SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

July 2004 FineScale Modeler

8351 views
40 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    November 2005
July 2004 FineScale Modeler
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, May 21, 2004 5:43 PM
This is just our usual how-did-we-do straw poll on the current issue. As usual, nothing fancy, nothing scientific--just tell us from the gut which article you liked best. Don't over-analyze because on a multiple-choice test, the answer that comes to mind first is usually the right one.

If you'd like to make comments, feel free to let 'em rip below.
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, June 1, 2004 8:33 PM
I really enjoyed all the articles, the one on Gabby's plane was simply the best! Kudos the modeler who did such a superb job!
  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Minneapolis, MN
Posted by rossjr on Wednesday, June 2, 2004 11:15 AM
See comments below in Rant thread......
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, June 3, 2004 1:07 AM
Didn't like it! Sorry! Every now then FSM is REALLY REALLY GOOD, like the one that delved into using Future Acrlic floor polish and where to get it around the world! That article alone was worth paying for! But this issue was not, Why? Simple, I want to read about models and model making! I don't want to read about D-Day, at least not in FSM. That's not what I pay for. While their were other articles on modeling, I feel cheated because so many pages are devoted to military history. I also get a british magazine, "Military in scale" and even that magazine has little in the way of historical reading. Rather it has lot's of pictures and even reference photo's of modelling subjects. Anyway, that's my opinion.

John Coppola, Australia
  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Saratoga Springs, NY
Posted by Jeeves on Thursday, June 3, 2004 11:19 AM
Considering I'll be tackling it for the first time soon on my Tempest-- I liked the article on the invasion stripes....but it was all good. Course, I finished it in one day after a 2 month break-- so maybe 100 more pages would be better Wink [;)]
Mike
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, June 5, 2004 6:51 AM
The historical article on the invasion was a masterpiece. There are too many people that have no idea about thesecond world war and what it meant to the world. Your story can be used as an insperation for dioranas, more realistic model builds and most of all educating us. Picking the winner this month was no easy task.

Thanks,
Richard
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, June 5, 2004 11:03 PM
I loved this issue! My passion has been the Second World War and it's weapons. The article covering a Gabby Gabreski P-47 was right on! Since I had the honor of meeting him and talking 'shop', I feel a special bond with this piece. I was getting ready to build one myself and this will be a major source of info. Thanks!
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, June 5, 2004 11:08 PM
Just a comment about the response by 'coppola'; Modeling acurately is reading and researching history. I don't tackle any project without some sort of research on what I am building. Model building and history go hand in hand.
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, June 6, 2004 3:31 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by ipms33206

Just a comment about the response by 'coppola'; Modeling acurately is reading and researching history. I don't tackle any project without some sort of research on what I am building. Model building and history go hand in hand.


I agree that building and history go hand in hand, but when I purchase a modeling magazine, I don't expect to get a history lesson any more than I expect an article on building a diorama in a history book on the invasion of some country.

There are plenty of historical researchers out there, I don't think my modeling mag has to or should try to compete with them. I'm not opposed to a very brief history behind the model type story, but lets keep the two seperate as much as possible. Tell me more on how to achieve a desired paint job or lighting effect.

Don Alien [alien]
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: New Zealand
Posted by nicholma on Monday, June 7, 2004 3:53 AM
I didn't get the unusal satisfied feeling with this issue sorry. It was promoted as a D-Day issue and of course to do justice to that occassion would have required a huge issue or several issues. I was hoping we might have some figure modelling (D-Day was really about people) or some models of the invasion craft, or a Mulberry harbour diorama or...). The Gabby P47 review (excellent model though it is) really had nothing to do with D-Day (invasion strips hardly qualify it) so could have been left out and replaced with something else that was more relevant. I for one did enjoy the historic summary but our newspapers have all had something similar over the last weekend anyway. Each to his/her own but I think the July issue was just average. Roll on the next..
Kia ora, Mark "Time flies like the wind, fruit flies like bananas"
  • Member since
    July 2003
  • From: Pensacola, FL
Posted by Foster7155 on Monday, June 7, 2004 4:07 PM
I enjoyed this issue very much. Although I received it only this morning, I have spent a good three hours reading through most of the major articles.

My only suggestion revolves around the fact that I would have liked to have seen all of the D-Day information before D-Day. Perhaps the May issue would have been better?

As usual, my favorite article was the Armor D-Day round-up, but then I'm biased toward armor articles. The historical article on D-Day - although very nice - lacked some comprehensiveness and contained a few errors that should have been noticed prior to publication.

