A senile whine in the wilderness of ship modeling

I agree with millard's appraisal of the Imai kits. The Imai Cutty Sark, in my opinion, was the best representation of that vessel in kit form - plastic, wood, or otherwise - of which I'm aware. In many ways it was superior to the big Revell kit (which, to be fair, is about twenty years older). I remember the beautiful Imai decals representing the Cutty Sark's stern ornamentation. You could almost read the ship's motto surrounding the device in the center of the stern - almost but, mercifully, not quite. (The ship's owner's name was John Willis. The motto is "Where There's A Willis Away.")

The kit did suffer from a couple of small, amusing errors. The designers obviously worked from the excellent plans by George Campbell, who was involved in the restoration of the ship back in the fifties. I can think of no better source. The problem was that a few significant bits of information on those plans are written out - and the Imai designers apparently didn't read English.

Example: On the Cutty Sark's maindeck are two cargo winches, one in front of the mainmast and one in front of the foremast. The forward one has a gadget called a cable lifter on each end. (The cable lifters were used to rouse the anchor cables out of the cable locker, before the anchors were let go.) Campbell made one detail drawing to represent both winches. He showed a cable lifter on one end, and beneath the drawing wrote "Cable lifters on both ends of forward winch only." The Imai kit has two identical winches - each with a cable lifter on one end, just like the drawing.

Two minutes with an X-acto knife and a little cement would fix those winches, and ten minutes and a few square inches of styrene sheet would cure the problems of the misshapen "booby hatch" aft of the mainmast. When we get down to points of detail like that, we're obviously talking about a good kit - one from a different planet than the nonsensical objects that some other companies market as scale models of sailing vessels.

I also liked the Imai series of 1/350 sail training ships, which came out in the late seventies when "tall ship" fever was at its height. They were nicely detailed kits with, if I recall, vacuum-formed sails. (My personal custom is to discard such things before leaving the hobby shop - along with whatever gimmick the manufacturer uses to fake the shrouds, ratlines, and deadeyes. I agree with millard on that point too.) The big inherent problem with those little kits, for course, is that the plastic masts and yards are so flexible; I'd suggest replacing those parts with wood or wire. And some of the kits in that series recycled each other's hulls and other components - sometimes appropriately, sometimes not. But they were generally nice kits.

As millard mentioned, quite a few of the 1/350 kits have been reissued by other companies lately. Others come up fairly frequently on E-bay. Originally they were all waterline kits; some of the reissues have additional parts for the underwater hulls. We had a most interesting exchange on this forum yesterday about one of them, the Mircea. It's a few lines down the forum under the title "Three-masted bark."

Dogzboz
The Imai Sailing ships are probably the best plastic sailing ship kits made.They are up there with Hellers 1/100 scale HMS Victory & Soleil Royal,and Revells 1/96 USS Constitution.Only on a smaller size bases.Most of the kits come with preformed plastic sails. But I've found a couple with cloth sails.The 1/70 Santa Maria,The 1/160 Galeass, and the 1/80 Chebec have cloth sails.The kits go together well.They have good detail on them.One of the nice thing is most of there kits let you rig your own deadeyes and shrouds. They don't have the preformed ones that to me detract from model.Aoshima model co. has some if not all of the Imai molds now and are reissuing some of the kits.
Most of them run about $150.00 a kit you can find them at Hobby Link Japan.Imai also made 1/350 scale of all the modern Tall Ships back in 1976 for the Bicentennial. That came here for OP Sail. These have also been reissued by different companys.Like Mini Craft and others.You can find a lot of the kits on E Bay just depends what you want to pay. Myself I'm trying to find another 1/50 Catalan.I built one two years ago its the prize of my built collection. I want to try another in a water dio. Hope that helps.
Rod

I have only built 2 ship models in my 20+ years of modeling. I just turned 33 last December.

When I retire, my scratchbuilding of wooden ships will begin. I am looking forward to it.

I was interested in the first post by jtilley regarding the Imai sailing ship kits from the 70's, are they any good?, what material were the sails made from in the kit? (if they had any).
Regards
Rob

I hadn't noticed that glitch in the scales of the two Victory kits. Both of them date from the Olde Days when kits were sized to fit standardized boxes. I suspect we've reached the point where the people in charge of marketing don't know how to do the math necessary to establish the scale of a model.

The Revell Victory is, in my opinion, marginally the better of the two - a nice kit, within the limitations of the scale and the time when it was originally released.

