Tuesday, April 11, 2017

Inspiration: Diego Quijano

I’ve met many excellent modelers in my 30 years in the hobby and seen the work of hundreds online and in print, but there are a handful that have truly inspired me, whose techniques, craftsmanship, or approach to the hobby shaped the modeler I am today. This is another installment in a series of articles to acknowledge their contributions.

One of the best models I’ve ever seen — albeit, never in person — is Diego Quijano's 1/72 Fujimi F/A-18A Hornet. It’s one of the handful of models I’ve seen over the years that’s remained in the front of my mind and serveed as an example of the qualities that I try to incorporate into my own work. The model reflects Diego’s diverse talents, and I can think of few modelers who attain this level of excellence.


You’ve probably seen this F-18; photos of it have circulated in magazine articles, on the web, and on Facebook for many years now. It’s just one of a large number of models that you can see on Diego's web site, and I have no doubt that you’ll be as impressed with his work as I am.

Here’s what inspires me about Diego's modeling.

Years ago an early mentor of mine pointed out that modelers tend to reside somewhere between engineer and artist. That is, we tend to be really good at building and detailing models, or we tend to be really good at painting and weathering them. Few modelers do both exceptionally well, but Diego is one of them.

Diego understands composition. He’s not always content to display his models on a flat base. He’s willing to take risks by displaying models in extreme vignettes, such as his Shades of Death, as only one example.

Diego builds science fiction. Check out his Jedi Fighter and you’ll see that it’s not hard to imagine him building models for a Hollywood studio.

Of course it’s with aircraft that Diego truly excels. In addition to the F-18, the natural metal finish of his 1/48 Fw-190, about as realistic as I've ever seen in scale, is further evidence of his skill.

And the best thing is, Diego doesn’t keep any of his techniques secret! He’s published five books that explain his techniques, an investment that’s probably worth everything that you’ll learn, particularly if you’re new to the hobby. He also has a Facebook page, but don't send him a friend request; he seems to have reached the software-imposed limit on maximum friends.

Someday I hope to meet him.

My thanks to Diego for allowing me to use one of the photo of his F-18.


Read more about other inspiring modelers.

Wednesday, March 22, 2017

Fencecheck is no more

One of my favorite web sites for modern military aviation has long been Fencecheck. It was a hangout for aviation photographers — amateur and professional alike — and was a valuable repository for us modelers. Unfortunately, I learned over the weekend that the owner of the site has shut it down.

The good news is that many Fencecheck participants are now collaborating and sharing photos in a new group on Flickr, aptly named Re-Check, which is fine for new photos going forward, but what about all the photos that had been posted on Fencecheck?

All is not completely lost. Although there’s no way to view the old discussion threads (they’re not accessible via the Wayback Machine), you can find many of the photos using Google. Here’s how.

Let’s say you’re looking for photos of T-38Cs for your upcoming build of the Trumpeter kit. Go to Google Images and enter this search query:

“T 38C" site:fencecheck.com/forums/


Most — but not all — of the resulting photos should be accessible. Simply click on an image, click the View Image button, and enjoy the photograph.

You can search for photos of any other aircraft, base, exercise, or unit by replacing T-38C as appropriate, for example Red Flag. And if it’s not obvious, you can use the same search strategy to find photos from other web sites; simply replace fence check.com/forums/ with the URL of the web site of interest.

Happy searching!

Friday, March 17, 2017

Your stash is out of control when...

You may think you have a lot of models, but your stash isn't really out of control until you’ve experienced at least five of these six scenarios.

You store models vertically in the empty spaces

No matter how big your storage room, space inevitably becomes precious at some point. You have to take full advantage of those nooks and crannies between your carefully stacked kits.


You display models as if your workshop were a hobby shop

When all the nooks and crannies have been filled, you find extra space on top of the larger kits on the shelves.


You relegate models to boxes in the basement

I know you want all your models to be easily accessible, but sometimes you just have to push them deeper into the bowels of your home.


