The Ship Model Forum

"Errr, isn't the flight deck supposed to go on *top* of the hull, Ed?"

Or was there another mistake made here that I'm missing? Anyway, it's looking good.

Carl, that Iowa is awesome. I'm currently building (among a bunch of other stuff) a Trumpeter Wisconsin, which has gone wrong in more than one place already (foremast went on crooked, front ends of the harpoon canisters broke when I detatched them, etc.. ). I'm about fed up with it already, and I build OOB. Don't know how I'd ever manage to build something with this level of detailing.

The others I'm working on are a Kuznetsov and a Pyotr Velikiy (see the Soviet thread for details), a Ronald Reagan (hull has gone missing!), a Dragon VLS Tico and a Pitroad DDG-51. The latter two are about the easiest ship kits I've ever built, though I'm a little mad at myself for having put full hulls on the Tico and Reagan. Then again, the lower hull is a big part of what makes the Reagan special, and not "just" another Nimitz. Ah well, it does give me a reason to track down the Trumpeter Tico again, since it comes with better extras (like the Pegasus hydrofoil...)

Cheers,

SP

Its finished!!!!!

I'd like to thank Chuck fo the remark in the Main forum 'if you want it, scratchbuild it!' (something like that) which was the inspiration for this build (and my tugs), the users of this fine 1/700 thread for their kind words and Nektarios, Pere and kidcurrie (in no particular order) for their advice and pictures they supplied.

She is not perfect (ie no PE) but she is as accurate as I can scratchbuild something (i hope ). I know she is missing her hoses from her RAS gear, but my real of solder has sprouted legs and gone walkies, so it will have to live without for now. Enjoy!

SebastianP wrote:"Errr, isn't the flight deck supposed to go on *top* of the hull, Ed?"

Or was there another mistake made here that I'm missing? Anyway, it's looking good.

Cheers,

SP

Dang it JIm!! I'ma Dr. not an Engineer!!
OK, I think that answers dat question
Thanks, I'm thinkin' I goofed on the fantail but, since nobodyz said anything I gess I did ok then

Hippy Ed wrote:

SebastianP wrote:"Errr, isn't the flight deck supposed to go on *top* of the hull, Ed?"

Or was there another mistake made here that I'm missing? Anyway, it's looking good.

Cheers,

SP

Dang it JIm!! I'ma Dr. not an Engineer!!
OK, I think that answers dat question
Thanks, I'm thinkin' I goofed on the fantail but, since nobodyz said anything I gess I did ok then

Here s a couple of photos of what i m working on. Three CVW-16 UH-2s onboard CV-34 1966-1968 with Starfighter decals.






Also around most of the F-18s and all F-14s are finished waiting for decals to join their airwings.

Comments and questions are welcomed.

I didn't know Trumpeter made Ticos... you might be thinking of the ARII one, because that comes with the whole extras things, an LCAC and the Pegasus, not to mention the full option of arm launchers or VLS, and full hull or waterline. For older kits, they're really well done I say.

Carl, don't you dare sell yourself short man, you're more accomplished, look at the level of detail you're putting in, for gods sakes, the BASKETBALL HOOP!!! Average people don't go to that level, man! I'd consider Myself average, because I don't do PE, mainly because I know I'd spend half the time cursing the railings.

As to the fantail - I'm not a carrier man, so hell if I know.

Nektarios, you're doing awesome on those aircraft, man, I'm working on one of the Ka-27's for my Udaloy right now and there's some cursing and swearing involved, but at least they're not transparent.

Oh yeah, something I forgot to mention, Sebastien - I found, when building the Yak-141's going on my Vladivostok, it helps if you assemble the aircraft on the sprue, not to mention potentially the benefits of painting them there, namely not needing to use tweezers or such for the majority of the painting. That's my opinion, I don't know what Nektarios will say on the matter, he's built a whole ton more than I have.

ASFC wrote:Its finished!!!!!

I'd like to thank Chuck fo the remark in the Main forum 'if you want it, scratchbuild it!' (something like that) which was the inspiration for this build (and my tugs), the users of this fine 1/700 thread for their kind words and Nektarios, Pere and kidcurrie (in no particular order) for their advice and pictures they supplied.

