FSM Most Wanted Poll - Ships

I agree. In the same thought, I would love to see a 1-350 HMS Nelson/Rodney and a 1-350 Ark Royal also.....Cheers mark

Even though there have been a few nice WW1 kits recently, I'd like to see more WW1 stuff.

Oh, as soon as I hit the reply key, I remembered another kit I would like to see- a bomb sloop or bomb ketch, in a decent scale.  There was a small scale bomb vessel a few years ago but I'd like to see one in 1:96 or even larger.

For myself, I think the lack of an angled-deck Essex-class carrier  in 1/350 styrene is a travesty, esp. considering how many different ships could come from the same molds.  Also, a 1/350 CVN65 with the beehive, a 1/350 CVN65 as decommissioned (with all the sat domes, etc.), and a 1/350 Nimitz-class as they exist today.

I want a 1/350 Alaska class cruiser.

I'm with Don. A 1/96 scale bomb vessel would be nice.   I also want a 1/350 Escourt carrier... preferably the USS Bouge.    Someone in the forums mentioned that there was a  1/350  Gamblier bay but its not quite the same.   I want a Bouge class escourt carrier without a lot of  "surgery" .

CV 6 would be nice, as would a lot of other ships. I would like to see British Revenge class BB, HMS Tiger, a British Town-Class cruiser, USS Pensacola, USS Baltimore, USS Alaska, USS Texas, etc. The wish list is a long one that spans two world wars and even the pre-dreadnought era. But, the way things are going, we won't have long to wait . . . (say a little prayer!)

Bill

More WW2 DD's

Cage masts for BB's

Frankly most anything from Jutland....

Under sail--Any of Perry's ships in the Lake campaigns.

A large scale 1/64 or 1/48 Cutter, and a Hoy would be outstanding--particularly in multimedia.

Perhaps some lumber schooners.

The ships of the fleet the other Perry took to Japan.

Some ships from ACW would not go amiss.

In powered ships, we deserve the ABCD line at  a minimum.  

Vessels from the Russo-Japanese war, perhaps?

Or, simply, a dropped hint to the manufacturers that many fleets have reused names across eras.  Could get some sales by kitting up every HMS Victory; ro every HMS Indefatigable--get to ships like USS Texas, or USS Virginia, where there are  4 and 5 and 6 potential kits in the gross sense, and more across different eras (three separate boxings of BB-35, if a company were so inclined, come to mind).

We really could use some "4 pipers" too, which could lead to DMS and APD kits.  How about some auxiliaries, too?  We really have never had a proper Neosho.  

Ok, and my personal bias--large scale modern small craft.  ATC, Monitors, Fasts & Swifts; LCP, LCP(R), LCPL and LCP(L)... How  about an LCM-7?  A LARC.?  An LCU.  Some not-random-Lindberg-scales LCI/LCI(L), and LSU , LST.  Now, I expect to see New Orleans or the new Anchorage out; but give us a LDS-1051, too, please.

I want a 1/350 German Surface Raider in plastic.Atlantis,Piinguin,Orion,Kormoron,any would be fine,just something up to today's standards.

And a new up to date SMS Emden

I do believe that we are losing sight here  

.  I think the question is intended to cover plastic , primarily . Now in that vein ,I would definitely like to see , not any smaller than 1/350  , some surface support ships .Not generics . I would definitely like models of the various sub and destroyer tenders . A really good seaplane tender would be in order here too . Now , that you got me started , how's about TRUMPETER , DRAGON or yes , even HASEGAWA or TAMIYA coming out with a really good and well detailed version of the POST-WAR angled deck carrier in any size BIGGER than 1/700 ? How about a good  fleet refrigerator ship or dry goods supply ship ? A really good C-1 or really good C-2 tanker .or in that vein , how about a very modern version of the fleet support vessels of today too ? Nothing smaller than 1/350 now . I can't work in 1/700 due to the small size wreaking havoc on the MK-1 -optical orbs .

 I like ships in wood ,BUT  , there's so much out there and those who choose ,  can create anything they like , just find something close and modify , modify , modify . I've done that for years . I think the scales are functioning to take us to specific areas of maritime history and material choices . A 1/96 Bomb Ketch is a little large for my taste  , where am I going to put it when it's done ? my 1/96 SKIPJACK OYSTER BOAT is in command of the largest shelf I have right now . 1/96 is NOT a good size for the area challenged and so  , there's also the reason many are going to 1/700  , or 1/350 plastiic , that's why I did . .     Tanker-builder        P.S. here's a good one . How about more of anything in 1/35 or 1/48 ?

CapnMac82

Under sail--Any of Perry's ships in the Lake campaigns.

