Now I know how the Sci-Fi people feel.........

QUOTE: Originally posted by Jim Barton Seriously, though, I was mentioning in another thread about how I can't get enough of FSM, and that after I read the new issue, I go back to my stash and read an issue that's six or seven years old.

I still read old ones when I'm bored and just looking for something to read. Never know when you might cross something that helps you out on something you might be wanting to try or need to do.

I personally feel sometimes FSM has too many armor articles, but I usually read them anyway. You never know when an armor modeler might have a tip or technique that could be used on something else. And it would be nice if FSM did something a bit different a little more often rather than the 2956th article about how to detail a P-51 cockpit. A bit more sci-fi, for example, even though I don't build sci-fi. A few more airliners or emergency vehicles, even though I don't build those either. Something a bit more unusual for a change. Seriously, though, I was mentioning in another thread about how I can't get enough of FSM, and that after I read the new issue, I go back to my stash and read an issue that's six or seven years old.

QUOTE: Originally posted by rebelreenactor actually, FSM had a review on a 1/72 PUMA a while back. Not sure which issue though. Oh and hey guys, how would you like a review of this "target" or maybe this one. better turn on those afterburners to get past one of those! And hold the ejection handel aat all times.

Don't need afterburners for those. We'll just send a Warthog in "down in the dirt" and see how well that vehicle handles 30mm depleted uranium rounds.
Go Ugly Early!

Mike

QUOTE: Originally posted by saltydog who wants to read a review on a target?LOL

Good one Chris!

Mike

Cant we all just get along!? ROFLMAO, wow, I say its time to riot in the streets and loot our LHS!!! Just kidding, but I do know how you feel when you have waited all this time and you find very little in this months issue to satisfy your cravings. I had been waiting for quite some time for the review of the Roden Mohawk, and when I gave up on it there it was in this months issue. I guess it takes time for the kit to become available, contact someone to build it, for the actual construction time, and then to condence it into an article and then set it up in the magazine.

I do agree on the ungodly plethera of certain kit species out there. 109's, P-51's please dont subject me to another. Lets instead garner our pioneering spirit and forge ahead into new and undiscovered country. Give me a 1/48 Chinook, give me some modern armor in the same scale. All I want for Christmas is a new Stryker in 1/35 scale. Not another Sherman, the shelves are already choked with those types of offerings.

Ok I'll climb down now, thanks for reading this far.

Well I agree and disagree.

First, I agree you can't satisfy every persons taste. Some subjects are way overdone (Tiger, Mustang, etc). Problem them being overdone, is the perceived interest in the most popular subjects. I just don't think an article on a Cessna (don't throw any rocks please) just wouldn't excite a majority of the readers. They are a interested minority and the magazine is catering to the masses.

Second agreement is the saturation of WW II. Again I agree and happily so. My main interest is WW II and weapons of historical eras. So I'm a happy camper on that one. Again, the magazine caters to the masses perceived interest. WW II is a very popular subject among the baby boomers (me) and many of the younger modelers that I've seen in the forums. Also our younger senior members have a great interest. Not to mention all the modeling subjects of that great war. Therefore a wide array of age groups is represented.

Lastly I disagree a bit on the lack of armor how-tos and coverage. Naturally armor being my primary focal point I'd love to see the entire magazine doused with tread articles, but that of course wouldn't be fair. I also enjoy, wingy and floaty models as well. There have been a few good how-tos such as the article on zimmerit, John Plzaks M1 Abrams, Tiger and Panther kit comparisons, T-34 bed-spring and so on. There are usually a few in the Readers Gallery and the occasional review.

I'm just disappointed in the lack of reviews in this months issue. Many new kits have been released and I feel even more for the braille scale builders who rarely get a review. Sure you can't please everyone, that's why we alternative options such as Military in Scale, MMIR, Scale Auto, etc................Who knows maybe next month will be all armor.

Zokissima,

I'm not trying to squabble, so please don't be offended by this question: what do you expect in terms of coverage of armor kits?

To put it another way, how could FSM's coverage of armor kits be improved?

I think that's a more constructive discussion than simply complaining about lack of coverage.

Going from memory, this issue has an article on a really big artillery piece and weathering a Tiger tank.

Last issue (I think) had an article on making tank interiors from scratch and a review of a British Challenger tank. Another issue in the past year showed how to make limited run kits (the author was Cookie Sewell). The D-Day issue featured airplanes and armor, but no ships.

One category that's been missing from FSM is 1/72 and 1/76 scale armor.

However, I've always found the mix of articles pretty darned good. There've been enough artcles on armor to make me think about building an armor kit!

I've also found that techniques highlighted in artcles on, say, sci-fi kits, are often transferable to airplane kits.

The above, however, is only my opinion. What do you think would make FSM's armor coverage better?

Oh, and what is TMMI?

Regards,

To be honest, I've kind of given up on FSM and Armor. I tend to go to TMMI for that, as the articles and reviews for Armor are far superior. I find that entirely too much is dedicated to AC. If you go in any hobby shop, or even the counts on this forum, it's fairly obvious to see that if modelling were split into two groups only (sorry all you watery and spacey guys) the groups are aircraft and armor. So why is it that so little coverage is dedicated to armor, so few actual full-length articles on builds of armor, and so many of AC? And please don't point out the weathering 'feature' of the Tiger that is in the current issue. Disapointing, to say the least...

