armornutii
Full Member
Member since: March 2023
crystevens@hotmail.com
Posts: 965
Mar 18, 2023 17:45:08 GMT -5
Mar 18, 2023 17:45:08 GMT -5
|
Post by armornutii on Nov 26, 2023 13:25:44 GMT -5
I'm one who likes to strive for historical accuracy, particularly in painting & markings. So if I see something that looks unusual or strange, rather than accuse or blast away, I will ask where the inspiration comes from? Perhaps its a valid one off scheme, and the builder can explain their source... or it can be an imaginary flight of fancy or "what if?" scheme... again the builder can explain their inspiration. Often those explanations make the presentation that much better with the knowledge of what's behind the look of the finished project. I remember a builder elsewhere who would make realistic fictitious markings on his WWII aircraft builds, often using his own, his wife's or even his kids initials as identifier codes on the models. He could do whatever he pleased for certain things like nose art, squadron colors, etc., and not be historically wrong because it never existed to begin with. I think historical accuracy has its place absolute. Placing a titty pink M4 in the Smithsonian and saying it was from Desert Stirm would be obsurd. Kudos to everyone who puts that effort in, I for one truely enjoy seeing the finished product. It helps motivate me just to build something. As a small caviot to the above, most of us modelers are using references that may have been bastardized by well intentioned people who are decades removed from the original blueprints or plans, thing can get wonky. I spent 7yrs working on EA-6bs and to this day can't realky tell you what if anything is wrong with the Monogram 1/48 kit rekeased many years ago....about the same time I was chasing sparks on the real thing. This is also one of the reasons I chise to jumo ship from FSM. AGAIN let me maje clear, if you want to make an accurate kit by all means go for it, if ya wanna paint it titty pink have at it. Just let me build my model to my level of research, expertise, and enjoyment. There are a couple " rivet counters" on the other site, one I hooe finds his way here, the other....well let's just say I would rather have a root canal that engage with his high and mighty wisdom. He can be him, I just ignored it, but it was tiresome along with all the other issues I mentioned in the beginning.
|
|
eaglecash867
Full Member
Member since: July 2023
Posts: 226
Jul 1, 2023 5:18:34 GMT -5
Jul 1, 2023 5:18:34 GMT -5
|
Post by eaglecash867 on Nov 26, 2023 14:27:58 GMT -5
I'm also in the camp of wanting to be historically accurate with my builds. Being a spark chaser on a vast variety of aircraft for the past 30 years causes my focus to mostly gravitate toward avionics, cockpits, electronic warfare systems, antennas, and so forth. Also a bit of a geek when it comes to egress systems. Had to learn a lot about those, especially on old Soviet/Warsaw Pact aircraft as part of my job. Gotta know how a VS-1 ejection seat works so I can safely work on L-39s. If I see something in a WIP thread that jumps out at me, I might just make a quick comment like "Just so you know, that seat in that aircraft doesn't have an ejection handle there". But, if the builder ignores me or says "thanks but no thanks", I leave it at that and don't try to run it into the ground. I can definitely relate to Armornutii's comment about rivet counters, because some of them do tend to insist that you do things the way they want you to, which is absurd. Strangely, those same rivet counters and "experts in everything" never seem to put their own work on display to be scrutinized and critiqued, which is really kinda low budget. Don't criticize someone else's work if you don't want to show your own. Also seen a lot of factually inaccurate, dogmatic statements from them that obviously came from books and the internet, because they don't match what I know to be true from direct experience. In the end, its all what we as individuals want to get out of our modelling, and the pushy ones are a little bit of a drag. I just try to roll my eyes and chuckle when I see those posts.
|
|
moramartht
Full Member
Member since: October 2018
Posts: 144
Oct 11, 2018 17:36:23 GMT -5
Oct 11, 2018 17:36:23 GMT -5
|
Post by moramartht on Nov 26, 2023 20:12:29 GMT -5
The FW 190 had a semi-official nickname: Würger, which is the German name for the Shrike. The Shrike, although that familiar name is derived from the Old English for "shriek", is part of the scientifically named family Laniidae, after the first classified Genus which was named Lanius after the Latin name for a butcher. This itself was suggested by the habit of some species of impaling prey (or parts thereof) on plant spines, like old-time butchers hung joints of meat on hooks in their shops.