There are models in your bathroom

True story, no joke. Many years ago I was in a club whose president received a call from a local modeler who wanted to sell his kits. He didn't want to wait until the next club contest, so the guy invited several of us to his apartment for a garage sale of sorts. On the way over I joked with my friends, “Watch, I’ll bet he has kits in his bathroom.” And you know what? He did!


You have overflow in cute baskets

You old timers will remember bagged kits. Where do you put those and other random kits that don't fit anywhere else? You steal baskets from your significant other and stash them away.


There are models in your car

You bought a huge 1/32 scale kit at last week's contest but don’t have room for it? Leave it in the trunk of your car!



Where’s the most unusual place we’d find the overflow of YOUR stash?

Thursday, March 9, 2017

Disagreements and opinions

Several bloggers whom I respect — and dozens of modelers across the interwebs — have worked themselves into quite a tizzy these last few weeks. It all started with Kitty Hawk’s release of their Su-17,  Doogs’ Models comprehensive build and review of the kit, and the conversations that followed. I was tangentially part of the conversation sharing Paul Cotcher’s thoughts on the kit as part of my Other Voices series.


In case you’ve been asleep these last few weeks, here’s a summary of the conversation.

Some modelers, such as Paul, are thrilled to see the KH Su-17 because it represents an improvement over the old KP kit that was produced more than 20 years ago. Other modelers, such as Matt over at Doogs’ Models, are critical of KH for many engineering shortcomings that make the model difficult to build.

Modelers seem to be falling in line with one or the other camp and, as in all things remotely political, I find myself somewhere in the middle, which positions me to be The Voice of Reason in this mess.

Here’s the thing. I think very highly of rivet counters, really I do. In fact three years ago I wrote about how I learned to love them. People like Matt provide a valuable service to the hobby by digging into new models to assess their buildability, and other modelers are quick to assess new kits for their accuracy and share their thoughts on sites like Hyperscale, ARC, and Missing Links. I remain impressed that modelers — total strangers, mind you — will invest a significant amount of time to help the rest of us make informed buying decisions. Every one of them should be commended.

I also have great affection for casual modelers, people who are content to have a reasonable representation of a favorite subject, even if it requires significant modeling mojo to build or if the model is somewhat inaccurate. My “godfather” in the hobby, a man I met more than 30 years ago, has an almost childlike enthusiasm for the hobby and could care less about accuracy. When I feel myself getting bogged down in the hobby, struggling with a model or obsessing over the accuracy of small details, I'll call him and his spirit immediately renews my own enjoyment for what we do. Mind you, this is a man who scratchbuilt a Spitfire wing out of playing cards after he bought a model and found that a wing was missing. Who among us would do that in today’s world?

I don’t blame Matt, rivet counters, or other bloggers for this or any other hubbub (have you seen related conversations about the Airfix 1/48 P-40 or the Z-M F-4?). I blame the rest of us. You see, the frustrating aspect of internet conversations is the need that most of us feel to comment on everything we read that we disagree with. Facebook and blogs like this make it easy — even enticing — with those little Comments boxes, and many of us are absolutely compelled to share our thoughts. But here’s the thing…just because I can comment on a post doesn’t mean I should comment on a post. Believe me, I see plenty of things online that I want to comment on, but I continually remind myself that it’s okay to remain silent, to hold my opinion to myself.

To be fair to all of us who participate in these forums and Facebook, internet conversations generally mirror the conversations we have face-to-face. When I talk to my friends on the phone we chat about the same topics I see online — the prices of kits, judging at contests, whether the KH Su-17 is worth what appears to be inevitable frustration. I guess if those topics are fodder for in-person conversations, they should be for online conversations as well.

Where does that leave us? I can't help but think of two favorite quotes, one from an old work colleague and another from a modeling friend:

"Your opinion, while interesting, is irrelevant."

“Opinions are like Sherman tanks. Everyone has one.” (Obviously he’s an armor modeler.)

Sunday, March 5, 2017

Don't fix your mistakes

My decals silvered. What do I do?
How do I repair a cracked canopy?
The wings on my aircraft are misaligned. How do I fix them?

I often see questions like these on the forums and my gut reaction is usually to say, “Don’t fix it.”

