps". A scale weapon such as Hedgehog has a lot of parts, the individual "hogs" each has to be inclined at it's proper angle plus the supporting equipment and lockers, then there are two!

Pleased to see the sub assemblies come together!

Regards: Tom


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Oct 09, 2021 12:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2006 7:36 am
Posts: 577
Location: Vigo, Spain
Hi all modelers again.

This week I had a go with the forecastle and the anchors, ship elements that I have always liked. The first thing were the anchors themselves.

I have excellent pics of US Navy stockless anchors, taken on board USS The Sullivans:
Attachment:
(836).JPG
(836).JPG [ 181.65 KiB | Viewed 337 times ]

Attachment:
(837).JPG
(837).JPG [ 152.93 KiB | Viewed 337 times ]

After this, I could see that the ones in the kit are good but can be improved. The flukes are OK after they have been reshaped, but the shank comes with a molded crown shackle attached to an awful looking plastic chain, so it has to be completely replaced.
The only interesting step in this first stage was to open the channel all along the shoulders, but little else. Thew shanks were carefully glued in position, so that they fit perfectly when into hawseholes. I added a crown shackle and a 10 cm. section of chain.
Attachment:
(838).jpg
(838).jpg [ 166.47 KiB | Viewed 337 times ]

The anchors are set in place loosely, but they keep their position by sheer weight of the chain. The effect is good enough for me.
Attachment:
(839).jpg
(839).jpg [ 151.14 KiB | Viewed 337 times ]

After this, the deck elements. I have no picture at all of how it was on board Jorge Juan, but I have some of other Fletchers, and all of them follow the same pattern:
Attachment:
(840).jpg
(840).jpg [ 258.71 KiB | Viewed 337 times ]

Attachment:
(841).jpg
(841).jpg [ 262.6 KiB | Viewed 337 times ]

The first elements were easy to build. The turnbuckles are out of scale, but I am not able to handle smaller diameter rings. I would have liked to see again the tutorial by EJFoeth in his HMS Hood thread to see how he did these elements, but the pics seem to have vanished in the air.
Attachment:
(842).jpg
(842).jpg [ 93.52 KiB | Viewed 337 times ]

I completed the set with some other chain links in two diameters, and used the kit hawse covers and the winch. It is now like this:
Attachment:
(843).jpg
(843).jpg [ 164.27 KiB | Viewed 337 times ]

Attachment:
(844).jpg
(844).jpg [ 156.72 KiB | Viewed 337 times ]

I hope you like it, and very best regards from the North Atlantic,

Willie.

_________________
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Oct 09, 2021 1:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 3504
An interesting system with a single wildcat. Letting go both anchors not a possibility unless the idea was to get rid of weight and watch the bitter end rattle overboard. Wonder how they managed this system? For my APA I carved the anchors out of basswood, for Poseidon I will attempt to 3D them. Working with a kit has advantages!

Forecastle looking quite nice! The small deck tackle adds a lot of authenticity. I remember modeling the turnbuckles on truss rods for some Ho N3 rolling sock decades ago. The ARL will have more opportunities for small rigging items!

Nice work! Tom


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Oct 09, 2021 5:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 8:19 am
Posts: 196
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Very nice Willie; you've managed to really capture the look of the anchors and the forecastle in general. Looking forward to more updates.

_________________
Bruce
OSC USN-Ret
Image

Currently on the building ways:
1/144 USS Stevens DD-479
1/144 USS Cook Inlet AVP-36
1/144 USS Walke DD-416
1/144 USS Preble DDG-46


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 10, 2021 7:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:41 pm
Posts: 2099
Location: Mocksville, NC
Willie,

Excellent work! You've captured the foc'sle deck gear quite well. I esp. like what you've done with modification to the kit anchors - nicely refined with all the details that were needed.

Hank

_________________
HMS III
Mocksville, NC
BB62 vet 68-69

Builder's yard:
USS STODDARD (DD-566) 66-68 1:144, USS-LSM/R-194 1:144
Finished:
USS NEW JERSEY (BB-62) 67-69 1:200
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: Sun Oct 10, 2021 11:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3623
Willie,

You do such wonderful craftsmanship on your models, I'm not even close to your skill level. Hank and Tom work wonders with "software and 3-D printers", different methods to building great models. You guys will have the most "realistic" destroyer models of 4-Gun FLETCHER's.