To those members who regard themselves as One-Trick Ponies: you aren't. After building even a few kits you are on the way to develop a set of skills which are readily transferable. The FW 190 group build is an ideal opportunity to try something different, as if you stick to late-war examples it's hard to get something wrong with even minimal research. This is because late-war colours are a very variable, it's hard to to determine shades from monochrome photographs and the few in colour can only be regarded as indicative, while surviving airframes and components often differ from those colours prescribed in official documentation.
Lastly, to bang the same old drum to the same old tune many here will have heard before, anyone with access to styrene which can be glued with only ordinary modelling cement is a potential Sci-Fi scratch builder. Sheet styrene (and shapes) are luxuries, as are surplus parts from finished builds; staples are expendable domestic items such as plastic cutlery, disposable razors, CD cases, some sweet and biscuit containers (I have a hoard of old Tic-Tac boxes), urine sample bottles, and the like. It's the acme of the "No Pressure" build, you can start with only the vaguest idea (or none at all!) and only you know when you're finished and what it is...
Cheers,
M
|
|
|
Post by kyledehart5 on Nov 27, 2023 2:26:51 GMT -5
Very interesting history of the nickname. Before joining the group build I had no idea that was a name for 190s. I enjoy aircraft but don’t really know anything about them. At any rate, building one will be fun.
Sci fi scratch building. Good idea. I know I’ve got plenty of junk laying around here. Lol!
|
|
dean48ws
Full Member
Member since: October 2023
Posts: 240
Oct 21, 2023 14:37:54 GMT -5
Oct 21, 2023 14:37:54 GMT -5
|
Post by dean48ws on Nov 27, 2023 3:38:47 GMT -5
All right, I'm in. Have ordered the Eduard 190A-2, mainly because it was in stock. I'd add a picture but that's outside my computing abilities!!!
|
|
|
Post by kyledehart5 on Nov 27, 2023 4:50:02 GMT -5
All right, I'm in. Have ordered the Eduard 190A-2, mainly because it was in stock. I'd add a picture but that's outside my computing abilities!!! Hey that’s fun! Welcome to the build. Having seen your Mack build I’d be inclined to say it Should be no problem with your skill set
|
|
|
Post by 406 Silverado on Nov 27, 2023 5:21:47 GMT -5
All right, I'm in. Have ordered the Eduard 190A-2, mainly because it was in stock. I'd add a picture but that's outside my computing abilities!!! Man this is just GREAT!! With your abilities and skill set this will be a blast to have you in on this. It wouldn't be this one would it Tim?
|
|
|
Post by tcoat on Nov 27, 2023 7:57:36 GMT -5
I'm one who likes to strive for historical accuracy, particularly in painting & markings. So if I see something that looks unusual or strange, rather than accuse or blast away, I will ask where the inspiration comes from? Perhaps its a valid one off scheme, and the builder can explain their source... or it can be an imaginary flight of fancy or "what if?" scheme... again the builder can explain their inspiration. Often those explanations make the presentation that much better with the knowledge of what's behind the look of the finished project. I remember a builder elsewhere who would make realistic fictitious markings on his WWII aircraft builds, often using his own, his wife's or even his kids initials as identifier codes on the models. He could do whatever he pleased for certain things like nose art, squadron colors, etc., and not be historically wrong because it never existed to begin with. If I am doing a subject that consists of a very specific piece of equipment during a well documented time period I will go over the top trying to be as historically accurate as possible. My Gentile's Broken Mustang, Bong's P-38 or Col Olds F-4 are examples of that. If it is just a generic tank, plane, ship etc than I am more than happy with close enough since variance was the norm not the exception. Using old pictures or even documentation for colours is a lost cause most of the time. Here are some great examples from my own experience. If you read the specs this truck is supposed to be NATO black, NATO green and NATO brown. The photo does not show that at all even though they are there but the overall picture is very toned down. Note the colour of my uniform (Me walking past the Powerwagon in the background) Now here I am with my truck which is identical to the one above taken later on the same day but further down the road. Different camera, different lighting and different type of print. My uniform somehow looks like a totally different colour with the jacket appearing much lighter. The shirt and pants would not have been that dark when they were brand new much less after the hundreds of washes they had by then. Not a great pic but if I was basing a model on that I bet I would think it was solid green. And here we have another of the same subjects. You can almost see the camo on both the fuel and ammo trucks. And this is what the model community would use as a reference. Not even close to what you see in the pictures. My point being that "historically accurate" can be very very elusive and is often more "historic opinion" than fact.
