SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

How long is a piece of string?

821 views
12 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
MJH
  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Melbourne, Australia
How long is a piece of string?
Posted by MJH on Friday, June 9, 2006 2:19 AM
I read recently, in Model Boats magazine I think, a story in which a modeller bought a plastic kit (Airfix/Heller Victory?) on the understanding that the model was advertised on the box as being some 1100mm (43.5”) long and 698mm (27.5”) high.  He reasoned that this would have sufficient room for R/C equipment in the hull.

The story goes he was taken aback to find the hull itself was only some 600-odd mm and wouldn’t suit his purposes.  Apparently he believed the length referred to the hull at the waterline.  Given that the box isn’t even 1000mm (32.8”) long, one has to wonder how he thought they got it all to fit in!  The main gist of the story concerned his efforts to return the kit and get a refund on the grounds it had been misrepresented – I understand he was successful after bringing in the authorities.

Now when I inspect a kit box, and read the stated length, I always assume the quoted figure is the overall length, including everything that protrudes (in any direction), for the simple reason that the manufacturer is going to want to give the best impression of the contents and, as in all things, size matters.  If an aircraft has a nose-mounted pitot tube it will be included in the overall length quoted, so will a tank’s main gun, and so will a bow-sprit, and a ship model’s height will include a stand (if supplied) – surely this is obvious?  Or am I being cynical.

So my question is; Is there a correct standard to show the length of a ship and, even if there is, can or should it necessarily be applied to a model kit?


!

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: Mansfield, TX
Posted by EdGrune on Friday, June 9, 2006 7:32 AM

In naval architecture there are three key length measurements.   Stating the length of a ship without giving the qualifying unit is, like you said asking the length of a piece of  string.

Waterline Length (WL)  - like it says this is the length of the ship at the design waterline,

Length Between Perpendiculars (LPP) - this is the length from  the forward perpendicular which is something like the first vertical strake at the stem -- to the stern, ususally the rudder post.   The forward perpendicular may be forward of the bow at the waterline. 

Length Overall (LOA) - this is the overall length of the ship, including projections fore and aft.

Model manufacturers are not generally cognizent of these distinctions.  They just want to let you know that a model will fit onto a shelf.   And the guy who wanted to RC a HMS Victory should have been wise enough to ask how far the bowsprit projected.

I can't fault either.

MJH
  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Melbourne, Australia
Posted by MJH on Friday, June 9, 2006 9:01 AM
Is it reasonable for a ship enthusiast to assume model manufacturers will be cognizent with these types of specification?  Personally I don't think so, especially given some of the criticisms that have been levelled at them in these forums .  If he were so familiar with such matters the buyer in this case should also be aware of the dimensions of the real Victory, and figuring out the waterline length of the actual ship, divided by 100, doesn't even require the services of a calculator (except the vexed matter of feet and inches to metres and centimetres perhaps).

I'm not trying to defend the manufacturers here but I can't agree that this 'misunderstanding' is a result of deliberate misrepresentation on their part.  As you suggest, displaying the waterline length won't help someone who only wants to know if the model will fit on his shelf.

!

  • Member since
    February 2005
Posted by warshipbuilder on Friday, June 9, 2006 9:16 AM
How long is a peice of string?

Exactly twice as long as half it's original length.

Hope this helps!

Big Smile [:D]

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Friday, June 9, 2006 12:53 PM

Plastic kit manufacturers - and, come to think of it, wood kit manufacturers too - are utterly notorious for their casual approach to scales and dimensions.  In a recent discussion of the various H.M.S. Victory kits on the market, we established that the scales stated on the boxes of most of those kits bear little if any relation to reality.  For example, Airfix says its Victory is on 1/ 180  scale, and Revell says its is on 1/146 - but the Airfix kit is bigger.  (The actual scales work out to about 1/171 for Airfix and 1/220 for Revell.) 

It's hard to tell how much of this practice is deliberate deception and how much stems from genuine ineptitude.  The sad truth is that the people writing the advertising copy for these kits frequently know next to nothing about the subject.  In any case, let the buyer beware.  I've reached the point where I don't pay much attention to the stated dimensions and scales on kit boxes any more.

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

MJH
  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Melbourne, Australia
Posted by MJH on Friday, June 9, 2006 10:40 PM
So have I, and not just in the model kit field.  The other widely used deception for the tyro is the 'big box'.  Was a time Airfix, and I suspect others, would cut up sprues to fit all the parts in a plastic bag that slotted into a reasonably sized box.  You could be fairly certain the box would just contain the largest kit part, the hull in the case of a ship, which'd give you a rough idea of it's length.  Sometimes made it hard to locate all the parts and make sure they were there though, especially before leaving the shop.