I have looked at a lot of photos of FLETCHER's dated from 1942 to the mid-1970s (and beyond) and the forecastle doesn't change much at all. Plus, on most "active service" destroyers, they have a cluttered look from added equipment and stowage of all manner of "stuff". But, the forecastle is the one part of the ship that remains clean and neat. I guess trying to "add" something in that area would not be possible with the anchor gear.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2021 11:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 3504
Willie!

Yes the Fletcher Forecastles always remain very clean and straightforward. Perhaps this is from the area being swept with blue water with some frequency in a heavy seaway. The foredeck of the ARL is by contrast covered with a busy collection of items, but it's light bluff bow may make for a lot of spray, it bobs like a cork rather than slicing through. In the photo on the foredeck (real ship) the chain goes around the aft end of the covers to the chain lockers. Those are fairly unusual in being open on both ends. It would be interesting to see what the procedure for changing anchors was? One of the photos showed an open pelican hook laying on the foredeck.

As to anchor chain, EJ Foeth hand formed stud link chain for his hood, a tour de force up there with Song hand carving his chains from wood for his 1:200 ships. Being stubborn in the pre 3D days, I hand did the APA Anchor Chain from styrene, which is fortunately hidden below the forward Bofors and not available for close inspection.

I see the kit slightly elevated what were usually the walkways covered with non skid paint, do you know what the Spanish Navy procedure was in this manner?

Keep up the good work!

Cheers: Tom


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 13, 2021 5:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2006 7:36 am
Posts: 577
Location: Vigo, Spain
Hi all modelers,

And thanks to all of you for your remarks, that are always apreciated.

Tom, to make a chain link after link would drive me absolutely nuts, other than this is way beyond my ability.

Fliger747 wrote:
I see the kit slightly elevated what were usually the walkways covered with non skid paint, do you know what the Spanish Navy procedure was in this manner?

Tom, in the modern units (I can still see the deck of my ship) it was and still is non-skid all over, and pretty rough. From the Fletchers I have no vivid memories, but I noticed that they had lines on deck, so I presume they kept the US Navy pattern, as with everything else. There are pics that back this idea:
Attachment:
(853).jpg
(853).jpg [ 70.39 KiB | Viewed 186 times ]

Attachment:
(854).jpg
(854).jpg [ 130.56 KiB | Viewed 186 times ]

I will have to study this subject in due moment, but it is something very easy to do, and hence the last of my worries.

I have given another push to the rear stack, adding some more details. Firstable, the thick double wiring with two sharp curves on the left, going up from deck to the ECM domes. Apparently, as with many other elements common to all the class, there are no two ships having identical arrangements, and I have seen no clear picture of how it was on board Jorge Juan, other than it is there too. I have followed the model of USS The Sullivans, because it is common to many other units and is slightly off-side, in an ideal position to have room later to add the supports for the upper platform:
Attachment:
(845).JPG
(845).JPG [ 211.51 KiB | Viewed 186 times ]

After this I tried the scale. I have one single good (but blurr) picture of how this scale was attached to the stack on Jorge Juan:
Attachment:
(846).jpg
(846).jpg [ 312.77 KiB | Viewed 186 times ]

This system seems to be the common one to all Fletchers, so this solves the problem:
Attachment:
(847).jpg
(847).jpg [ 146.81 KiB | Viewed 186 times ]

I cut the first elements from a 2.5 mm. Evergreen canal, which is exactly the width of the scale that I have.
Attachment:
(848).jpg
(848).jpg [ 233.12 KiB | Viewed 186 times ]

When they are set in place with the "sides", the kind of step that follows is ideal to place the scale with absolute precision and no effort at all:
Attachment:
(849).jpg
(849).jpg [ 234.19 KiB | Viewed 186 times ]

It was afterwards completed with scraps of stretched sprue.

I have also added the upper section of the wiring trunk, so the thing is at the moment like this:
Attachment:
(850).jpg
(850).jpg [ 237.46 KiB | Viewed 186 times ]

Attachment:
(851).jpg
(851).jpg [ 249.91 KiB | Viewed 186 times ]

Attachment:
(852).jpg
(852).jpg [ 253.33 KiB | Viewed 186 times ]


I will try to finish it this week. In the meanwhile, nice going and best regards from this side of the world,

Willie.