|
|
|
Post by tcoat on Nov 27, 2023 8:00:18 GMT -5
The FW 190 had a semi-official nickname: Würger, which is the German name for the Shrike. The Shrike, although that familiar name is derived from the Old English for "shriek", is part of the scientifically named family Laniidae, after the first classified Genus which was named Lanius after the Latin name for a butcher. This itself was suggested by the habit of some species of impaling prey (or parts thereof) on plant spines, like old-time butchers hung joints of meat on hooks in their shops. To those members who regard themselves as One-Trick Ponies: you aren't. After building even a few kits you are on the way to develop a set of skills which are readily transferable. The FW 190 group build is an ideal opportunity to try something different, as if you stick to late-war examples it's hard to get something wrong with even minimal research. This is because late-war colours are a very variable, it's hard to to determine shades from monochrome photographs and the few in colour can only be regarded as indicative, while surviving airframes and components often differ from those colours prescribed in official documentation. Lastly, to bang the same old drum to the same old tune many here will have heard before, anyone with access to styrene which can be glued with only ordinary modelling cement is a potential Sci-Fi scratch builder. Sheet styrene (and shapes) are luxuries, as are surplus parts from finished builds; staples are expendable domestic items such as plastic cutlery, disposable razors, CD cases, some sweet and biscuit containers (I have a hoard of old Tic-Tac boxes), urine sample bottles, and the like. It's the acme of the "No Pressure" build, you can start with only the vaguest idea (or none at all!) and only you know when you're finished and what it is... Cheers, M WOW! They took the long way around to get to that nickname.
|
|
Green KreationZ
Full Member
Member since: November 2023
Posts: 528
Nov 19, 2023 19:13:09 GMT -5
Nov 19, 2023 19:13:09 GMT -5
|
Post by Green KreationZ on Nov 27, 2023 12:19:31 GMT -5
I'm one who likes to strive for historical accuracy, particularly in painting & markings. So if I see something that looks unusual or strange, rather than accuse or blast away, I will ask where the inspiration comes from? Perhaps its a valid one off scheme, and the builder can explain their source... or it can be an imaginary flight of fancy or "what if?" scheme... again the builder can explain their inspiration. Often those explanations make the presentation that much better with the knowledge of what's behind the look of the finished project. I remember a builder elsewhere who would make realistic fictitious markings on his WWII aircraft builds, often using his own, his wife's or even his kids initials as identifier codes on the models. He could do whatever he pleased for certain things like nose art, squadron colors, etc., and not be historically wrong because it never existed to begin with. If I am doing a subject that consists of a very specific piece of equipment during a well documented time period I will go over the top trying to be as historically accurate as possible. My Gentile's Broken Mustang, Bong's P-38 or Col Olds F-4 are examples of that. If it is just a generic tank, plane, ship etc than I am more than happy with close enough since variance was the norm not the exception. Using old pictures or even documentation for colours is a lost cause most of the time. Here are some great examples from my own experience. If you read the specs this truck is supposed to be NATO black, NATO green and NATO brown. The photo does not show that at all even though they are there but the overall picture is very toned down. Note the colour of my uniform (Me walking past the Powerwagon in the background) Now here I am with my truck which is identical to the one above taken later on the same day but further down the road. Different camera, different lighting and different type of print. My uniform somehow looks like a totally different colour with the jacket appearing much lighter. The shirt and pants would not have been that dark when they were brand new much less after the hundreds of washes they had by then. Not a great pic but if I was basing a model on that I bet I would think it was solid green. And here we have another of the same subjects. You can almost see the camo on both the fuel and ammo trucks. And this is what the model community would use as a reference. Not even close to what you see in the pictures. My point being that "historically accurate" can be very very elusive and is often more "historic opinion" than fact. I couldn't agree more! I have seen people reference WW2 photos which were colorized as reference in post on other modeling forums. Alot of these colorized black and white photos are ran through a software that attempts to predict the color. This prediction is not always correct. At best they are able to get the correct color/hue (Red, Green, Yellow, etc) but they typically do not provide the right tone, tint, or shade. Nothing in modeling will be exactly historically correct due to issues with manufacturing during war and so on, but I also enjoy the research phase and attempting to get as accurate as I can.