One thing I noticed is that the Airfix HMS Victory in 1/180 scale seems to be bigger than the Revell Germany HMS Victory in 1/146 scale. I could be wrong but perhaps this is another example of bad marketing on someone's part.
I'm 36, soon to be 37. I think my generation was the last generation to build lots of models when we were young. I'll admit that when video games came along I played as much as anybody and built less models, but I never stopped building, and I wanted to build models on par with what I saw in modeling magazines, books and museums.
My two nephews love history, military history etc. Once in awhile I give them gifts of a model or miniature. One nephew says he wants to build models and paint miniatures like I do, but his mother won't let him build models because he'd have to build on the kitchen table and that of course is a place for eating and not model building A chance to teach a young person the hobby goes down the drain because his mother can't see that putting down newspaper on the table would be sufficient. It's not like he would be airbrushing. Oh well. At least we can do a build when he's here for a month this summer.

Cheers,

Dave

I took a look at the Revell-Germany website. That "Beagle" kit is pretty clearly a reappearance of the one first issued (according to the bible on the subject, Thomas Graham's Remembering Revell Model Kits) in 1961. It was a "modified reissue" of the firm's H.M.S. Bounty. The modifications included some different spars (to change it from a ship to a barque), a new deck, new boats, a different figurehead, and probably a couple of other pieces. Other than having a hull, a deck, and three masts, it bore no resemblance to the actual Beagle. (We know in considerable detail what she did look like; there are good contemporary plans.)

This is one more example of downright dishonest marketing on the part of a model company. This one, in fact, got passed down to at least one other generation. One of those awful European plank-on-frame kit manufacturers brought out an H.M.S. Beagle that's just a wood version of the Revell kit - at a retail price of several hundred dollars. The European firm actually hired somebody to draw an impressive-looking set of plans for it, probably by tracing the Revell parts.

It bothers me that such stunts attract so little attention from critics and enthusiasts. If a model company reissued its B-17 kit as a B-47, how would the modeling public react?

There are some other, more interesting re-releases on the Revell-Germany site. At the head of the list for many people is the 1/96 U.S.S. Kearsarge - one of the better "sailing" ship kits Revell ever did. (In putting it in that category we surely can overlook the smokestack and propellor.) Also the 1/400 Hawaiian Pilot - the old C-3 freighter initially issued in 1956. The picture on the website is the original box art. The kit is not state-of-the-art by any means, but what a fun exercise in nostalgia. (Maybe this time I'll actually be able to get all those teensy deck stanchions lined up without smearing glue all over the model. At age seven that was beyond me.)

Also the 1/380 nuclear merchantman Savannah, from 1959 - complete with removable deck section to reveal the reactor. This one ought to be of special interest to folks who've visited the actual ship in Charleston. She was a popular model subject for a few years. I believe the ITC version got reissued fairly recently by Glencoe. Adams also made a Savannah. I'm not sure whether it was identical to the Revell kit, which was of about the same size. I doubt it. Revell and Adams duplicated subjects several times, but (apart from the series of horse-drawn wagons) I don' t think they actually reissued each other's kits.

Fun stuff to remember. But I do get depressed about the apparent state of Revell-Monogram. I haven't built an American Revell or Monogram kit in years, but I'd hate to see the firm go under. At the moment the range of products available for experienced modelers and enthusiasts - even in the ship field - is the greatest it's ever been. But what about the kids? If nobody manufactures kits that kids can afford, and sells them in stores that kids inhabit, what will happen to the hobby?

Let's hope Revell-Monogram is holding back some new kit announcements for the trade fairs. At the moment, that company's catalog is probably the most meager it's ever been.

A little back-peddling is in order, since I ranted rather strongly. We each have our individual tastes. Life surely is more complicated and faster paced than in the distant past. I know some people enjoy high tech toys and tools and I believe technology and modern manufacturing techniques have improved the hobby and life in general. And an old greasy car restoration is not every person's cup of tea. I know some people just aren't interested in building models. I intended only to make the point that I feel we shouldn't discard everything from the past and I think it is good to slow down and get the satisfaction of creating something with our hands.

I was also looking at the Revell-Monogram site a couple of days ago. I noticed Revell-Germany has some new ships coming out but only one sailing ship, the Beagle in 1/96 scale, but that's better than the same old re-released stuff. After surfing/window shopping I also noticed that there is not much going on with American (plastic) kits. We have hundreds of "modern" naval kits to choose from and several sailing ships, but all from non-American manufacturers.

I don't know if this means the end of Revell is coming, but look what happened with American car-makers. I like some of the newer stuff like the new Mustang but for years the imports showed innovation and a quality culture while Ford, GM, etc., rested on their laurels. The threat of the imports forced American companies to think about quality and the long-haul, not just immediate profits. I believe Revell-Monogram relocated to new facilities, but it appears they are offering the same old products and mentality. Maybe they will join the others and move operations overseas.