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lufbery I'm all for more armor reviews...as long as it's not WWII German armor! I mean, geez, that's all anyone ever seems to talk about or build. Actually, WWI German anything: cars, planes, armor, artillery, and horse-drawn carts -- anything German from WWII is overdone. I think it is horribly unfair to people who like other topics, that the cover story of this month's FSM featured a WWII German Tiger tank! I mean, really. German tanks are so freaking odd. They use odd acronyms that can't be pronounced (like PKZPTH H, or something like that). Some of the terms for vehicles sound vaguely obscene, like Kettenkrad. That sounds like something awful you'd do to a small cat. But to take it one step further, I'm sick of seeing all the instruments of death and destruction featured in FSM. Let's see more spaceflight vehicles, civil airplanes, and motorcycles. In fact, I've been offended by some of the construction equipment that gets featured in the Readers' Gallery -- it reminds me of the violence of urban sprawl. Okay, if you've read this far, I hope you realize the above was meant as satire. FSM does a great job of presenting a very wide variety of topics. I think it's unfair to expect a perfect balance of kit topics in each issue, but over the course of a year, there's plenty to interest everyone. I do think that kits on WWII topics, especially German topics, are over covered. And I would like to see more civil airplanes, spaceflight vehicles, and motorcycles. But I'm not expecting FSM to cover everything in each issue. Regards,

I can't agree with you more. Exactly how many Mustangs, Spitfires and 109s do we need? As far as tanks go, I see more kits of the Tigers and Panthers by the different manufacturers than anything else, another reason NOT to do a tank. I will admit to buying the occasional tank but only of the truly odd or unusual.

I'm all for more armor reviews...as long as it's not WWII German armor! I mean, geez, that's all anyone ever seems to talk about or build.

Actually, WWI German anything: cars, planes, armor, artillery, and horse-drawn carts -- anything German from WWII is overdone.

I think it is horribly unfair to people who like other topics, that the cover story of this month's FSM featured a WWII German Tiger tank!

I mean, really. German tanks are so freaking odd. They use odd acronyms that can't be pronounced (like PKZPTH H, or something like that). Some of the terms for vehicles sound vaguely obscene, like Kettenkrad. That sounds like something awful you'd do to a small cat.

But to take it one step further, I'm sick of seeing all the instruments of death and destruction featured in FSM. Let's see more spaceflight vehicles, civil airplanes, and motorcycles. In fact, I've been offended by some of the construction equipment that gets featured in the Readers' Gallery -- it reminds me of the violence of urban sprawl.

Okay, if you've read this far, I hope you realize the above was meant as satire. FSM does a great job of presenting a very wide variety of topics. I think it's unfair to expect a perfect balance of kit topics in each issue, but over the course of a year, there's plenty to interest everyone.

I do think that kits on WWII topics, especially German topics, are over covered. And I would like to see more civil airplanes, spaceflight vehicles, and motorcycles. But I'm not expecting FSM to cover everything in each issue.

Regards,

Ya just can't please all the people all the time...or some of the people...or something like that!

Luckily, I like everything, so I'm pleased all the time! (Some of my friends say I'm way too "easy," whatever that means!)

Ten reviews gives everyone a better chance for a kit that they may be interested in
to be reviewed. My main interest is in aircraft , however the wait for the Dragon King-
tiger review was.... frustrating. Now I can't find the photo my uncle brought back so I
guess I'll have to get the other kit to be sure.
Harry

QUOTE: Originally posted by tigerman QUOTE: Originally posted by rjkplasticmod I thought the coverage was great !! Need more Aircraft in the next issue though . Regards, Rick Curse you wingy guys (pumps fist in the air). Yeah you may as well have all 10!

Definately need more wingy things.

actually, FSM had a review on a 1/72 PUMA a while back. Not sure which issue though.

Oh and hey guys, how would you like a review of this "target"


or maybe this one.


better turn on those afterburners to get past one of those! And hold the ejection handel aat all times.

Well, I'm in an even smaller minority.

Every time they review an Armor kit, it is a 1/35th scale kit. I don't think I've ever seen a review in a 1/72 scale Armor kit in FSM; at least not in many years. I guess there aren't enough parts for them to consider it a model.

QUOTE: Originally posted by saltydog who wants to read a review on a target?LOL

Not so much a review as target identification practise!

Karl

I see the wingy guys have no problem with that. They tend to get the bulk of the reviews every month. I noticed no cars either Chris, might have a bit to do with all the car model mags out there. Anyway, I hope next months reviews are a little more balanced out.

Don't forget those of us that like doing a car here and there as well.

who wants to read a review on a target?LOL

QUOTE: Originally posted by tigerman In next months FSM there are 10 workbench reviews: 8 are wingy, 1 floaty, and 1 Sci-fi. 0, count it 0, armor related. How can the second most popular forum have 0 reviews? I just don't get it. There have been plenty kits released. I'm bummed.

tigerman, you say that like there's somthing wrong

Armor will get its due; it's just at a low point in the cycle. Just seeing any sci-fi in there is major event!

Just give it time and there'll be a slew of armor kits for review. Gotta give a little time to the others out there, and you never know when a kit will grab your interest just by being reviewed in FSM. I enjoy seeing what's new in all the various fields of this great hobby.

I almost cried when I saw it! I was not happy either. Maybe they will reverse it next time with all of dragons new releases.

QUOTE: Originally posted by rjkplasticmod I thought the coverage was great !! Need more Aircraft in the next issue though . Regards, Rick

Curse you wingy guys (pumps fist in the air). Yeah you may as well have all 10!

I thought the coverage was great !! Need more Aircraft in the next issue though .

Regards, Rick

eric i am sure the following issue will make up for it. they are doing a good job overall.

joe

here....hear Tigerman......
......though i'm primarily a wingnut......WW II......Airliners.......& General Aviation.......i've "expanded" some of my horizons and lQQk (optimistically) towards FSM to start to include some of the Great Sci-Fi stuff that's out there.....

LOL...that has to be a first.....more sci-fi than armor...I am shocked!

Dan