|
|
|
Post by tcoat on Nov 27, 2023 12:24:19 GMT -5
I couldn't agree more! I have seen people reference WW2 photos which were colorized as reference in post on other modeling forums. Alot of these colorized black and white photos are ran through a software that attempts to predict the color. This prediction is not always correct. At best they are able to get the correct color/hue (Red, Green, Yellow, etc) but they typically do not provide the right tone, tint, or shade. Nothing in modeling will be exactly historically correct due to issues with manufacturing during war and so on, but I also enjoy the research phase and attempting to get as accurate as I can. Researching is one of my favourite parts of the hobby. I will sometimes spend more time researching than actually building a project. I will also sometimes throw all the research away and go with what I think looks better though!
|
|
armornutii
Full Member
Member since: March 2023
crystevens@hotmail.com
Posts: 965
Mar 18, 2023 17:45:08 GMT -5
Mar 18, 2023 17:45:08 GMT -5
|
Post by armornutii on Nov 27, 2023 13:01:20 GMT -5
My brother, God bless him, is one of those guys who scoures the internet for the most minute details on very specific German armored vehicles,. I feel he often doesn't take into account damage, battlefield modes or repairs, or simply avaiability of materials to mass produce items. I have bellyached about him before so this is old news to most. The one thing that drives me nuts is his " efforts" to push me to spend hours looking at pictures that have no context to me in order to prompt me to super detail every single model I build. Now that I'm interested in the 1/16th stuff his montra is the bigger the scale the bigger the errors. Makes it very difficult to share my builds as I know he is going to tear it apart with " oh that manufacuter did this wrong, that isn't what that is in that vehicle at 3pm on Wednesday April 1944 on a road somewhere in Germany....driven by Gunthner" SORRY GUYS! I think Ringo Starr saidvit one time "All I wants is to play me drums".
|
|
eaglecash867
Full Member
Member since: July 2023
Posts: 226
Jul 1, 2023 5:18:34 GMT -5
Jul 1, 2023 5:18:34 GMT -5
|
Post by eaglecash867 on Nov 27, 2023 15:05:09 GMT -5
I just try to get as close as I can to a particular aircraft, at a particular time, in a particular place. When I was researching the Marine Corps F-4B I recently completed, there were all kinds of differences in that same BuNo from one photo to the next depending on when and where the photo was taken. Heck...even the radome on the thing changed. One photo it was black...in another it was white...just from field maintenance and swapping parts between aircraft. I also did a lot of reading of the NAVAIRs on the F-4B and learned about where they specified painting things with Corrogard, how wide the area was, etc. Although that was all incorporated in the particular BuNo I was building, even THAT wasn't consistent from aircraft to aircraft...probably because of material availability, production schedules, etc. I did stumble upon one thing in my on-line research that I almost wrote off as being "rivet counter" and not worth the effort. That was the difference between a Navy/Marine Corps outer pylon and an Air Force outer pylon. I decided to take on the challenge of hanging the MERs on that outer pylon the way the Navy and Marine Corps do it...with a 13.5 degree angle in the adapter. It was SUCH a PITA, but I got it figured out. In the end, I was really glad I did. If I had just hung that MER straight up and down, the napalm canisters wouldn't have cleared the main gear doors...and I would have been sad. LOL. That was exactly the reason the angled adapters were chosen on the real aircraft. Heh...it doesn't tell you THAT little detail in any of the instructions on the aftermarket ordnance. Fun build though...getting all the little lumps and bumps, and antennas right for that era of Phantom.