A large scale 1/64 or 1/48 Cutter, and a Hoy would be outstanding--particularly in multimedia.

Perhaps some lumber schooners.

The Niagara would be good. I have attended two "Operation Sail" events at Duluth and have a bunch of pictures of her.  That is a very good replica, so the mfg would not have a hard time getting accurate reference material.

BTW, I have a Great Lakes lumber schooner (scratchbuilt) under way.

How about USS Midway in any of her configurations? I personally like the axial deck, but the angle deck versions would also be nice. Or, an axial USS Franklin D. Roosevelt, a Vietnam-era USS Coral Sea, and a post-1970's USS Midway?

I'm a military historian by trade - maritime historians wear different lenses which I'm reminded of every time I visit Ship Modeler. I think maritime historians like ships because they're sweet to the eye, played a big role in human history and people like ships. So maritime junkies warm to ship types and many ship modelers have an almost amazing knowledge of the technical nuts and bolts of ships - particularly if the type has found a soft spot for some reason. I tip my hat to all of them.

Military historians I think are more interested in history making. On sea, that leads to a study of naval power. So it certainly makes sense that military historians would also want to see major types of ships available to model because so many played an important role in the game of war and peace. So you bet I'd like to see a WWI battlecruiser and am very glad to see Trumpie coming out with Eskimo. But it is a curiosity of industrial war that the number of capital ships has actually gone down dramatically especially when compared to the relative wealth of nations. They've also increased tremendously in power. So, for a brief period during the Pacific War, a handful of ships had the ability to shape the duration and intensity of one of history's biggest conflicts - and one that shaped the map of Asia today. And it was in this war that Enterprise compiled a record that is almost astounding. I'll grant that the political impact of American frigate victories in 1812 had some importance - but their military importance of minimal. Not so the great carrier engagements of the Pacific War. We can grant US victory once it was clear Hitler was going to fail, but the duration of the Pacific War was very much in the air. It was this subject that was touched materially by CV6 - the one carrier that was in every major battle bar Coral Sea. Planes from the Enterprise helped sink five carriers among the 35 Japanese ships sunk or damaged by CV6. I got close to the Enterprise Association and many of the crew considered their home to be a "lucky ship." No doubt true. But too much good happened throughout the war not to conclude that fate gave the ship exceptional men and officers. And they lived to tell the story. (Probably one reason E isn't in plastic. Now if it would have been sunk it might have more fans.)

Not having Enterprise in 1/350 styrene is the equivalent of not having a 1/48 P-51, Spitfire, FW-190, Zero or BF-109. In armor it would be like having no Shermans, Tigers, Panzer IVs or T-34s. Can't imagine there not being a market. On Scale Hobbyist the new tool Shokoku and Zuikaku are back ordered, Dragon has recently done Princeton and Hasegawa Gambier Bay. Yet if you want to model history's most successful and important warship you have to track down Tamiya's old 1/700 or go resin. I don't get it.

Eric  

Eric,

I do not think that you are being fair to maritime and naval historians. Most of us, in fact, are deeply concerned with the history makers, and deeply lament the fact that the current growth in the availability of ship models is still far too young for many historic ships to not yet be represented in kits. Most of us agree with your assessment about the lack of any plastic kit of CV-6; if you read all of this thread you will find that she has in fact been mentioned several times.

I teach history in high school and in college for a living and am deeply concerned with all things historical. I know that John Tilley is a History Professor. There may be others in this forum as well.  To say that we are only concerned with ships we love is grossly inaccurate.

Bill

Some good points in here.

The comment about  a great deal of fate of nations being tied up in just a few ships brings up my question again--What of AO-23, USS Neosho?  

I'd rather see a AD-14 USS Dixie than another Bismark.

As a post script, for clarity, when I previously refereed to wood, it was in the sense of the ship material, not the kit material.  Although, PE & resin parts would certainly help plastic kits of wooden ships, particularly where the hulls ought appear 10-15mm thick and not 2-3.  

My votes for ships; a plastic 1/96th USS Niagara, plus Revell to reissue all of their original 1/96th sailing vessels, and, an affordable plastic cage-mast battleship, preferably 1/350th.

No offense intended - we're discussing plastic models here. I try to do a ship/plane/tank cycle and when it's ship time I go to Ship Modeler. Certainly there are people there that are most interested in an individual ship's record. But, as noted, what impresses me is the delight so many of them take in the ship end of things - you'll see discussions on extremely detailed matters of deck fittings etc (no small matter if you want an accurate model) but not much on operations. The end results are certainly impressive - nobody can quibble with a good ship model.