I believe that manufacturers have the right to make a decent profit and they can only do so by offering products with a big profit margin or those which sell in big quantities. This is a little redundant when added to what has been posted on this topic, but it is true that the trend today is toward instant gratification. Microwaved family dinner, faster and faster computers and internet service, etc., etc. They throw up a house faster than the title company can finish all the paperwork. These cookie cutter quick-builds will fall apart in 10 years. I like Victorian houses with all that craftsmanship and the hand-made decorations and details. That's what I admire about old ships and the models the skilled builders produce. But it is true that those things are not popular in modern culture. I hear comments from people when they see my car. It's a '67 Mustang. It's usually something like, "I used to have one." When I had an old VW bug I heard the same comments. The people who aren't classic car fans almost always say that they drive something "modern" now. They want to jump in and drive. The old stuff had character but they don't have time for Saturday morning oil changes or tune-ups. In other words, people are too busy runing around being busy. They are stressed out too. They don't have time to slow down, and do something with their minds and hands. I get the same feedback about model building -- hobbies take too much time.
Seems to me they are saying they want their technology to do it all for them, and using their minds and hands takes too much time.

My son, who is in the 11th grade, said he was studying history of the American Civil War period. Four days later I asked him to look at a neat little article at the Cottage Industries web site and he said they had moved on to a new topic. They don't spend a lot of time on any single subject.

Personally, I would be willing to pay more for a quality detailed sailing ship kit and just take my time building it to best of my ability. I just wouldn' t buy and build as many. I think that's what will happen if any manufacturer offers such products. The few of us who want to take the time for a little hand-made craftsmanship would pay a premium due to low volume sales, but at least there would be some old ship model building going on in the future.

Sorry, I just rambled on and covered what has been said before and I have spent way too much time on a computer instead of working on a model ship. Cursed technology!

I don't think Revell Monogram (aka Revell USA) is going to do much in the way of scale plastic models other than what will appease the general mass market customer. Looks like Revell Germany will be the producer of special interest AC, Armor, and Ships.

lolok: You made me laugh about showing your Polish wife a German battleship.


Scott

I just happened to take a look at the Revell-Monogram website. The online version of the firm's catalog recently got updated.

That catalog contains eight ships. Two of them are sailing vessels: the 1/96 Constitution and the 1/192 Constitution. (The other six: PT-109, the Gato-class sub, the 1/570 Titanic, the 1/426 Arizona, the Forrestal-class Saratoga, and - believe it or not - the 1/535 Missouri, which was originally released in 1953 and was Revell's first plastic kit.)

Equally interesting is the page of "forthcoming product announcements." The number of plastic kits (as opposed to diecast cars and other pre-assembled models) being announced by Revell-Monogram for 2005 is zero.

Let's hope this doesn't foreshadow the demise of the company. Maybe it will announce some new merchandise (or at least a reissue or two) at the trade shows. But it's hard to be optimistic about the state of the hobby in the face of evidence like that.

It's a classic case of catch 22. If there's little demand from modellers for such kits, then the manufacturers won't produce them. If the modellers don't see them in the shops, then there won't be any demand.

To all the above i say Amen. We are an overlooked niche in the market. I also agree with what was said about wives! My Polish lady does not mind my Victory or Constitution but the Bismark with every bit of P/E thrown at it only gets the comment.."It's GREY" and German to boot. Revell germany is bringing a few kits to market lately.reissues granted but at least something.The river Rhine cruise ferry.The QM2.Oil tanker and coming in February next year a Freighter.
As an aside,I am looking foreward to the Chebec from Imai which 'Millard' is in the process of posting to me.Please all say a quick God-Speed that it arrives safe and in one piece.Thanks Millard.I am really looking foreward to starting it.

Edmodel brings up some interesting points. Like him, I haven't been inspired much by the coverage of sailing ships in FSM. (One article that I really did like: the one about the models of Peter Spier, in one of the annuals. He's a fine modeler and a terrific artist.) In fairness to the folks at FSM, they can't print what doesn't get sent to them - and I suspect they don't get many sailing ship submissions. And there's a built-in problem with reviews of sailing ship kits. As I understand it, FSM has a policy - an entirely reasonable one, in my opinion - of insisting that the reviewer actually build the model before reviewing it. If that policy got applied to sailing ship kits, the reviews would appear months or years after the models were issued.

Several magazines do specialize in ship models and devote much of their space to sailing ships. (I'm sure edmodel knows that, but newcomers to the forum may not be familiar with them.) The two best probably are The Nautical Research Journal (mostly, but not exclusively, about modeling) and Model Shipwright (British). The standards of modeling in both those journals are extremely high. The NRJ rarely deals with plastic kits (though there's a nice article about the old Nichimo 1/200 Yamato in the latest issue). Model Shipwright hasn't covered many of them recently, but has in the past and, I imagine, is receptive to doing so again if the right material turns up in the mailbag.