|
|
Joe Rix
Forum Moderator
Member since: January 2023
Posts: 1,453
MSC Staff
Jan 24, 2023 18:15:02 GMT -5
Jan 24, 2023 18:15:02 GMT -5
|
Post by Joe Rix on Nov 27, 2023 19:38:38 GMT -5
Well I have come to the conclusion that my new forum home will be MSC. I have been a member of FSM for A LOOONG time and really enjoyed the magazine as well as the community, sure it had its cremudgens and in the past flame wars but it generally was a good place to connect with other modelers from around the world. Recently it has become a miriade of pop up adds, log in issues, and error codes. I'm not computer literate, and don't want to " work" for my hobby. I will miss the folks who remain there and haven't found this site however being here is WAY MORE user friendly and has a much more "homie" feel. I am saddend by the decline of a steafast icon of the modeling world however I can no longer tolerate the effort needed to simply read a thread much less create one. I won't be renewing my subsrciption to FSM this time I hope they continue to produce content on You Tube as the information passed on there is reall fun and informative. Hopefully they can pivot, rebuild, and come back as a better product worthy of my money for subscription. It's about time that I chimed in here. Perry, your sentiments are understood and merited. It is indeed unfortunate that FSM has not seen fit maintain the forums and put forth an honest effort to ensure it's health and growth. I have had a subscription to FSM since 1987. It was how I kept connected to the hobby during my inactivity. When I committed to building again in 2009 joining FSM forums was one of the first things I did. It was a complete game changer for me. Not only did I find a wealth of knowledge and expertise, but also fun and friendly folks with whom to bond with. FSM forums are responsible for the majority of how I model today. I am eternally grateful for all of those who aided in my modeling growth. For several years I was a dedicated participant. I loved participating GBs. I weathered the storms each time FSM changed the format. Many a form of butt hurt was displayed during those episodes. As well as the great Photobucket debacle. Many good folks left because of those issues. Yeah, there were your select folks who were annoying and acted the jack wagon, but I generally ignored them and did not allow them to detract from my enjoyment. Yet, I hung in there. Over time though it was my own personal life commitments and general malaise that led to my inactivity. There was really nothing particular about the FSM forums that disenchanted me. Yeah, the lack of activity was a bummer, but that is not what got me down. I simply had other demands on my time and it became more of a chore for me to keep up on the forums. I stayed in touch though and was thrilled to rejuvenate with "The Mob" and attend the Vegas Nats with you all. It is very heartening to have all the members of "The Mob" here on MSC so we can continue our friendship. It is when I reflect on FSM's diminished status that I can't help but take some responsibility. I chose to disengage and dilute my participation and as such take some accountability for not remaining active and being a part of the lack activity there. Like others here though, it just is not the same as it was in it's heyday and had ceased bringing the thrill it once did. For a couple of years I really lacked an interest in forums simply because I did not have a ton of disposable time. Then Joe hit me up about joining MSC. I agreed to give it a shot. Here I rediscovered several old acquaintances and a surging load of enthusiasm and positive support. This ignited a renewed interest to reengage in forums and modeling. When Joe approached me about joining the staff I was hugely reluctant due to a misplaced sense of time commitment. Yet, he persuaded me that it would be in my best interest. I am very glad he did. It has been incredibly rewarding to participate here. MSC and it's members represent the best of our hobby. to encourage and accept all levels and forms of modeling. It is wonderful to find a new home. Cheers to all.
|
|
dean48ws
Full Member
Member since: October 2023
Posts: 240
Oct 21, 2023 14:37:54 GMT -5
Oct 21, 2023 14:37:54 GMT -5
|
Post by dean48ws on Nov 28, 2023 1:55:23 GMT -5
All right, I'm in. Have ordered the Eduard 190A-2, mainly because it was in stock. I'd add a picture but that's outside my computing abilities!!! Man this is just GREAT!! With your abilities and skill set this will be a blast to have you in on this. It wouldn't be this one would it Tim? Yes mate, that's the one. I'm open to suggestions on what I should do with it, paint wise I mean! Some research appears necessary. Kinda like homework! Don't forget, this is an aircraft, I don't think I've built 1 since high school. Plus there's the performance anxiety of comparing it to the builds on here ( me comparing that is!)
