SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Lindberg Blue Devil destroyer

9213 views
9 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    November 2005
Lindberg Blue Devil destroyer
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, May 28, 2004 4:22 PM
Can any of you sea dogs out there give me an opinion on this kit? Anyone ever built it? My experience with Lindberg kits in the past has not been real positive since they tend to be rudimentary & lack detail, but the possibilities of a Fletcher class destroyer in this scale are really intriguing. One would think that a big scale kit like this would pack tons of detail which could perhaps be even further enhanced by some aftermarket additions. I'm not a dead-serious ship modeler so I'm not overly concerned with having a 100% accurate historical representation of the USS Melvin (I've noticed that you guys on the ship forum tend to be serious as heart attacks about your work, so don't be too hard on a hapless visitor from the aircraft side). So,do you bluejackets think that this kit is worth the 50 or 60 bucks that's being asked for it? Also, I'd like to get your opinions on a couple of submarine kits: the Revell Andrew Jackson & the Revell 1/125 U-boat with visible interior. Everyone these days seems to be flocking to the new 1/72 U-boat kit & I'm curious about what you guys think of these smaller & less expensive alternatives.
Thanks in advance for your comments, all you boat-heads out there.
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, May 28, 2004 5:43 PM
My son built 'Fletcher' as an R/C boat; looks good on the local pond. There's a lot of after market stuff to dress it up. you should get some good information from others here, also a visit to www.modelwarships.com would be worth your while.

Regards,
Bruce
  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: NE Georgia
Posted by Keyworth on Friday, May 28, 2004 8:21 PM
The kit has great potential for turning into a great model, but it will take a good bit of detail work and scratchbuilding. The above link will be a good help.
"There's no problem that can't be solved with a suitable application of high explosives"
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Friday, May 28, 2004 9:13 PM
The Lindberg kit is an odd one. For its time (early 60s, if I remember right) it was one of the best detailed warship kits available, and in some ways it still holds its own. (Few plastic warship kits have as much detail on their superstructure bulkheads, for example. And, if memory serves, the plates on the gunhouses are outlined with countersunk lines - this in the days when airplane kits rarely had countersunk detail.) On the other hand some of the detail is pretty crude. The sights on the 40mm guns are blobs, and the radar screens are solid plastic slabs. (I suspect that was deliberate to some extent; the thing was intended primarily as an operating model, and the radar screen on top of the mast probably served as a good handle.)

It's gotten some pretty brutal criticism from enthusiasts because the proportions of the hull and superstructure deviate considerably from reality. (Again, that may conceivably have something to do with the motorization idea.) If you compare a silhouette of it with the plans of a real Fletcher the difference will be pretty obvious.

On the other hand, it's a really fun kit. I got one as a birthday present when I was in junior high school (the kit was almost new then; my age is showing), and had a great time trying to hook up all the cams and connecting rods that were supposed to drive the gun houses, director, and rudders. I was never quite able to get them all working simultaneously, but that probably was due to my pre-teenaged ineptitude. On the basis of what you've said about your interests, if I were you I'd buy it and have a good time with it.

The Revell Andrew Jackson is a reissue of an old Renwal kit, also from the early 60s. It has some interest for historical reasons. Admiral Rickover, the "head of the nuclear navy" at the time, made quite a stink in the media with his claim that the issuing of such a hobby kit compromised national security. Elsewhere in this forum there's a long thread of comments about it from people who know far more about nuclear submarines than I do. The consensus seems to be that the basic shape is reasonably accurate but the interior is pure fiction. One wonders whether the admiral was blowing a calculated smoke screen.

As I remember there are two Revell cutaway U-boat kits - a Type VII and a Type XXI. (My memory is a bit shaky about this one.) I haven't built either of them, but I've looked at the VII and read some reviews of the XXI.