_________________
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 13, 2021 7:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:41 pm
Posts: 2099
Location: Mocksville, NC
Willie,

First, your stack work looks exceptional - right to your high standards!! Always enjoyable to see further work on JJ!!

As for the deck non-skid - yes, the indentations in the molded deck represented the std. layout for that. However, as you say - each ship did sort of how it pleased with keeping the non-skid properly maintained and functional.

I'm not positive, but I think on STODDARD when we were in LBNS for a 6 mo. overhaul (drydock, etc.) in 1967-68 there were available small rectangular shaped non-skid pads that could be adhered to the deck and these are normally what you see on the FLETCHERs of the era. Where the solid non-skid walkway is shown (main deck) - that was made up by taping off the area to be coated, a layer of epoxy glue laid down, light grit sand applied to the expoxy and let dry. Then, the loose sand was swept up and the resultant "rough" surface rolled out with black deck paint and then the tape removed. I don't believe that there was available at that time ready made non-skid paint with a grainy texture. Of course, with time, salt water, sunshine, and so forth all taking their toll on the ship's surfaces, these non-skid areas didn't stay rough all that long.

Hank

_________________
HMS III
Mocksville, NC
BB62 vet 68-69

Builder's yard:
USS STODDARD (DD-566) 66-68 1:144, USS-LSM/R-194 1:144
Finished:
USS NEW JERSEY (BB-62) 67-69 1:200
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 Oct 14, 2021 11:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 3504
Looking at photos from above one can see a succession of rectangular anti skid panels with rounded corners applied to the deck. This seems to have been a WWII usage. I haven't personally seen these but have a roll of anti skid tape from which I have made a similar set of panels for the floats on my airplane. At least you won't have to deal with those.

The stack looks really excellent and will be a good detail hi light. Post war much clutter and complexity was removed in the way of K guns, light AA and whatnot, to be replaced by other complexity by way of electronics.

Excellent and very steady progress.

Cheers: Tom


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Oct 14, 2021 2:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3623
In the 1950's there was a variety of "ASW weapons clutter" going on. The introduction of the Mk 2 ASW Torpedo launching system (TLS) (using the Mk 4 launcher as seen on USS CASSIN YOUNG) for launching "over the side" the Mk 32 torpedoes (more like a self-propelled depth charge) were installed on many destroyers. Also, there were the PMGL system installed on PacFlt FLETCHER's. The PMGL (Poor Man's Gravity Launcher :big_grin: ) was a fantail drop rail device designed by a yard crew in Japan when the PacFlt was frustrated that they had Mk 32 torpedoes, but that it would take like two years to get the Mk 2 TLS installed on all their destroyers. The Mk 4 launchers were installed in multiple locations on destroyers. The PMGL system was installed mostly parallel to the starboard side 600-lb depth charge drop track and the reload rack was moved forward of the drop track. However, a few destroyers had the PMGL installed on the portside!!

When the Mk 43 torpedo was introduced to the fleet, a similar problem arose. The only launchers available were the Mk 2 TLS and the Fleet used them to launch the Mk 43 torpedo, but sometimes the much smaller diameter torpedo than the Mk 32 torpedo, was damaged. And once again the PacFlt decided to make a smaller version of the PMGL, the PBGL (Poor Boy's Gravity Launcher :big_grin: ). It also was installed on the fantail, normally next to the PMGL.

It wasn't until the early-mid 1960's with the introduction of the Mk 32 triple ASW torpedo launchers (and a single Mk 27 single torpedo launcher was installed on four FLETCHER's) with Mk 44 torpedoes, that the Mk 2 TLS, PMGL, PBGL, etc were retired and removed.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Oct 16, 2021 12:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 3504
Willie:

Thank you for posting the excellent photos of the anchors on Sullivans, anchors are one of the design construction tasks I am procrastinating about. It was interesting that the hull had sharp indentations from the anchor flukes, including apparently a patch? I wonder how those occurred? Anchor being flung about in a heavy sea or perhaps kissing a dock or ship coming alongside?

It is very helpful that ships of an era often had equipment in common so your solutions may indeed be of help to the rest of us.

Cheers: Tom


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 364 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 15, 16, 17, 18, 19  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 1:6000 and 33 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

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