|
|
TJ
Full Member
Member since: May 2023
Posts: 1,335
May 14, 2023 18:18:36 GMT -5
May 14, 2023 18:18:36 GMT -5
|
Post by TJ on Nov 28, 2023 5:01:22 GMT -5
Man this is just GREAT!! With your abilities and skill set this will be a blast to have you in on this. It wouldn't be this one would it Tim? Yes mate, that's the one. I'm open to suggestions on what I should do with it, paint wise I mean! Some research appears necessary. Kinda like homework! Don't forget, this is an aircraft, I don't think I've built 1 since high school. Plus there's the performance anxiety of comparing it to the builds on here ( me comparing that is!) Tim. The very basic colors for the camouflage are RLM 74, 75, 76. The interior is RLM 66. If you have Tamiya XF-24 its a pretty good match. The yellow is RLM 04 but any yellow will do. The one other thing is the Germans used a Black Green for the prop not straight black. Hope this helps get you started
|
|
|
Post by 406 Silverado on Nov 28, 2023 5:21:13 GMT -5
Man this is just GREAT!! With your abilities and skill set this will be a blast to have you in on this. It wouldn't be this one would it Tim? Yes mate, that's the one. I'm open to suggestions on what I should do with it, paint wise I mean! Some research appears necessary. Kinda like homework! Don't forget, this is an aircraft, I don't think I've built 1 since high school. Plus there's the performance anxiety of comparing it to the builds on here ( me comparing that is!) PM sent.
|
|
|
Post by 406 Silverado on Nov 28, 2023 5:21:56 GMT -5
Yes mate, that's the one. I'm open to suggestions on what I should do with it, paint wise I mean! Some research appears necessary. Kinda like homework! Don't forget, this is an aircraft, I don't think I've built 1 since high school. Plus there's the performance anxiety of comparing it to the builds on here ( me comparing that is!) Tim. The very basic colors for the camouflage are RLM 74, 75, 76. The interior is RLM 66. If you have Tamiya XF-24 its a pretty good match. The yellow is RLM 04 but any yellow will do. The one other thing is the Germans used a Black Green for the prop not straight black. Hope this helps get you started Thanks for chimin' in with some good & helpful info Johnny. +1 Karma to you bro.
|
|
|
Post by kyledehart5 on Nov 28, 2023 6:14:32 GMT -5
I just try to get as close as I can to a particular aircraft, at a particular time, in a particular place. When I was researching the Marine Corps F-4B I recently completed, there were all kinds of differences in that same BuNo from one photo to the next depending on when and where the photo was taken. Heck...even the radome on the thing changed. One photo it was black...in another it was white...just from field maintenance and swapping parts between aircraft. I also did a lot of reading of the NAVAIRs on the F-4B and learned about where they specified painting things with Corrogard, how wide the area was, etc. Although that was all incorporated in the particular BuNo I was building, even THAT wasn't consistent from aircraft to aircraft...probably because of material availability, production schedules, etc. I did stumble upon one thing in my on-line research that I almost wrote off as being "rivet counter" and not worth the effort. That was the difference between a Navy/Marine Corps outer pylon and an Air Force outer pylon. I decided to take on the challenge of hanging the MERs on that outer pylon the way the Navy and Marine Corps do it...with a 13.5 degree angle in the adapter. It was SUCH a PITA, but I got it figured out. In the end, I was really glad I did. If I had just hung that MER straight up and down, the napalm canisters wouldn't have cleared the main gear doors...and I would have been sad. LOL. That was exactly the reason the angled adapters were chosen on the real aircraft. Heh...it doesn't tell you THAT little detail in any of the instructions on the aftermarket ordnance. Fun build though...getting all the little lumps and bumps, and antennas right for that era of Phantom. Point in time history. I love this. This is exactly how I approach my race car builds. They changed the cars at essentially every race. And I love the research too. I spend hours researching photos. Then I look at it all and decide which point in time I want to build or if there is a version that makes most sense with a given kit or project.
|
|
|
Post by kyledehart5 on Nov 28, 2023 6:17:49 GMT -5
Man this is just GREAT!! With your abilities and skill set this will be a blast to have you in on this. It wouldn't be this one would it Tim? Yes mate, that's the one. I'm open to suggestions on what I should do with it, paint wise I mean! Some research appears necessary. Kinda like homework! Don't forget, this is an aircraft, I don't think I've built 1 since high school. Plus there's the performance anxiety of comparing it to the builds on here ( me comparing that is!) Its always daunting when putting your build up next to some of the incredibly talented people on here? I try not to compare my builds to others but it can be hard. Especially when we're all building a similar subject. Just have to remember to enjoy it and do the best I can. Mine will be exceedingly simple compared to most. But I think I'll enjoy it and I hope others will as well.