Then there's Ships in Scale. This one's a little different from the others. It presents a variety of topics on many levels, with some articles slanted toward beginners. Quite a few articles on plastic kits have turned up in Ships in Scale recently. Frankly most of them aren't on the same level that aircraft and armor modelers routinely expect, but many are quite interesting - and especially useful for folks just getting started.

I wish FSM carried more material on ships. One of these days I'll try to put my money where my mouth is. I guess I'm among those modelers who ought to blame themselves for the shortage of material. My excuse is that (due to a job, a mortgage, three stepkids, two grandchildren, four insane cats, etc.) my rate of production is excruciatingly slow. I wrote a four-part series on my last scratchbuilt model for Model Shipwright - almost exactly twenty years ago. Ouch.

Patience is an interesting concept. To my notion, the worker on an assembly line has far more patience than I do. The only ship-model-related tasks that test my patience are the ones that involve little skill but lots of repetition. (Examples: rigging ratlines, rigging deadeyes, putting dents in copper sheathing, etc.) My observation has been, though, that the people who get discouraged by that sort of thing frequently don't give their heads and their digits enough of a chance. If my own experience is at all typical, there are a series of steep but brief initial learning curves in ship modeling. It takes a while to teach your fingers how to rig a pair of deadeyes, but the second pair will go quicker than the first and the fifth will go about ten times quicker than the second. So don't give up after number three. Maybe "patience" is an applicable term in this process, but I'll still take ship rigging over that assembly line job.

Some people say "anybody can build a ship model." I'm afraid that's a slight exaggeration; some people don't have the physical dexterity or (just as vital) the eyesight for it. (An individual who suffers from arthritis in the hands, or poor closeup vision, would be well advised to pick another hobby.) But in my opinion a lot of people get scared away from the hobby who could do it well - and get great pleasure from it - if they'd give it a shot and get a little guidance. That's where the books and magazines can help.

While I lurk on this forum quite a bit, I seldom post, but this topic touched a nerve. I've been a subscriber to FSM for almost 20 years and in that time I bet I could count the number of plastic sailing ship articles on my fingers. Maybe it's an indicator of how unpopular sailing ships are with the modeling community in general, not with the general public! It seems strange, but I get more ooos and ahhhs over my sailing ship models than all the planes and modern ships in my collection. So why so few articles in a modeling magazine? I don't profess to know the answer, but I think that if there were more articles on sailing ships, maybe there would be more modelers of sailing ships. I may be wrong on that, but what is wrong with trying it out? Maybe we all need to submit more articles to FSM and see what happens. I don't remember when the last sailing ship article appeared in FSM. but if I remember correctly, it wasn't fully rigged. I'll have to check back issues to find out. maybe we should start off by submiting features or reviews on the tried and true Constitution and Cutty Sark kits to start off with, and move on from there. While I do build planes and modern ships as well, sailing ships are the most rewarding models I do, and from personal experience, take more patience! And patience is in short supply these days! Maybe we're beating the air, but at least we could try to get interest in sailing ships on the rise. That is the key to getting more, better, and different kits! Maybe the answer lies with us. Just my .02 gang! Hang in there, cheers all, Mike

This discussion has been raked over the coals for years. As the President of my ship model society (Northern NJ), I am the youngest member at aged 37. The median age of the group is 72. Our society had to wake up to reality and come to terms with the fact that fewer people are building wooden sailing ships. It's not because of a lack of interest in the subject, since Fleet Week and the sailing ship gatherings here in the NYC area attract thousands.

I believe (and it's already been stated) that peoples' lives are too complex these days. We work too many hours, have too much going on, soccer practice, baseball practice, both parents working, choir, Boy/Girl Scouts, band practice..etc. etc.

We've been conditioned by society, that the only time you're allowed to step back and take things slowly, is when you're on vacation. Hell, even our retirees are busier now then when they were working (or so I've been told).

The concept of taking 400 hours to do anything (except college) just doesn't bode well with stereotypical society. Everyone wants the quickest possible solution, which is why we're seeing such a flood of die cast planes, cars, and armor. Humans are naturally gatherers, so we collect junk, it's what we do. And the die-cast (most of it is junk, btw) manufacturers are the proverbial 'hobby crack' to feed the addicts. In the old days, if you wanted a collection of NASCAR, you went out and built them...today, you have a choice of 5 different versions of the same car from the same year, for less than the cost of a kit. That also means you don't have to paint it, build it, and wow, it comes out actually looking like the photo on the box!