We modelers can be perfectionists. Even though most of us aren’t driven by competition (it's true), we want our models to look good, and we’re usually willing to work and re-work a scratchbuilt detail, a troublesome seam, or a challenging paint scheme for hours on end. But at the end of the day, what’s so terrible about having an imperfect model in your display case, particularly if you intend to improve with every new model, year after year?

I found myself in this situation on my build of Trumpeter's 1/35 Pz.Kpfw 38(t). I attempted to use pigments on the model and the results were, well, pretty shitty. (Kudos to those of you who’ve mastered the black art of pigments.) I could repaint the model and start over, but that’s time that will be better spent on a new project where my enthusiasm is higher.


In our quest for perfection we forget that this hobby is a journey. Every model is not going to be perfect nor will every model meet your expectations. You’re going to make mistakes and bad choices along the way, and models will leave your workbench that are disappointing. That’s okay. There’s always another model in the stash whose prospects are higher than the last one, and that’s where you’ll apply what you’ve learned.

My advice is this. Allow yourself to make mistakes, and don’t fix them. Let them remain visible as reminders to not to that again.

Don't believe me? Here's a real artist's take on the subject.


Friday, February 17, 2017

Welcoming new members to your club

One of the benefits of a hobby is having the opportunity to meet new people. I’ve moved several times during my adult life, and each time I've immediately looked for a local club. I met two of my best friends as a member of IPMS Dayton a thousand years ago and several other friends via IPMS Columbus after frequent visits to their annual contest, Blizzardcon. Unfortunately I haven’t had any luck making friends in other clubs, and I think it has a lot to do with how welcome I felt at my first few meetings.


Duane Hayes, the newsletter editor of Model Creations Unlimited IPMS in Jacksonville, Florida, understands the importance of hospitality, even suggesting that their motto should be, "You Are Only A Stranger Once, After That You’re Family.” He recently offered some excellent ideas for making new members feel more comfortable at their first meeting, ideas that your club should begin implementing immediately.

- - - - -

Remember back to the time walking into a room full of people where you didn’t know anyone and just wanted to pretend you were invisible and stand against a wall. It was a very uncomfortable feeling, but after meeting other people during that first time, or after a couple of meetings, you began to enjoy the activities associated with the group.

After thinking about your personal experiences in new environments, think about a person who has built models for years and has never known anyone else who shares his interest. He doesn't know about any model clubs, but the website and Facebook page makes MCU sound just like a group that is going to offer a great experience for him and expand his hobby. He realizes MCU has a meeting coming up. He decides to show up to learn about MCU and see what it is all about.

If this person walked into our club meeting, how would he feel? Would he feel welcome? Would he be greeted by another member, perhaps an officer? Would club members introduce themselves to him? How would he be introduced to the club members?

Now, not all walk-ins become members, but I don’t want any prospective new member to walk away because they were not greeted, introduced, or not able to ask, or get questions answered about the model hobby or our club. Welcoming prospective new members into our club is an important role of all current members.

Make the guest feel comfortable enough to ask questions during, or after, the meeting. Ask him questions about himself. Why is he they interested in joining MCU? What are their favorite model subjects or interests?

Allow the guest to introduce himself and tell why he has decided to attend the meeting. Have ALL the current members introduce themselves; don’t make it a one-sided introduction by only having the guest stand up. When the guest asks questions, answer in a positive manner that allows the guest to understand. When a new member is proudly showing his latest model project, give him your full attention and don’t conduct side-conversations with other members.

Helping prospective members join our club is an on-going opportunity for MCU to strengthen the club’s membership and let all modelers know they are truly valued in our hobby. I think our club does a excellent job of welcoming new guests at our meetings, but there is always room for improvement.


Thanks to Duane Hayes for permission to reprint his editorial.

Tuesday, February 14, 2017

The sexiest aircraft ever produced

It’s Valentines Day, but before you cozy up to your wife or significant other, take a moment to think about the sexiest aircraft to ever take to the sky.

Learjet

From the Learjet 23 introduced in 1963 to the Learjet 75, every model of this aircraft from Bombardier suggests speed and class. If you were to ever sell your stash of unbuilt kits and buy your own private jet, this would be your first choice.