|
|
|
Post by 406 Silverado on Nov 28, 2023 6:26:17 GMT -5
Yes mate, that's the one. I'm open to suggestions on what I should do with it, paint wise I mean! Some research appears necessary. Kinda like homework! Don't forget, this is an aircraft, I don't think I've built 1 since high school. Plus there's the performance anxiety of comparing it to the builds on here ( me comparing that is!) Its always daunting when putting your build up next to some of the incredibly talented people on here? I try not to compare my builds to others but it can be hard. Especially when we're all building a similar subject. Just have to remember to enjoy it and do the best I can. Mine will be exceedingly simple compared to most. But I think I'll enjoy it and I hope others will as well. You don't have to worry about a thing Kyle because there's not a competition going on with this and we're all from different backgrounds and have different skill sets. The point of any kind of a GB like this (or a forum for that matter) is to share the knowledge so that ALL of us get better and have fun while we're doing so. You're in good hands brother.
|
|
|
Post by kyledehart5 on Nov 28, 2023 6:33:08 GMT -5
Its always daunting when putting your build up next to some of the incredibly talented people on here? I try not to compare my builds to others but it can be hard. Especially when we're all building a similar subject. Just have to remember to enjoy it and do the best I can. Mine will be exceedingly simple compared to most. But I think I'll enjoy it and I hope others will as well. You don't have to worry about a thing Kyle because there's not a competition going on with this and we're all from different backgrounds and have different skill sets. The point of any kind of a GB like this (or a forum for that matter) is to share the knowledge so that ALL of us get better and have fun while we're doing so. You're in good hands brother. I agree. The positive attitude of everyone since I've joined makes me comfortable joining the GB while not worrying about how I'll be judged or looked at. There's no doubt I'll learn plenty following along with everyones builds though. I'm here for it. It'll be fun
|
|
eaglecash867
Full Member
Member since: July 2023
Posts: 226
Jul 1, 2023 5:18:34 GMT -5
Jul 1, 2023 5:18:34 GMT -5
|
Post by eaglecash867 on Nov 28, 2023 6:56:58 GMT -5
Point in time history. I love this. This is exactly how I approach my race car builds. They changed the cars at essentially every race. And I love the research too. I spend hours researching photos. Then I look at it all and decide which point in time I want to build or if there is a version that makes most sense with a given kit or project. Yup. Its like the question of what color is correct for an F-16 radome. There really is no "correct" color, since that rubberized coating on the radome picks up all kinds of stuff from the environment its in. No two are the same, and even the same airframe and same radome will be a different color from one period of time to the next.
|
|
dukemaddog
Full Member
Member since: March 2023
Virtuoso of Miniatures
Posts: 421
Mar 3, 2023 17:42:18 GMT -5
Mar 3, 2023 17:42:18 GMT -5
|
Post by dukemaddog on Nov 28, 2023 16:02:58 GMT -5
I agree Kyle, I am a bit daunted putting my basic work next to the awesome masterpieces here but they are my models, built the way I wanted to and as long as I'm happy with them, that is all that matters to me. Some4times I even manage to impress a few masters with some of my work. That's icing on the cake for me!
|
|
|
Post by kyledehart5 on Nov 28, 2023 16:55:18 GMT -5
I agree Kyle, I am a bit daunted putting my basic work next to the awesome masterpieces here but they are my models, built the way I wanted to and as long as I'm happy with them, that is all that matters to me. Some4times I even manage to impress a few masters with some of my work. That's icing on the cake for me! well I’m no master but I’m definitely impressed by your work. Always enjoy the tours through the factory.