The Type VII dates from one of Revell's drearier periods, the late 70s, when the company was trying to cut corners and appeal to the kids' market. It's pretty primitive. When it was initially released, Revell ran an ad for it in several periodicals. The ad featured a dramatic painting of the sub traveling at speed under water, with an incredibly huge torpedo apparently suspended from its side. Close inspection revealed that the model sat on a stand with a nameplate shaped like a torpedo; the artist thought the nameplate was part of the actual sub, and nobody at Revell corrected him. The kit gained a certain amount of notoriety when it got reissued in a box labeled "U-505." U-505, of course, is the Type IX U-boat preserved at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago. When the museum's gift shop started selling the kit, and purchasers discovered that it didn't look like the real ship, such a ruckus was raised that Revell pulled the kit off the market.

The Type XXI, I believe, is a considerably more recent kit and, if my memory of the reviews is correct, an excellent one - probably the best of the "cutaway sub" genre. I think it originated with Revell of Germany. If I were going to tackle any of those three kits, that would be the one.

Youth, talent, hard work, and enthusiasm are no match for old age and treachery.

  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, May 29, 2004 9:01 AM
Thanks for the outstanding comments, guys. You've answered with the knowledgability &
professionalism that I have come to expect from you nautical people. Other comments
still welcome.
  • Member since
    October 2003
Posted by se5022 on Saturday, May 29, 2004 9:26 AM
I have one too. I like the large scale, but it does leave something to be desired on the detail end. If you just want a display model, it would work with minimal scratchbuilt additions. It all depends on how much work and effort you want to put into it.
  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: 37deg 40.13' N 95deg 29.10'W
Posted by scottrc on Monday, May 31, 2004 7:34 PM
I RCd this kit. For a operating model it is so so. Of coarse that was before micro servos LiPo Batteries, and dime sized speed controls. It was a bear to balance. For detailing, almost all the radio and guns are out of scale. As for the hull, it is not bad which gives this kit potential. Also, the price is VERY good for this scale of model.
Scott

  • Member since
    January 2003
Posted by Jeff Herne on Tuesday, June 1, 2004 1:30 PM
There's an extensive article I wrote on Modelwarships on accurizing this kit. It was written long before the aftermarket turrets and other additional stuff.

I spoke to Tom Harrison of Tom's Modelworks last week, and he's getting ready to release a set for this kit. Since I wrote the article, he and I have been working closely to address some of the kit issues.

If you expect to make an accurate model from this kit, I would suggest purchasing the 1/192 Bluejacket kit, or the 1/192 resin kit from Iron Shipwrights. In short, here's some of the issues with this model...

Hull sheer is non-existent.
Midship bulwarks need to be repositioned.
Twin rudders on kit are suitable only for the last 4 ships of the class DD-800-804
Bridge face has 5 portholes, not 4 as on the kit, replace bridge face.
Screws need to be replaced.
Stern is too thin.
Searchlight platforms are wrong.
Rails on 02, 03, levels and platforms, are molded on 'walls' that need to be removed and replaced.
Turrets are incorrect shape, and mounted too far forward of center.
20mm and 40mm will need to be replaced.
Radar and Mk 37 Fire Control Director need to be replaced.
Torpedo tube housing is far too small.

I could go on...but here's the link to the article.

http://www.modelwarships.com/features/current/fletcher/fletcher_index.htm

Regards,

Jeff Herne
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15, 2004 1:43 PM
i have built 2 of these destroyers for r/c from kits that were started by someone else and not finished. one was about %90 completed and the other %10. some parts were missing. i finished one as the kits shows. the other one has the airplane catapult mod. i am more interested in r/c than scale but even i could not stand the top radar. there is a yahoo group lindyfletcher that has pictures.
don
  • Member since
    August 2004
Posted by Ernie on Thursday, August 19, 2004 9:49 AM
I just finished the kit, But I have to say the only thing it's good for is the basic parts of the ship structure,funnels etc... It took me 21/2 years and countless hours finding research but I did it. everything and I mean everything had to be built form scratch or re-built from the bottom up. I knew this going in, but after I saw what Bob Steinbrunn did with the Bluejacket shipcrafters kit I couldn't resist. I couldn't afford that kit so I bought lindburgs kit. I will have pictures soon. You can E-mail me at webberernie@yahoo.com and I could tell you more. I don't have any way of putting pictures on the computer so I would have to send them to you. Hope to hear from you. Ernie
JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS
FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.