These days box size bears little or no relation to model size and huge sprues often hold relatively few parts (Trumpeter are fond of this widely spaced layout).  I bought an Eastern Express release of one of the old Frog kits recently, the parts came in a small plastic envelope rattling around in a box that would have comfortably held eight of them.  I knew what I was buying but a newcomer might be impressed by the box size and would be sorely disappointed on opening it.

!

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Saturday, June 10, 2006 12:22 AM
I remember taking up this issue a long time ago with a distributor's rep, when I was working in a hobby shop.  I think the kit in question was Aurora's then-new Japanese submarine, which came in a nicely illustrated, glossy box that was at least four times as big as it needed to be in order to accommodate the kit.  The rep - who, I think, knew what he was talking about - explained that a huge percentage of the kits manufactured by companies like Aurora ended up being sold in discount stores (Woolco and K-Mart) and warehouse-type toy stores (Children's Palace), each of which allotted a certain amount of cubic feet of shelf space to plastic kits.  Packaging kits in big boxes kept the competitors' products off the shelves of such places.  Maybe something similar is still going on.

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

  • Member since
    January 2006
Posted by EPinniger on Saturday, June 10, 2006 6:23 AM
Slightly off topic as it's an aircraft kit, but Revell's 1/48 Arado 234 is a good recent example of this.
The box is nearly large enough to hold a B-17 in the same scale.

MJH
  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Melbourne, Australia
Posted by MJH on Saturday, June 10, 2006 9:42 PM
Using big boxes to limit a competitors shelf-space is an interesting concept.  Surely the downside is that the retailer will hold fewer kits (both yours and others) and if your competitor gets in first you can put even fewer of your own boxes in whatever space is left.  Wouldn't surprise me though.

It's very hard to find plastic kits in major chain stores here these days - maybe a smattering of Revell or Airfix 'starter' kits.  I was in a toyshop yesterday and found less than ten small aircraft kits, all Revell 1:144 and 1:72, while a whole wall was devoted to die-cast cars.  Doesn't bode well for the future of the hobby.....

It's irrelevant here I know, but I was surprised by the resurgence of 1:32 farm sets.  I was looking for miniature livestock for various models - some ships carried goats and/or hens didn't they?  I collect the odd Britains 1:32 Farm and Garden stuff from pre- and post-war, so it's a point of interest for me.

!

  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Belgium
Posted by DanCooper on Monday, June 12, 2006 6:32 PM
Coming back on the orriginal post here... since I see the branch is either Airfix or Heller (same manufacterer anyway), the modeller should have been using he's eyes better and than this misunderstanding would never have happened, since both manufacterers show - and have been doing so for several years now - the dimension of the model with a "silouette" (I don't know if this word is the same in english ?), in other words, on the side of the box they show a black (schematic) representation of a boat, plane, car or whatever with little markers to show what the measurements of the kit include.

Anyway... a more likely scenario of what really happened....

- Modeller : Honey, I'm hooome, look what I picked up at the local hobbyshop *big proud smile...
- Honey :  What, yet another big model.... and where did he's lordship think of placing that piece of plastic ?  And where did he's lordship find the money for that ???  Did he's lordship forget WE (read "I") need a new washing machine and not to mention a ***-job ????
- Modeller : but, honey, but but......*sigh..... euh, well, euh would it make you happy again if I were to return it to the shop, perhaps ????  please, pretty please ????

On the bench : Revell's 1/125 RV Calypso

MJH
  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Melbourne, Australia
Posted by MJH on Monday, June 12, 2006 8:08 PM
That's quite true, and I would assume that's where this particular modeller got his information on length but, as I recall (I don't have an Airfix/Heller kit handy),  the silhouette is that of a generic ship shape with the length in millimetres below it and doesn't specify the fact that it is an overall figure.

My main question is;  if you were presented with a kit and told it would be so-so long on completion, would you automatically take that to be overall?  I would.

As to your scenario - perhaps we could have a discussion on the various means by which new kits are spirited into the house under the nose of  "She Who Must Be Obeyed", "'er indoors", "the little woman", "the Boss", "She" or whatever epithet you may prefer.  Younger or recently espoused modellers might glean some useful tips from the old salts.......

!

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Monday, June 12, 2006 10:55 PM
This is a rare case in which I have to take the kit manufacturer's side in an argument.  It seems to me that any reasonable person, confronted with a set of dimensions for a model, would assume that those were the overall dimensions.  Logically, if the given "length" doesn't include the bowsprit, what does the given "height" represent?  The hull with no masts on it?

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

MJH
  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Melbourne, Australia
Posted by MJH on Tuesday, June 13, 2006 12:03 AM
My original thoughts precisely, if somewhat more succinctly put.  I think it was unreasonable for the buyer to expect any different.  This idea of waterline length is like measuring a car by its wheelbase.

!

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.