|
|
|
Post by tcoat on Nov 28, 2023 17:43:25 GMT -5
I agree Kyle, I am a bit daunted putting my basic work next to the awesome masterpieces here but they are my models, built the way I wanted to and as long as I'm happy with them, that is all that matters to me. Some4times I even manage to impress a few masters with some of my work. That's icing on the cake for me! well I’m no master but I’m definitely impressed by your work. Always enjoy the tours through the factory. Well guys we all have our strengths and weaknesses. The thought of building armour in 1/72 sends me quaking in fear. Maybe I could pull off the old Airfix stuff with 5 parts but not the things Duke does. The shiny paintwork that Kyle does is just a chore to me that I really don't enjoy at all. Other guys do super detailed models with all the bells an whistles which are totally beautiful but I get frustrated quickly dealing with resin and etch so will leave those to them. My comfort zone is a basic build, usually out of the box, where I focus on wear, tear and weathering but looking at all the work you guys do I am expanding my horizons and am more willing to go outside that zone.
|
|
moramartht
Full Member
Member since: October 2018
Posts: 144
Oct 11, 2018 17:36:23 GMT -5
Oct 11, 2018 17:36:23 GMT -5
|
Post by moramartht on Nov 28, 2023 19:54:27 GMT -5
Cockpit interior would be RLM66, but wouldn't other interior areas be RLM02, a sort of pale grey? I'm no expert, but I was given to understand it was in use from the early 1930s and was still around in sufficient quantities to be used to substitute for other light greys (e.g. for Night Fighter Camo?) when the prescribed shades were unavailable towards the end of the war in Europe.
Regards,
M
|
|
|
Post by 406 Silverado on Nov 28, 2023 21:01:49 GMT -5
Cockpit interior would be RLM66, but wouldn't other interior areas be RLM02, a sort of pale grey? I'm no expert, but I was given to understand it was in use from the early 1930s and was still around in sufficient quantities to be used to substitute for other light greys (e.g. for Night Fighter Camo?) when the prescribed shades were unavailable towards the end of the war in Europe. Regards, M You'll find a mix of different colors towards the end of the war as resources became more and more scarce. Areas of interiors were left aluminum as there was a shortage of RLM66 or RLM 02 and lots of times if there was paint it was only applied in single coats vs. multiple layers at the beginning to mid stages of the war.
|
|
aaronw
Full Member
Member since: November 2023
Posts: 169
Nov 23, 2023 14:11:42 GMT -5
Nov 23, 2023 14:11:42 GMT -5
|
Post by aaronw on Dec 16, 2023 20:09:26 GMT -5
Wow, I could have written a lot of these posts. FSM was one of my first modeling forums, and I spent a lot of time there. I think I joined 2003-ish, and was pretty active until 2011 or so, when they once again updated their forum software in a spectacular fail. I had made it through similar poorly executed, "upgrades", but that along with various forum drama, and then a major move I moved on. I've tried off and on to get back, but like so many forums these days it seems kind of dead compared to the past, and the forum software continues to be awful.
It's not just FSM, all of the modelling sites I used to frequent have either seen a huge decline in traffic or been overrun with drama queen curmudgeons which really sucks the fun out of them, and by extension any kind of modelling related social activity. I follow a couple of model related Face Book groups, but that format is really poorly suited to anything more than asking questions or showing off a latest build. I find it a terrible substitute for forums with things like group builds, works in progress, tutorials, kit reviews or really anything where you will want to watch activity for more than 5 minutes, or have an archive of information to review.
I'm glad to have received an invite to this place. I've only been here a few days, but this place seems to have the vibe I found on forums 10 years ago. I've found my modelling activity fluctuates but a good forum has often really helped with my productivity.
Edit - I remember that 229GB. I still want to build an HS129 up-engined with BMW 801s, as an HS229, a what if inspired by that GB theme.
|
|
jeaton01
Full Member
Member since: October 2013
Posts: 928
Oct 3, 2013 22:10:29 GMT -5
Oct 3, 2013 22:10:29 GMT -5
|
Post by jeaton01 on Dec 20, 2023 0:41:08 GMT -5
I was a participant in the Fleet Air Arm GB's hosted by Tango 1 for many years. A number of us got together when the 1/32 Tamiya Spitfire was released and built one for Tango 1 in appreciation for his efforts in showing how a good GB is run. I put together a web site to chart the model's progress. It was called the Round the World GB as it literally was built by people all over the world. It was a lot of fun so I thought I would share the link to those web pages. Lots of names some of which are here now and more that I wish were here.
|
|