At present I'm engaged in a pretty good example of what I was talking about. My most recent writing concerned the South and Southwest Pacific. When I first started to develop my stash I was on the look-out for the real heavy hitters in the Solomon Campaigns. With some exceptions (Fletcher, San Francisco) they're not easy to find. No Brooklyns - that means no Helena. There are no Cleveland's so that leaves out what passed as "big guns" for a year of WWII. DML makes a lovely 1/350 Laffey. There were quite a few of them and all did honorable work. But where's a Sterett?  If you're going to put a name on a Fletcher why not a late 43 Charles Ausburne or O'Bannon? So now I'm doing a USN and IJN DDs that took part in Vella Gulf: Maury and Shigure. Both ships were among the most famous in the Solomons Campaign. I had to make a really lame Midship Gridley sit in for Maury and an old Tamiya Shiratsuyu to play the part of Shigure. Pit Road and Fujimi make Shiratsuyu class 1/700 DDs - Shigure didn't get a name plate. Shigure was one of the IJN's most distinguished ships: figure it.  In the 44 campaign we've got super battleships in good numbers - I guess Japanese modelers will pay big bucks for anything that wore their ensign. How about the US? Washington sunk a battleship - a rare day at the office in the Pacific War - and it's unavailable in 1/350. Nor are there any class of 44 USN "old" battleships that arguably did more to win campaigns than the lovely and spectacular flak platforms of the Iowa class. And it's not just the Pacific. Bismarck sank a battleship and got sunk in turn. There's nothing that helps a ship get into styrene faster than being big and getting sunk - and Bismarck, which was at the heart of an almost pitiful debacle qualifies on both ends and is WWIIs most famous warship. Scharnhorst is out there and deserves it. But what about the sinkers versus the sinkees? We can get a 1941 Prince of Wales and Repulse (got sunk). KGV, the UK's most distinguished warship is in 1943 garb. I'd like a 1941 KGV and a Rodney to boot. Want a later war British BB, why not Duke of York: it sunk Scharnhorst. The list is not complete. (For destroyers I wonder if makers don't count individual numbers. The Benson or Gleaves class DDs didn't win WWII but there were a lot of them that served honorable tours and that would leave a lot of relatives of men who served with them. Just a thought.)

Maybe the best example of what I'm getting at is Zvezda's Dreadnought (now joined by a Trumpie version.) No one will dispute Dreadnought's importance in naval history. It sunk a submarine - good work for a BB. But anyway you cut it, Dreadnought was not at Jutland. Important ship with a pretty short record in combat and the only British WWI warship available in styrene. (I do hope Trumpie follows a pattern and puts out a 1/350 WWI Queen Elizabeth - they've got a 1/700 out to accompany their 1/350 WWII rebuild.)

I doubt the industry is responding to the average modeler. Personally, I think an Enterprise would sell extremely well. But someone at the industry level isn't particularly interested in the role ships played in war or we wouldn't be looking at so many holes. It is possible that ships draw more modellers from Asia and Europe relative to the US. That would help explain why so many distinguished US vessels are in resin while the IJN and the KM (and even the French and Italians) are pretty well represented.

Eric

I agree most emphatically that the manufacturers  are attracted by ships that have either been sunk or are currently serving as museum ships. In fact, many of us have been actively trying to get the manufacturers to focus on ships that have more interesting stories to tell. Shigure is but one great example. And, they have expanded their selections over the past 15 years, but they still need to do a better job. We do not need another Bismarck or Yamato.

Historically, we could use some tenders, supply ships, and/or oilers; without them neither forward basing or the fleet trains could have existed. No one such ship is particularly historic; collectively, they enabled the USN to win WWII, sustain action in both Korea and Vietnam, and to react to any number of crises around the world today.

Sailing ships are particularly under represented. One earlier post advocated that Revell rerelease their entire 1/96 scale line. However, most of those models do not depict the ships the manufacturers say they do. Cutty Sark is an excellent kit; Thermopylae is simply a modified CS that looks nothing like the real ship. Similarly, Kearsarge is nice while the Alabama is pure fiction. The same can be said of Constitution and United States, and Bounty vs. Beagle.  Certainly many of Heller's line is fictional as well. The state of plastic sailing ship modeling is as dismal as the HECEPOB kits.

But, the situation is getting better.

Bill

I filled the ballot for a 1/350 BB35 USS Texas, immense amount of history and she is available should a manufacturer desire a 1:1 reference.  For other scales I would like to see some amphibs kitted, like the LSDs, LPDs and LSTs.  I like that there are new LHDs and LPDs available but there is a huge line that hasn’t made it to plastic yet – USS Germantown, Ogden, Cayuga, Dubuque and Comstock to name a few.  In other scales I recommended a 50’ Utility Boat, they seemed to be all over USN ports with myriad deck configurations and yet again neglected from plastic.