She is not perfect (ie no PE) but she is as accurate as I can scratchbuild something (i hope ). I know she is missing her hoses from her RAS gear, but my real of solder has sprouted legs and gone walkies, so it will have to live without for now. Enjoy!

ASFC i can hear your ship asking for PE. It is so well built that it will be just perfect with full PE. If not full PE then at least add the PE net on the helicopter landing area.

Superb work again.

Nektarios wrote:

Hippy Ed wrote: Dang it JIm!! I'ma Dr. not an Engineer!!
OK, I think that answers dat question
Thanks, I'm thinkin' I goofed on the fantail but, since nobodyz said anything I gess I did ok then

Why Thank you

Hey Nektarios, where'd ya get dem UH-2s??? I could ude a set of A/Bs for my build up of the Ranger

Hippy Ed wrote:Hey Nektarios, where'd ya get dem UH-2s??? I could use a set of A/Bs for my build up of the Ranger

Hippy Ed how many UH-2s do you need???

Nektarios wrote:

Hippy Ed wrote:Hey Nektarios, where'd ya get dem UH-2s??? I could use a set of A/Bs for my build up of the Ranger

Hippy Ed how many UH-2s do you need???

I think 3 of them since I;m not sure how many were abd Ranger 1965/66 I do know it was HC-1 who was abd.

Hippy Ed wrote:Great job so far Carl!!
Can't wait ta see the PE stuff

Ed,

You wanted to see the tiny PE on the gun directors? .......................





Aft gun director and please note the hook on the crane. But please ignore the blotchy hull paint. Damn masking tape!

oh my...

Hippy Ed wrote: oh my...

Yeah that and some more.

Hippy Ed wrote: oh my...

Yeah that and some more.

Hippy Ed wrote:

Nektarios wrote: Hippy Ed how many UH-2s do you need???

I think 3 of them since I;m not sure how many were abd Ranger 1965/66 I do know it was HC-1 who was abd.

Send me your home address and i ll send you three UH-2s ASAP.

Nektarios wrote:

Send me your home address and i ll send you three UH-2s ASAP.

PM inbound. Thanks

I've been meaning ta ask y'all a question....
USS Ranger CVA-61 1965/66 went to 'Nam. Left Pearl Harbor on 27 DEC 1965. So far I have found out that the following ships were with her...
USS England DLG-22
USS Carpenter DD-825
USS Sproston DD-577 (Fletcher class??)
What class were these & are there kits in 1/700??

Also, what other ships would have been with them on station 16 JAN 1966 at Pt. DIxie in the So. China Sea?

Thanks,
Eddie

Ranger was a Forrestal class. Kits: Italeri? Arii has it in 1/800.
England was a Leahy class. Kits: JAG might have it.
Carpenter was a Gearing class. Kits: JAG might also have it.
Sproston was a Fletcher. Kits: Probably JAG, if anyone.


You can find these all on Navsource.org - just go into the section of their ship type, and look through the numbers until you find the one that matches.

Depends on if the Sprotson was a Four-Gun at the time - you can get the twin 3" open tops in the set for the USS Belleau Wood by DML, potentially in other sets in other places - then you just mount those in place of the Bofors Quads, make a few other alterations, and shabang, there ya go.

Carl, the turrets arrived this morning - yay me! Those JAG turrets are bloody freakin amazing for detail too, and the guns just look impressive. Very nice putty work and such. I have RAM launchers coming with the Mighty Mo from Freetime, which will have some of them mounted in place for this construction project. Since the launchers are all above-deck mounting, I was considering the turret tops, like the old Bofors positions, allowing forward coverage with good angle of fire.

Timmy C wrote:Ranger was a Forrestal class. Kits: Italeri? Arii has it in 1/800.
England was a Leahy class. Kits: JAG might have it.
Carpenter was a Gearing class. Kits: JAG might also have it.
Sproston was a Fletcher. Kits: Probably JAG, if anyone.


You can find these all on Navsource.org - just go into the section of their ship type, and look through the numbers until you find the one that matches.

Thanks Timmy I've learnt that the Carpenter was a modified Gearing class... now what does that mean?