P-51D Mustang

The P-51D was arguably the first truly "world class" fighter ever produced, and there’s no denying its visual appeal nor its success.


Spitfire

The Spitfire was the British equivalent of the P-51, as beautiful as it was agile. And my British friends would kill me if I didn’t include it.


F-104 Starfighter

No other aircraft design suggests speed more than the F-104. The Starfighter is part airplane, part spaceship, the stuff of boys’ dreams in the 1950s.


F-16 Viper

Few aircraft have been as versatile over its life nor seen as much service around the world. There seems to be no role that this aircraft can't fill. The F-16 is probably your first choice if you're likely to find yourself in a dogfight. (F-35 pilots might disagree.)



Tuesday, February 7, 2017

A plethora of resin Humvee wheels

Have you noticed how many aftermarket companies produce resin wheels for the Humvee in 1/35 scale?

Aires
Blast
Calibre35
CMK
DEF Model
DTOYS
ET Model (three versions)
Live Resin
Mig Productions
Panzer Art (two versions)
Pro Art
Trakz
Verlinden
Voyager

And I'll bet you a banana split that I missed two or three others.

I can only surmise there’s an unspoken rule that if you’re going into the aftermarket business, you absolutely must release Humvee wheels!





And I must say…they all look very nice!

You can find reviews for many of these wheels on HMMWV In Scale, which is an excellent resource for information on the Humvee.

Thursday, February 2, 2017

Other voices: The Kitty Hawk 1/48 Su-17 and criticism of new kits

Paul Cotcher of Red Star Scale Models is back for another contribution to our Other Voices series. Paul has long had a strong interest in Soviet and Russian subjects, so it's only appropriate that you hear his comments on the new Kitty Hawk Su-17 and the response from rivet counters upon seeing it.

- - - - -

Fair warning, this article is the modeling equivalent of our parents describing walking to school in the snow, uphill – both ways. Time to practice a little modeling relativism, so if that might push your buttons, you may want to stop reading now. Otherwise, let’s take a trip down memory lane.

In the days before the internet, every trip to the hobby shop could bring a surprise, there were no CAD renderings posted ahead of time, no product listings, no Facebook (or Hyperscale, ARC, or even rec.models.scale). And if the local hobby shop wasn’t good enough, a trip to an out of town hobby shop could bring even more modeling goodness. In the early 90s I frequently travelled to Miami on business, and used those trips to frequent Orange Blossom Hobbies. Not only did I get to meet a bunch of people that I still consider good friends, every trip revealed something new that I had never heard about before. Those of us that have been around the hobby for a while can certainly remember these discoveries.

This specific story, however, relates to a different out of town shop. Traveling to New York City, one would have thought that there would have been a grand and glorious hobby shop somewhere in that metropolis. Ace Hobbies, formerly of mid-town Manhattan provided plenty of exotic products that you wouldn't find elsewhere. Their product listings in the old Military Model Preview magazine would have led one to believe they were much larger. Frequently getting kits, magazines, and supplies from Eastern Europe (apparently from pilots flying in and out of JFK). That was more than enough to get me to visit. Having always been a big fan of modeling Soviet and Russian subjects, anything that was then coming out of newly opened eastern Europe was modeling gold! Alas, Ace Hobbies was far from grand and glorious, it was a dark little place in the shadow of the Empire State Building. Located on the third floor up an elevator that likely later posed as the elevator in the Big Bang Theory, you’d enter the small space to find a pile of kits strewn about in no particular order, save for the few kits on a somewhat center table that were the “new items.”

On a visit one summer day, I recall walking in (after the ride up from Bucks County, PA where I was staying) ready to shuffle through the dusty piles, after all, that’s what was required to really find what was in stock at this (and so many other) shop. What to my amazement should appear but a brand new 1/48 Su-17 from KP. Talk about modeling gold! A 1/48 swing wing Fitter! I was in modeling heaven. Not thinking for a minute, it was going home with me. Of course, they didn’t take credit cards, so I had to ask that they hold it while I went to find an ATM. Long story short (no, Steven Zaloga, you can’t have it), it was on its way home with me.


