Big model, or BIG mistake??

Don't lose any sleep over it...

Manstein's revenge

spiralcity:

bondoman:

Manstein's revenge:

 

bondoman:

 

If you don't like that model, offer to build them a better one.

 

Oh, that sounds so sophmoric---"If you don't like it build a better one yourself". 

Is that your philosophy on everything?  Don't like the new kit from Company X?, make your own mouldings. Don't like your current President?, run for the office yourself?  Don't like the service at your local Dept. Store?, open one yourself?....

So unless you are going to "build a better mousetrap" don't critique?

 

Pretty much sums it up, which is why i don't ctritique stuff much.

 

Exactly Bondo, everyones a critic! Critics are a dime a dozen and opinions mean nothing.

If the curator dosent mind the mistakes, so bei it, it's thier call.

So back to Bondos point: If you dont like it, dont bother wasting your time to see it. If you think the museum could use a better one, then offer your services and build them an accurate ship.

Otherwise, dont lose sleep over it... Im sure their are better things to keep us occupied.

 

 

 

Not losing any sleep over it...just gonna bash the museum for displaying it...just takes a minute to do that and I sleep BETTER afterwards....better things to keep us occupied? Yes and no----apparently you have time to drop in and give your two cents as well...

Yep. I browse the forums Many and yes I gave my two cents, so what?

A bit over 10 years ago I visited the Planes of Fame Museum in Chino. It's not too far from where I live. As most here know, they have a beautful selection of real aircraft on display, many in flyable condtion. That is what I paid to get in to see. They also have a large display of built scale models on display built by local modelers. They had place to fill out a card asking if you are interested in building kits for the musuem to be put on display. Of course I filled one out. I never heard anythign about it again. Aside from name and basic contact information, the only other question was-"are you an IPMS member". At the time I was not. And I will say that most of the builds that were there were not of the quality that I see displayed at any of the LHS I frequent, the IPMS chapter I have since joined, much of the work I see on here, or any of the builds that I have turned out in the past 20 years. Just because you can do better and offer to do so, does not mean that the museum will accept your offer. I doubt any of us (or anybody else) goes to Chino, USS Lexington, San Diego Air & Space Museum, or any other museum to see the models. Enjoy the primary purpose of your visit, where ever it happens to be.

spiralcity

bondoman:

Manstein's revenge:

 

bondoman:

 

If you don't like that model, offer to build them a better one.

 

Oh, that sounds so sophmoric---"If you don't like it build a better one yourself". 

Is that your philosophy on everything?  Don't like the new kit from Company X?, make your own mouldings. Don't like your current President?, run for the office yourself?  Don't like the service at your local Dept. Store?, open one yourself?....

So unless you are going to "build a better mousetrap" don't critique?

 

Pretty much sums it up, which is why i don't ctritique stuff much.

 

Exactly Bondo, everyones a critic! Critics are a dime a dozen and opinions mean nothing.

If the curator dosent mind the mistakes, so bei it, it's thier call.

So back to Bondos point: If you dont like it, dont bother wasting your time to see it. If you think the museum could use a better one, then offer your services and build them an accurate ship.

Otherwise, dont lose sleep over it... Im sure their are better things to keep us occupied.

 

 

So did the U.S. Navy......

Bockscar

.

Here's a relevant development; Tamiya is re-releasing it's 1/350 Yamato.

The kit was originally tooled with incomplete reference material.

Researchers have since documented the sunken wreck and in light of the new material, Tamiya felt compelled to retool the kit to make it more accurate.

Yeah, they added a few holes that weren't in the original release...

Mark

Yeah,

I can just see the execs back at Tamiya:

"Releasing the first Yamato was a big mistake!

We need to issue a world-wide recall due to inaccuracies that may damage

the public image of the ship!"

bondoman

Manstein's revenge:

 

bondoman:

 

If you don't like that model, offer to build them a better one.

 

Oh, that sounds so sophmoric---"If you don't like it build a better one yourself". 

Is that your philosophy on everything?  Don't like the new kit from Company X?, make your own mouldings. Don't like your current President?, run for the office yourself?  Don't like the service at your local Dept. Store?, open one yourself?....

So unless you are going to "build a better mousetrap" don't critique?

 

Pretty much sums it up, which is why i don't ctritique stuff much.

Exactly Bondo, everyones a critic! Critics are a dime a dozen and opinions mean nothing.

If the curator dosent mind the mistakes, so bei it, it's thier call.