1/200 SMS EMDEN

1/350 HMS AGINCOURT

1/350 SMS SCHARNHORST and HMS INVINCIBLE

CV-6 has one major fault as subject for a model release.  It didn't blow up or sink with great loss of life.  I can only conclude from the over population of Bismarks, Yamatos, Titanics, etc that this is the best way to be immortalized by the plastic model industry.

I would like to see a USS Wyoming/Arkansas. They had the most main turrets of any US battleship, six, double barrel turrets. For sentimental reasons the USS Tenton CL-11, an Omaha class cruiser, they were distinguished by four funnel stacks. How about the IJN Shinano sunk only a few hours after it's first time on open water under it's own power. The entire Pearl Harbor "Battleship Row" and the rest of Ford Island's victims. AndrewMagoo

Earlier, I had said that we do not need another Yamato. But, on reflection, we do. I would love to see a Yamato "as built" with the 6" wing turrets. Every other Yamato kit depicts her as she was sunk.

Also, how about the Italian battleships Conte di Cavour or Giulio Cesare. These were among the most beautiful battleships to serve in WWII.

Bill

For some reason or other the Japanese manufacturers (principally Tamiya) have gotten into the habit of representing the Yamato in her final (or nearly final) configuration.  But the two Tamiya 1/700 Musashi kits have the wing turrets.  I can't remember whether Tamiya has done a 1/350 Musashi or not; I think so. 

As I recall from Mr Skulski's book, the two ships were almost identical at almost every point in their careers.  I ssem to remember that the most visible difference had to do with the pattern of the linoleum on the aircraft deck (but I may well be wrong about that)  Converting a Musashi kit into an as-built Yamato surely wouln't be difficult.

I think Fujimi has several Yamato in different configurations - again in 1/700.

Slightly later edit:  Fujimi has a 1/700 "commission version" Yamato (  http://www.freetimehobbies.com/FUJ42131/ ).   I have no idea how it compares to the Tamiya kits.  And Tamiya did relase a 1/350 Musashi in as-built configuration back in the late seventies.  Freetime Hobbies still lists it:  http://www.freetimehobbies.com/TAM78016/ .  Whaddya want to bet the company modifies its newer 1/350 Yamato into an as-built Musashi - and probably a Shinano - as well?

John,

Thank you for the information about the 1/700 scale kits, although I no longer build that scale. I do have three of the Tamiya 1/350 Musashi kits (I am planning a conversion into the ship into her as built configuration); that kit is post-1944 refit. An interesting piece of trivia about that refit was that the Musashi was fitted and equipped with depth charge racks, a detail left off of every manufacturer's kits of this ship.

How sure are you that the Musashi kit that you cite is in her as built configuration? I cannot tell from the picture but the kit number is different from the kits I have.

Thanks!

Bill

My choices were all in 1/700, and they were, the Langley (CV-1), the Ranger (CV-4), the Wasp (CV-7) and the Graf Zeppelin.

The US carriers are all available in resin, I know, but they're expensive, and in the case of the Langley, everyone who builds her finds problems that are difficult to deal with.

1/350 is too big for me, lack of display space.  But I do sympathize with you who prefer the larger scale.

As far as the Enterprise is concerned, I thought that there was one already in 1/350, from Trumpeter.  I thought that I saw one built once in one of Modeling Madness' galleries, or some other site.  Or maybe it was a kitbash of Trumpy's Hornet.

Bill,

I guess I was speaking out of turn when I said all the Tamiya Musashi kits were in "as-built" configuration.  (I'm not into 1/350 battleships; I can't afford them unless I'm really sure I'm actually going to build them - which I'm usually not.)

I can't tell much from that Freetime picture either.  I do remember that Tamiya reissued all its old 1/350 battleships a few years ago with no changes other than fancy, metallic finished boxes.  I wonder if that's what Freetime is selling.

For what little they're worth, my choices for "Most Wanted":

Aircraft, 1/72, 1/48, or 1/32:  Curtiss Jenny.

Ships, 1/700:  H.M.S. Dreadnought, any British WWII aircraft carrier (preferably the Ark Royal), any WWII capital ship.  (There's particular room for German ones.)  [Later edit:  that reference to "any WWII capital ship" was a dumb typo.  I hope it's obvious that I meant WWI.]

Ships, 1/350:  British WWII aircraft carrier.  Anything from WWI.

could not wait for a 1/350 angledeck SBC-27C so i made my own.