First inspection showed that it looked a lot like an OEZ kit. Which later was confirmed. OEZ had sold their efforts to KP (Kopro) resulting in their last tooling showing up under a different brand (I guess at one time they had a MiG-23BN planned, too). It was certainly more refined than the Su-7 that I had previously built. Still crude (mid-90s crude) in some areas, but again, better than the other OEZ kits I had in the stash (keep in mind there was no Academy MiG-21 yet, so that included the OEZ MiG-21 kit).

Fast forward a few months, maybe even a year or so, and it was time to build the beast. Likely the release of the Cutting Edge cockpit for the kit was what pushed the project over the Go line. Like most projects it was simple to get the cockpit together, but the small amount of work in to get the resin fit to the kit, and then the fuselage together. After all it was just two fuselage halves, putting those together can’t be hard. But (and here’s the but), from that point in the project fought me every step of the way. Things I remember being difficult include the main wheel well where half the well wall was molded with the upper half of the wing and the other half was molded with the bottom half. Well that will leave a heck of a seam...if the two wheel well halves even matched up. They were so offset that a totally new set of walls had to be fabricated to get one smooth wall all the way around. Seemingly everything had to be trimmed, shimmed, blended, or otherwise spackled in place. Pylons were not molded to one side of the wing or the other, and had to be filled and carefully blended. The large wing fences were split requiring careful filling and sanding. The landing gear was an atrocious approximation of the complex gear on the real aircraft (heck we had new books coming out to show us what these things really looked like). One problem after another. And let me be perfectly clear here, I am only glossing over the bigger issues.

Suffice to say, I fought it all the way to the finish line, and LOVED every minute of it. It was a 1/48 Su-17, and I was darned glad to have one to build. Despite this, I had others in my collection over the years, and even built up a host of additional details to do a “really nice” build. Cutting Edge cockpit, exhaust and outer wings, resin wheels from TallyHo!, a host of etching from Eduard and Part, weapons and pylons from Art Model, and then at the very end came Ciro and their glorious wheel wells (that fixed the out-of-register main wheel well halves). All of this would have made for some spectacular detailing on a kit that was still a bear to build. Project cost was probably in excess of $250 by the time you secured all the add-ons – not to mention some aftermarket decals. Despite many false starts I could never get myself to really engage on the project again. Would get the kit out, tinker a bit and then turn my attention to something newer.

In the two decades, give or take, since I built the first one, I never built a second. I am a far better modeler now then I was then. Better not only in terms of skills, but also better in terms of tools, materials and techniques that have come to light since that time (I mean, Squadron Green putty, am I right?). As we moved into the last four or five years with the onslaught of new 1/48 jet kits, it then became a matter of time before a new Su-17 would present itself and I would be able to build a new and improved Fitter (and the good Lord willing, all the earlier versions too).

So where is this whole thing going Paul, that’s a great story, but what’s your point here?

Thanks for asking! There is most definitely a point. Today, on my front porch, I found laying a brown corrugated box in the characteristic model kit dimensions. In that box, was a brand new 1/48 Kitty Hawk Su-17M3/M4. The kit is GLORIOUS. I’ll have details on my website and Facebook page (probably by the time you read this), but in the interim, let’s talk about why it’s a great kit, and why you almost certainly will have heard otherwise.


From the moment this kit was announced, it was already decried as a piece of garbage. Because of brand alone, it was already doomed in the eyes of many. Doomed not only to those that like to use such statements as “debacle” or “dumpster fire” or even “horribly misshapen monstrosity” to describe flaws in kit designs, but doomed to the people that just read those statements in passing and assume them to be gospel. After all everything you read on the internet is true, right?

Unlike the good old days, we get to carefully monitor each dumpster fire in progress, much like the 24 hour news cycle. Each step of a release is carefully charted on modeling forums everywhere. Announcements are made, CAD renderings are displayed, test shots come out of the mold machines, first kits are assembled, early releases reviewed, and only then does a release get to mass market. By that time the Photoshop and red pen brigade have sliced and diced every nuance of every photo.