Personally, it's not about the collecting, it's about the building, the art, the craftsmanship, that it takes to create the things we do. In fact, most of my completed models end up in storage (waiting for the 'someday' model display room), or they're sold off to private collectors, simply because I don't have the physical space for everything.

And as to why the kit producers don't do more sailing ship kits...it's all abouy money. Remember, they're in business to make money, they don't do it because they love the hobby...it doesn't take a rocet scientist to figure out that if a (another) P-51 will bring a 500% return on investment (tooling, etc.) and a sailing ship only brings 110% return on investment, where's your money going??

So..I'm back to the shop, to sand on this big wooden Bluejacket T-2 hull...

My two pence,

Jeff Herne

QUOTE: Originally posted by scottrc Amen to what you have just said. There are a few freighter kits, and a tug boat or two, but nothing to represent our fishing fleets or the tens of thousands sloops and barks and pleasure boats that are around the world. I cannot bring myself to try to build another Constitution or Cuttysark. What do you do when you cannot find any more plastic kits to build?

I second this: I find it also somewhat disappointing that there are relatively few fishing boats out there.

In such cases the wooden ship builders are in great advantage because they have a lot more at their shelves where they can choose from.

Why not a plastic kit of such a nice and admirable gunboat: e.g. the "
Hamiltons Gunboat 1808" which can be found at (look under "Products")

==
/www.gk-modellbau.de/usa/index.htm
==

would make for a very nice looking boat.

I came latley in into "plastic ship kit modeling" and I do not have a lot of FSM-magazines, just a few so to sepak. However, I bet that you will not find any issue of FSM magazines which do not depict an aircraft.

Why not more of kind of "sailing ships"? I mean if (potential) people get an appetizer from time to time that would also pay-off for the producers. An article about sailing ships could equally well compare the "plastic ship" with one of the "built wood ships". That would teach readers that a "plastic sailing ship" looks sometimes as good as the equivalent "wooden ship".

There are a lot of beginners who try their luck in historic wooden ships. They buy a kit but give up eventually because they have underestimated the effort which must go in in such a wooden ship. I assume there are not many then who "downgrade" to plastic ship kits because the unlucky wood ship kit builders are often educated that "plastic" is kinda like "devils advocate".

If they would permanently see nice sailing ships in the magazines dedicated to scale modelling they would eventually start to reconsider their position and start building plastic ships.

Katzennahrung

Conversely,I think that models can be great tools to stimulate interest in history. The first plastic model I ever saw was in the principal's office at Robert E. Lee elementary school, and it was a beautifully executed diorama of the paddle-wheel steamboat, "Robert E. Lee"; that model really enhanced my imagination while reading Huck Finn. Years later, one of my best friends chose as his junior year social studies project the building of the battleship Yamato, and he used a stunning Tamiya Yamato as his prop as he lectured the class on, among other things, the economics of building a capital ship.

Working on my sailing ship models has involved quite a bit of research, and I have enjoyed digging up some favorite old books at the local library (The Seafarer's series, especially the books "Frigates", "Fighting Sail", "The Men of War") and discovering more recent ones (A Most Fortunate Ship, War at Sea in the Age of Sail, HMS Victory, Her Construction, Career and Restoration). I've been reminded of that saying that history belongs to the victors (or something along those lines); for example, the account of the battle between the Chesapeake and Shannon is described from quite different slants between the Seafarer's "Frigates", which has a decidedly yankee view and "War at Sea in the Age of Sail", written by British historian Andrew Lambert. The accounts of the Guerriere vs Constitution battle is also decidedly partisan in these books.

Wouldn't building a model, even a tiny one, be a great tool to use for imprinting a historical event on a student's brain?

Just some thoughts.

To get back to plastic sailing ships, I'd love to see a few:

Any of the "original 6" US frigates other than USS Constitution and USS United States

HMS Guerriere, HMS Java, HMS Macedonian, HMS Shannon (I'd love to make a diorama of a frigate duel)

Any East Indiaman or other merchant vessel other than clippers

Any Trafalgar ship of the line other than HMS Victory.

All preferably in large scale (1/96).

Jose Gonzales

The cost of the molds for new plastic sailing ships and the lack of demand are probably
the two biggest reason for very few new models.Right now WWII armour,planes,and ship( mostly in resin) are the big items .People are impressed by sailing ship models but are scared to tackle them.I have seasoned modelers asking all the time."how many hours did it take you".or 'how do you have the patients"I always say any model done right takes patients.I'm always hoping some new sailing ship kits will come out but not holding my breath.The new companys from China or Russia will probably be the ones to do it if anyone.I know that Revell and some of the older Co. are reissuing some of there older model.Like the USS Kearsarge and the large Spanish Galleon.I myself would like to see some plastic kits of ships from the Revolutionary War. Theres not much out there.Maybe a Fair American or Ranger. With possible P/E parts and wood mast and yards. Oh alright a man can dream can't he?