So back to Bondos point: If you dont like it, dont bother wasting your time to see it. If you think the museum could use a better one, then offer your services and build them an accurate ship.

Otherwise, dont lose sleep over it... Im sure their are better things to keep us occupied.

Oh may the good Lord have mercy...

When i built the first two ship models in my then young life, they were the Missouri and the New Jersey, which fought out many a battle on the carpet in my bedroom with my friend Curtis Joe's fleet.

Then they were supported by all of the Essex class angled deck carriers, the ones with the big "Beware Jet Blast" decals.

Those stank though because they were full hull and the props broke off in the carpet.

Look ever upward with ship models. There aren't too many bad ones, but they just get better.

With that, I'm out of here as far as this thread is concerned. I think the OP did not establish that the SD model was a "mistake", far from it.

Tracy White

As a correction, the Tamiya Yamato referenced is not re-tooled; it is all new. No parts were re-used. I think it is a good and valid question though.

This means Tamiya will cease all production of the original?

As a correction, the Tamiya Yamato referenced is not re-tooled; it is all new. No parts were re-used. I think it is a good and valid question though.

USS Lexington is looking for models....

http://www.usslexington.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=275&Itemid=333

Here's their current list:

http://www.usslexington.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=279&Itemid=337

Maybe build the Musashi.....have they found it yet?

Well, if you're satisfied with the older kit, keep it. If you prefer the newer, more currently researched kit and have the money for it, go for the new beast.

mfsob

OK, then - let us know how you get on with that.

Here's a relevant development; Tamiya is re-releasing it's 1/350 Yamato.

The kit was originally tooled with incomplete reference material.

Researchers have since documented the sunken wreck and in light of the new material, Tamiya felt compelled to retool the kit to make it more accurate.

So, do I ditch my original kit......lol.....I have to admire Tamiya's dedication to, and investment in, accuracy and detail.

OK, then - let us know how you get on with that.

If the answer is a real "No, it shouldn't be displayed in a museum of this caliber," then it should be replaced.

I've seen an entire war memorial torn down on just such a question combined with a lack of funding. Just have to find the cash.

If the answer is merely an opinion of a question merely rhetorical, then "No, it shouldn't be displayed in a museum of this caliber because it is an inaccurate representation," is a debate that is always worth having in our moot court.

As a tool of education and an historic memorial, maybe the museum should/could up a plaque explaining the errors of scale and detail and explain why/how they ended up on such a huge model.

These sorts of things end up taking on a history of their own.

It might be, if it helped keep the doors open. Then again, maybe it's more important that they make sure all their models are correct so that they can sell them when they shut down and the ship is scrapped. This isn't a black & white issue.

I'm currently lobbying the Smithsonian to take a model of the Hiryu in 1/72nd scale that I built out of hubcaps and cow patties over the past 37 years...I mean, why shouldn't they display it?  Its BIG and I put a helluva lotta work into her...that should be respected, if for nothing else, for the "folk-art" aspect of it...to heck with accuracy, it should garner a lot of interest and isn't that what's important?

CapnMac82

If I had to guess, some of the reaction here is the sort of thing ship modelers can collect over time (inured or inculcated, either way) from being around ship models.

We have a Beagle that is really Bounty; Oregon as Maine; 'pirate' ships galore; we have random scales, and spurious research and breath-takingly oblivious marketing.  We have the Constellation controversy, too.  We have the near-endless debates on 7-12-41 Pearl Harbor ship colors.

What may also be partly here is that we also have the Hull model of the Constitution, too.

What happens in 50, 100, 200 years, when someone points to this "BB-59 S. Dakota" and tries to make it gibe with the other available kits, the other available plans out there?

I think this has an Occam's Razor we can apply. 

If the hull number were BB-78, and the name on the stern U.S.S. Marinanas, would we stil lbe having this argument?  Or, if it were labeled for being CB-9, USS Virgin Islands?

I think, I hope, the answer would be "no."  Or, it would be on whether this was a speculative super BB or CB class of ship.

 Good point! The original question was if the museum made the right choice displaying this model the way it is, with the name "South Dakota" on the stern, and a plaque which notes that he "encorporated all the changes he could find, including the fifth screw" into the model. That at least implies that it is a model of the actual ship. Again, it's the museum's choice I question, not the guy who made it.

If I had to guess, some of the reaction here is the sort of thing ship modelers can collect over time (inured or inculcated, either way) from being around ship models.

We have a Beagle that is really Bounty; Oregon as Maine; 'pirate' ships galore; we have random scales, and spurious research and breath-takingly oblivious marketing.  We have the Constellation controversy, too.  We have the near-endless debates on 7-12-41 Pearl Harbor ship colors.