So as we proceeded through the release process on the Kitty Hawk Su-17, we see the CAD, and it looks pretty good. We see updated CAD, still pretty darned nice. We see the first test shot build – wow that looks great! We finally see parts on the trees, those looks great, too. Wow, it’s a legit 1/48 Fitter! Yet even with all of this, the haters are still there, and more importantly those that read the hate go into the release expecting it to be wrong and not worth their while.

Here is why the negative point of view, relatively speaking, is incorrect. Let me make this VERY simple:

You ready?

Gonna be hard for some of you to comprehend, but...

IT’S NOT THE OEZ/KP/KOPRO/KARAYA/EDUARD KIT.

End of discussion. Somehow we’ve gotten ourselves into the practice of comparing every kit to some idealized non-existent kit that can never be achieved. Yeah, there’s Tamiya, they seem to be the best blend of engineering and fidelity, but they come at a price, and come out with maybe one subject a year. We need to stop comparing against unrealistic ideals and maybe look at some more realistic comparisons – like what else is out there in the 1/48 Su-17 space? Here’s a clue: It’s that project I so lovingly described above. It was a beast to build, it was full of accuracy issues, and to get it to a similar standard, would cost three to four times as much as this new kit will cost. Fair and full disclosure – there is a Hobby Boss kit coming of the same subject – not sure when, but it’s in their catalog. Maybe that will fix the canopy issue, but from what we’ve seen of early test displays, it’s not as accurate as the Kitty Hawk kit. Beyond that, you’re hoping that somebody else does a better job, but at this point you’re hoping for something that’s FAR down the road, and nothing more than a wish at this point. Kitty Hawk, Hobby Boss, Ideal Future Kit or KP – that’s your choice. Nope, sorry, I forgot one, there's the Evergreen kit too. There's always the Evergreen kit.

So back to that whole modeling relativism thing. We need to stop comparing to the imaginary and start looking at what’s in front of us. Ninety-five percent of kits are really good releases and so far and away better than what has come before. We’ve lost track of that. Every once in a while something really superb comes along, but even then, there’s a flaw somewhere, or the panel lines are too heavy (even if everything else is near perfect), but those releases are the exception and not the rule. Secondly, if you’re really into a given subject, you’re going to be willing to put more effort into the build then somebody only casually interested in the subject. That said with the huge variety of new kits coming, there has to be just about something for everyone at this point.

And yes, I get it, we want to hold the manufacturers to a higher standard. The reason why the kits are so good today is because of the input that has been received by customers over the internet years of modeling.  But while the standard has gotten better and better, the complaining about accuracy issues has not. Endlessly chasing down accuracy issues comes at a price, and in most cases, manufacturers will cut a corner here and there to keep the price of a given release in the reasonable range.

So the next time you want to build a given kit, here are a few pieces of advice:

  • Look up hyperbole (see also click bait) in the dictionary, then look at many other pieces of new, postings or similar pieces of content (whether modeling related or not). It will put things in perspective.
  • Stop worrying about what’s being said online about a kit or manufacturer. Chances are it’s something you’d never see if a subject matter expert hadn’t pointed it out in the first place.
  • If you’ve built a few models, chances are you’ll be able to overcome any fit issue that you come across. Remember these are model kits and not Lego sets. Maybe the whole “kit doesn’t fit” issue is something that I need to address in a separate article (this one is long enough).
  • Don’t apologize for what you’re building because somebody said something bad about the manufacturer or the kit. If you like it and had fun with it, a lot more people want to hear about your experience with the kit than with further comparisons to the imaginary ideal. Guaranteed that 90 percent of the folks who view your model, whether online or in person, will be blown away by the effort.
  • If you’re into a given subject, build the kit, because chances are a better kit is a lot further out than not. Unless it’s a P-51 or a Tiger tank, there will be another release of one of those in five, four, or three years.

Finally, it’s a hobby, it’s supposed to be fun, build the darned thing and stop worrying about what some expert said.

If I can build and enjoy the KP 1/48 Su-17, then it’s a virtual certainty that you’ll be able to enjoy the Kitty Hawk release. All a matter of perspective.


The opinions expressed above are those of the contributor and not necessarily of Scale Model Soup.