The group was talking about History teachers.Back in sixties in H.S. I had two great history teachers.Both made the subject exciting and fun.Today I do as much research on a ship I'm building as I can.And those two guys kinda of instilled that in me.My wife teaches English Lit. in H.S. We've talked about how todays student are more into today and tomorrow than into yesterday.Hopefully that will change.

Back to the Plastic sailing ships.Maybe would should do like in the prison movies.And start banging our silver ware on the tables. "The inmates want more ships,The inmates want more ships.
Rod

I was lucky in my first high school history teacher. His name was Robert Cullison, and he was a former Marine major - a veteran of the Pacific campaign. I vividly remember the samurai sword he'd taken off a dead Japanese officer on Guam. But he was also one of the quietest, nicest men I've ever met - and the father of six kids.

The second high school history teacher wasn't quite in the same league. I remember the day I handed him a paper I'd written about the clipper ship Flying Cloud. The next day he dropped it on the desk in front of me and accused me - in front of the other students - of having plagiarized it. My father was not a violent man, but when he heard about that one he came remarkably close to committing physical assault. Before he got the chance, I showed the paper to Mr. Cullison, who had a conversation with the accusing teacher. The problem went away.

After I got out of high school Mr. Cullison and I became close personal friends. He was never able to afford a car; his garage was full of books, and he and I spent many hours out there. I remember one time when I paid him a visit just after the first day of school had ended. He was sitting at his desk with his head in his hands, looking as ashamed as I've ever seen a human being look. When I asked him what was the matter, he explained that a student had called him a "dirty old man" (strong language in those days). Mr. Cullison, for the only time in all the years I knew him, had lost his temper: he'd picked up the nearest textbook and thrown it at the kid. When I got there he was waiting to be summoned to the assistant principal's office. (I later found out what the assistant principal said to him: "Bob, you made one mistake. You missed." He was still ashamed to talk about the incident.)

In conjunction with that grant project I've spent much of the past semester driving around eastern North Carolina watching high school U.S. history teachers in action. The ones I've been observing are, without exception, top-notch people. They're enthusiastic, they're knowledgeable, and (most important of all) they care about the kids. I don't understand where they get the energy and patience to do their jobs for the lousy salaries they make.

But the material they've got to work with sometimes makes me want to cry. Some of those students (the ones in the "Advanced Placement" classes) are academic whizzes; they spend much of their in-class time sitting in front of computers, and find historical stuff on the web that I'd never have dreamed was there. The majority, though, have only the vaguest idea of what history is - and so do their parents. These kids live in environments where a book is a rare thing. Most of them have a great deal of trouble writing a complete sentence; some can barely speak standard English. To implant a genuine enthusiasm for history in such a kid during the course of a semester is a challenge that I know I couldn't meet. My hat is off to those fine teachers for giving it their best shot - and I can't blame them when they don't succeed. The culprits aren't the teachers; the culprits are idiotic educational bureaucrats, irresponsible parents, movies, TV, out-of-control hormones, peer pressure, computer games....

Enough. There goes the blood pressure again. Why did I start this thread?

Jtilly comments: "He said the visitors invariably asked him two questions: "How long?" and "How much?" He'd started to wonder whether he was a ship modeler or a prostitute."

I just lost coffee through my nose on that one

About history teachers, I had a bad experience with two of mine since they were both coaches who were stuck taking oxygen in the classroom . Out of 20 students, 18 used the time to sleep because these guys made it a point to make history boring. One of these guys and I never seen eye to eye, to the point where is got physical sometimes. He would make up BS about the D-Day invasion, or the Battle of Midway and I'd call him on it. Needless to say, I flunked the class but appealed and got into a different class with two very interesting teachers. One who would teach World History and another, an eccentric Norwegian who taught, of all things, Russian History.

Since I was labeled a "problem child" , I was given two the "Nutty" teachers.
Both were WW2 vets. One was a Marine in the Pacific and while lecturing, would flashback and go into some routine that involved him wearing his helmet and running down the hall with a broom handle.

The other teacher was in the Norwegian Underground and would tell us stories about the Third Reich and spying on Stalin that made the history lesson sound real "James Bond". Well, the school district would get on him about his little "stories" because he was not teaching to the "curriculum". That was until 1986 when the State Department declassified his records and he got to make them public. The commendations and operations he was involved in during the war, and later in Russia as a spy during the 1950's, made him to much more qualified to teach WW2 and cold war history than any of the authors who wrote our history books.