What may also be partly here is that we also have the Hull model of the Constitution, too.

What happens in 50, 100, 200 years, when someone points to this "BB-59 S. Dakota" and tries to make it gibe with the other available kits, the other available plans out there?

I think this has an Occam's Razor we can apply. 

If the hull number were BB-78, and the name on the stern U.S.S. Marinanas, would we stil lbe having this argument?  Or, if it were labeled for being CB-9, USS Virgin Islands?

I think, I hope, the answer would be "no."  Or, it would be on whether this was a speculative super BB or CB class of ship.

I think many of you need to keep this in perspective. Let's ask a couple of questions:

1) How, exactly, does this miss-represent history?

2) What are the odds that this model could inspire someone to learn more about history or help the ship?

3) would any of you truthfully, honestly tell a financially strapped museum that might lose their ship that they need to spend MORE money on a model when they have a leaky ship?

As some of you know, I spend a lot of time and money trying to determine Battleship Arizona's final paint scheme. It's important to a certain level, but I don't think for a second that any of the sailors that died on her gave a damn what color the paint that was burning with them was.

We care about detail because it's part of the hobby for many of us. But often times a low-grade product is going to be seen by more than something finely tuned. I hated Pearl Harbor the movie for the gaffs it "taught" people, but loved that it least put the attack out there and gave us a chance to correct that, rather than letting it slip into obscurity.

Aim high, but don't be afraid of turning low-hanging fruit into opportunity as well.

Notice the bubble-top P-47 floatplanes on the catapults? That along with any number of other details in the photos makes it clear, to me at least, that the model is a What-if Über-BB design, perhaps a post Montana class mega-ship. Looks pretty cool to me and it appears that the creator had loads of fun, and is probably laughing his butt off right now.

Regards, Jon

Thank Goodness ,It,s not considered a model of the LEX herself ! I would say the effort far outweighs the inaccuracies .I built a model that was housed in the foyer of the EDGEWATER LOUNGE in the NEW then convention center and hotel being operated by TRUSTHOUS FORTEin LITTLE ROCK , ARK . . They wanted an accurate model including the wheel BUT , they did NOT want any hull below the waterline .I thought they were screwy , BUT , I was recovering from the tornado of 82 that ripped through central ARKANSAS .Money was very short ! The model now is in storage somewhere ! I would,ve given my eye teeth for the steamboat pictures on the walls of the place . They were , many of them old and real oil on canvas paintings .I have always wondered where they got them .SO I made my model look like a blend of three boats pictured .If it had gone to a museum I would,ve definitely done a single version of an historic stern-wheel steamer . I named her the "EDGEWATER PRINCESS " . and they loved her . SO , in a wind -up on this If they had asked someone for an accurate model of the LEXINGTON then yeah ,it,s dead wrong .BUT , for the sheer magnitude of the model obviously built with info that was NOT correct it,s fascinating to look at . It reminds me of some of the " what if " drawings in the old POPULAR MECHANICS or POPULAR SCIENCE or even MECHANIX ILLUSTRATED Magazines .I say give credit where credit is due , yeah , it,s incorrect , BUT , what a helluva lot of work .

I would venture a guess that most folks who buy tickets do it for the experience of being on board an aircraft carrier, not for the model displays.  The models are just embellishments to the main attraction.

BTW, I was on the Lex in 1975 when it had "real" stuff onboard...

Mark

I would say it is a mistake.

I am glad the guy put in the effort and made a great something, I wouldn't call it a model. HOWEVER, information gleaned from MUSEUMS is supposed to be considered reliable. If someone uses this as a source of information on the South Dakota, they would be wrong. Unless of course the display makes clear the model has very limited similarities to the South Dakota.

This model alone is not revising history, but it is a sign the museum might not be as hung up on accuracy and telling history correctly.

Manstein's revenge

No personal attack---I like Bondo...

I just don't think the answer to every critique is: "It should stay/you shouldn't criticize, unless you can/are willing [to] make one better yourself"...

After all I would certainly tell you that Pearl Harbor the movie sucked, but I'm not about to try to make a better one.

I guess my tolerance level for ship models is colored by an appreciation of them as a form of folk art, or something.

Manny,

I can appreciate that.

Bill

No personal attack---I like Bondo...

I just don't think the answer to every critique is: "It should stay/you shouldn't criticize, unless you can/are willing [to] make one better yourself"...