Sunday, January 29, 2017

Scale models at the state fair

Modelers often have conversations, face-to-face or online, about how to increase interest in the hobby. I’ve heard ideas about how to introduce the hobby to young people and adults alike, though it’s the latter group who I believe should be our target audience — that is adults who have an interest in aviation, militaria, naval history, or cars.

Regardless of where you stand, the members of Albuquerque Scale Modelers Club know how to promote the hobby.

For more than 10 years the club has run a model contest that’s part of the New Mexico State Fair. This is brilliant! State fairs attract thousands of children and adults, who just might have interests that could lead to a hobby in scale modeling. These fairs usually have arts and craft competitions, so it makes sense that scale modeling should be among the categories.


Last year the New Mexico State Fair model contest saw 69 models entered by 40 modelers, with categories for youth (11 years and under), senior youth (12 to 17 years), adults, and professionals (those who make a living as model makers, as well as all ASM members themselves). The club members serve as the judges, which ensures that judging is fair and consistent with what those in the hobby have come to expect.


I’d love to see other chapters follow ASM’s lead. I’m guessing that nearly every state has a state fair, so it’s an untapped resource in bringing newcomers into the hobby.

Kudos to the guys in Albuquerque! Take a look at photos from the 2016 fair, and browse their web site to enjoy photos from prior years.

Thanks to Joe Walters, ASM’s Newsletter Editor, for permission to use the photo you see here.

Tuesday, January 17, 2017

Grievous inaccuracies in movies

It’s always entertaining — if a bit frustrating — to read movie reviews from modelers, aviation enthusiasts, and armchair historians, who are always quick to call out inaccuracies to show how knowledgable they are. For example, one discussion I read a few months ago about “Sully” included the observation that the squadron Sully was assigned to at Nellis AFB flew the F-4D not the F-4E. Never mind that the producers had access only to an E model.

For what it’s worth, inaccuracies can be found in movies of all genres if you look for them. In "Bottle Shock,” a movie about the 1976 Judgement of Paris wine competition, there’s a scene that was filmed at Chateau Montana, a winery in California. If you look in the background you’ll see wine fermentation tank controls that, I’m told, where installed by Hale Winery Refrigeration. Unfortunately those tanks hadn’t been installed when the events in the movie took place.


Sounds ridiculous, right? Like, who the hell cares? I suspect that's how 99 percent of the viewers of "Sully" would respond if told about the inaccurate Phantom.

Sometimes I think our knowledge about a subject can get in our way of enjoying a simple movie.

Thursday, January 5, 2017

More of the same

Five days into the new year, and there’s already evidence that we’ll see yet more multiple releases of the same vehicles and aircraft from the manufacturers. Feel free to yawn now, and don’t be surprised if someone else yawns, too.

On January 1 Trumpeter announced a new kit of the BMR-3 on Facebook, and I complimented them on moving into the realm of engineering vehicles, an area that has been underserved by the manufacturers. But then yesterday Meng announced their own kit of the BMR-3.



What the what is going on among the manufacturers? Why do we see so many concurrent announcements and releases of the same subjects?

I pondered this question almost exactly a year ago. In that post I mentioned the T-10, SCUD-C, and MiG-31. Since then we’ve seen three new kits of the Su-34, two kits of the ZSU-23 Shilka, two kits of the 9A52-2 Smerch, three of the BMPT, two of the King Tiger, and several M1A2 Abrams in its different incarnations.

I point out this phenomenon again with the same frustration I felt a year ago, with the realization that for ever model kit that a manufacturer produces, it’s not producing something else. If Manufacturer A announces a kit of a vehicle or aircraft and then Manufacturer B decides to produce their own version of it, it means that Manufacturer B is not producing something else, something unique that could drive sales equally well. I don’t know who conceived the BMR-3 first, but the company that responded in kind should have chosen something different, like a BREM-1 T-72 recovery vehicle, which is not available in plastic form.

At the beginning of every new year I'm excited about new kits that have not been previously announced (there are always surprises), but that excitement is tempered this year knowing that several kits will be variations on a theme.

So, who's taking bets on how long it will be until Tiger or Takom announce their own BMR-3?