Needless to say, I, and many many other students, felt a bond with these two. They made us want to learn by tapping into the mysteries of history. We never used just one book, but many, we had to do a lot of research. They both tapped into our interests, and really encouraged our model building by having us do siplays and demonstrations about not only construction of a model, but most importantly, doing the research.

On a side note. We were told at the begining of the year that we were now members of the OSS. That we were going into Russia and Germany to gather intelligence. That we would need to know the language, customs, geography, and political structures of the places we were to infiltrate. This was a class that turned into a game. Do you know how many mothers called complaining that their kids were going to be members of the "SS" thinking that the OSS was part of the Third Riech, not realizing that the OSS was the forefront of todays CIA?

Sorry for bring up you blood pressure, but I too feel that schools put history at the bottom, not realizing that we cannot do business, design, research, write, or live without knowing what those who were before us did. As a modeler, when I do lectures and displays at schools, malls, and libraries, I feel like I'm making a huge contribution to teaching history to society. To the observer, its a big green battleships with a red flag so they ask; why is it like that? The nthe seed gets planted.


Scott

Looks like I touched a sensitive nerve here!

Upon further reflection I think I owe Revell a semi-apology. A few new sailing ships have appeared under that label since 1977 - but I believe they all originated with Revell of Germany. (The Batavia - a fine modeling subject - comes to mind; I think there have been a couple of others, including a carrack and a sail training ship with green sails, whose name escapes me.)

I'm lucky to have a wife who really enjoys looking at ship models; she offers no opposition whatever to the cases in which they reside. On the other hand, my output is so slow that this isn't much of a problem, now that the kids are out of the house and space isn't exactly at a premium. I do think it's generally true that sailing ship models make a bigger impression on the uninitiated than most other manifestations of the hobby. And I wish there were more female modelers - ship and otherwise. This hobby doesn't need to be driven by testosterone.

Scottrc's list of questions reminds me of a comment I once heard from a friend who built models in a booth at a maritime museum. He said the visitors invariably asked him two questions: "How long?" and "How much?" He'd started to wonder whether he was a ship modeler or a prostitute.

Scottrc's own question, "what do you do when you cannot find any more plastic kits to build," has, of course, two obvious answers: try a wood kit, or take the plunge and build a model from scratch. I'm not a big booster of wood kits; most of them are pretty awful, and obscenely over-priced. (I've sounded off about this topic before in this forum.) But there are some nice ones out there. The most recent products from Bluejacket, Model Shipways, and CalderCraft are legitimate scale models.

And scratchbuilding isn't anywhere near as hard as lots of people think. It takes a good set of plans (there are some excellent ones out there - and some ghastly ones), decent tools and materials (erase the phrase "balsa wood" from your memory), and - perhaps most important - a good enough eye to visualize the shape of the ship in three dimensions on the basis of two-dimensional drawings. If you've built several plastic ship kits you probably have acquired that skill without knowing it.

As for Mr. Gonzales's comments about the teaching of history - as a university history teacher and the spouse of a high school history teacher, I can only say "amen." The level of historical knowledge among the general public in this country is utterly appalling, and a general weakness in the quality of history education must be at least partially to blame. (Fewer than half of the incoming freshman at the school where I work can tell me who the U.S. was fighting in World War I. About a quarter of them don't know whether the U.S. supported the North or the South in Vietnam.) I will say, though, that I see reason for hope that a change is in the wind. At the moment, for example, I'm involved in a federal grant project designed to enhance the credentials of our county's high school U.S. history teachers, and make their courses more accessible to the students. The grant got funded as a result of bipartisan concern in the U.S. Congress about the awful state of historical knowledge among the public.

But it's an uphill fight. The schools have so many more important things to worry about - like metal detectors, new lights for the football stadium, drug shakedowns, new uniforms for the cheerleaders, full-time on-site police officers, pregnant students (10% of the females in the school where my wife works), higher standardized test scores on the REALLY important subjects, like math....

Enough. I can feel the blood pressure going up.

I agree with what has been said so far. Yes, women do seem to appreciate sailing ship models more than steel ship models. And kids don't have the patience to build, or to do anything that might take some time and commitment. I tried to get my son to build a very simple kit of an SR-71 blackbird, but months later it sits 3/4ths finished on the shelf, and I have a feeling I'll end up building the USS Enterprise model (the Star Trek TOS version) I bought him last christmas. He only likes a model after it's done:)

The other thing I think kids don't have today is an appreciation of history. Really. I'm reading an interesting book "Lies my Teacher Told Me". It does have a sort of liberal slant on how US history is being mistaught, and centers a lot on race relations, but one of the major points of the book is that history is currently taught in a way that makes it boring. I think that without an appreciation of history, US as well as western and eastern civilizations, the subject matter of our models loses meaning. What kid would be interested in building a model of Old Ironsides or HMS Victory, or the Bismark or Yamato, unless someone passed onto them the great and the terrible deeds and occurrences that passed through those hallowed decks, or the fact that thinking of these things can actually be moving to someone?

We build models of subjects that move us. For the current generation of young builders, what is that? The two models that my son has finished? Gundam Wing models - robot warriors from a Japanese saturday morning cartoon series. Snap-together with stickers for decals. Oh well, I'll keep trying.

Amen to what you have just said. There are a few freighter kits, and a tug boat or two, but nothing to represent our fishing fleets or the tens of thousands sloops and barks and pleasure boats that are around the world. I cannot bring myself to try to build another Constitution or Cuttysark. What do you do when you cannot find any more plastic kits to build?

I know when people come to my house and see the sailing ships, they are always full of questions. Why do you do it? What made you interested? How do you make them?
You don't look like one of the little old men who we thought build these! What on earth makes you do it? Your kinda weird aren't you?

The main reason, other than my wife would never allow a 1/350 Tripitz or Bismark in the living room, is that a sailing ship provides me with grace, imagination, and body. I'm allowed to use colors other than blue, red, and grey. I can change my mediums so if I get bored building one type of part, such as cannons, I can move onto something different. I get to sew and work with metal and wood.

I think if more women built ships, we would see a lot more sailing vessels as plastic kits. I cannot see why they would't want to build one, they get to paint with different colors, hone up on the needle point skills, and sew. I have yet to get a member of the opposite sex give a compliment on a battleship or aircraft carrier other then "Oh, thats nice dear, now take it back downstairs". The ships with masts and sails get the ohhs and ahhs from the ladies. However, when I ask one to try building a ship, they say I'm crazy, that it will take too much time. Like how many years have you been working on that quilt dear?

My mother built ships, thriteen to be exact, and it was her that got me hooked.

As to the kids, they don't have any interest in the ships. I got interested when, at age 6 my parents took me around the world and we vistied every ship museum we could find. I had a lot of parental support. My favorite show was a BBC show abour clipper ships called the "Onedin Line". How many pre-teens would watch that today? They love the cars and planes, but I can't get them to even look at a battleship and even though it was on "Pirates of the Carribean", a sailing ship is not cool. Another thing too is that the kids are into the prepainted, snap or screw it together models. Again, if it takes longer then 15 minutes and requires an ample amount of concentration and using logic, FORGET IT, they will go watch TV and leave the actual building to me.

My kids go with the flow, what the neighbor kids are doing, which is playing that x-box, riding the battery operated scooter, or moping around the house because they cannot afford a $300.00 pair of sneekers or an ipod.

I'm just the weird guy in the basement with is obsolete model ships.

Scott

I agree with all you said. I'm 44 and I notice when I go in to the LHS, the folks in the ship department are older.

Where's all the USCG boats? See 'em on the news all the time, especially in the "wet" parts of the country. Outside of the High/Medium endurance cutters in 1/700 (my preferred scaled), there is nothing modern out there. And the "Eagle" not only being in an oddball scale, has accuracy issues.

You can't turn around and not see an ariticle on the SEALS, Green Berets, etc. Where's their boats in 1/35?

How about some modern tug boats? Outside of the Heller Smit Rotterdam and R/C stuff, it's pretty thin.

"Master and Commander" and "Hornblower" are very popular. You're right. Where's the ships? I think a "Surprise," "Indefatigable", and a couple of French / Spanish ships would do well. Especially, if the kits are tied in to the series/movie.

I personally would like to do the Cutty Sark and Constitution kits, but, judging by the posts here, there may be some accuracy issues(?). Maybe they need an update?

I know there are wood kits out there, but, at this time, that is an area I don't want to delve in. (Plus, up to two years to do a ship?? Ack! I'm American. I need my gratification now!)

And my last statement, may be part of the issue also. My opinion, repeat, my opinion, us "gray beards" are use to doing things which take time and need to be mastered. The "MTV Generation" has not reached this "zone". Witness the growth of already painted and lettered/decaled 1/24 cars on the shelf in the LHS. (Yes, yea. I know. I've built a couple myself...)Look at the RTR diecast armor stuff in 1/32 and 1/72. I know there are younger modelers out there, and more power to them, however, they are a small group.

I'm also a 1/32 slot car racer and an HO scale model railroader. We have had similar forum discussions about model car racing/ model trains. Where's the young folks?

Sigh. I think I know the reason, but, not the fix.