All-in-all, another very good publication!

Robert Foster

Pensacola Modeleers

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: St.Louis, Missouri
Posted by nicodemus on Monday, June 7, 2004 6:03 PM
Once again I find an article coming out addressing the very project I'm working on. In this case the painting of Invasion stripes. Just in time for the 60th anniversary, I finished up the 1/48th Monogram C-47 in full D-Day stripes. If only I had waited a little longer to get those tips! * I used a vernier caliper to check/gauge my stripes as I masked/painted them, tedious!Banged Head [banghead]
I'll be sure to review those tips for a future project, such as a little 1/72 P-51 in either Yeager or Anderson's markings.Big Smile [:D]

Overall good show, should I hold off on the P-38 lightning I'm working on to see what's next?Laugh [(-D]
a humble ham-fisted modeler in the midwest-
  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Camp Leatherneck, Afghanistan
Posted by bilbirk on Monday, June 7, 2004 8:44 PM
I completely agree with Coppola and disagree with the ipms number person! Modeling is supposed to be fun! People wonder why kids are not too interested in the hobby is because they are intimidated by that thinking. they don't want to have to reseach a model to be able to put it together, they just want that sense of accomplishment. If you want to paint a Tiger II Pink go for it. Besides the majority are not in for the contests.
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, June 7, 2004 10:06 PM
All of the articles were great, but I was drawn to the Gabreski P-47 article a little more than the others. It remind's me of a 1/48 I built several years ago with a red cowling, but a different camo scheme. The article on the stripes was really good also. Very informative. You can never get too much information about WWII, and the pics are a great help. THANK YOU!!!
  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Netherlands
Posted by propfan on Tuesday, June 8, 2004 1:35 AM
The historical article on the invasion was a masterpiece. But this magazine is not a historical document, but a magazine encouraging and improving peoples skill to build models. This space could be better used for How to articles, or photo's from finished models. That does not mean that information of how to apply invasion stripes is usefull and good for people building invasion models.

Happy modeling

Bert   IPMS SIG Airliners and Civil Aviation 90002

  • Member since
    February 2004
  • From: Pittsford, Vermont
Posted by F4PHANTOMGUY on Tuesday, June 8, 2004 7:27 AM
I was inspired by the Gabreski P-47 build. I enjoy Fine Scale Modeler but I am dissapointed in those issues that devote pages to historical reviews and less to models or related techniques. Historical background is fine within the context of an actual model build or technique related article. Historical reviews requiring pages of text is not as interesting as the Reader Gallery. I purchase texts or access the internet for required historical background information.
I want to be a GOLDEN RETRIEVER when I grow up.
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, June 10, 2004 2:44 PM
I liked the invasion stripes article. I hope to use that technique on an old Monogram C-47, one day. Keep up the good work! Best regards, Dave
  • Member since
    December 2003
Posted by modelnut4 on Thursday, June 10, 2004 3:05 PM
Gee Whiz, I guess you can't please all of the people all of the time. Oh well, I still liked the DUKW article. The P-47 Article was very good on a very interesting subject, the model was a great job! Since there was some more reading involved than usual, it will occupy more space on my reading/throne room shelf a little longer, not neccesarily a bad thing.Big Smile [:D]

I was a little bummed about the Trumpeter Model of the P 38, I had hoped for better for the money involved. I guess I will just have to go buy 3 or 4 Revell P-38 J's and kitbash my way to P-38 Nirvana instead!Wink [;)]

Jay modelnut4
AKA treadhead 1952
Las Vegas, NV
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, June 10, 2004 3:18 PM
It just happened that I had started on Italerie's DuKW a few days before the issue came out. I picked up several things that I added to my build including scratch built wheel skirts and filling in the drainage slots
  • Member since
    April 2004
Posted by HollywoodTom on Thursday, June 10, 2004 4:46 PM
According to a recent O'Reilly program, 63% of Americans interviewed in a current Gallop Poll had no idea who fought in World War II. Armed with this information, it's somewhat difficult to oppose FSM's editor's choice to include a major article on D-Day in their magazine.

Personally, I thoroughly enjoy the mini historical articles that have begun appearing recently in the sidebars of the magazine, and I feel that whenever an obscure model is detailed in our publication it's worthwhile for us to enhance our understanding of the reasons for that model's prototype's existence. With understanding comes better modeling. When you understand the historical context for a modeling subject, it's easier to reproduce it in miniature. You can make modeling decisions that "model" the decisions made by the prototype manufacturers and users. For example, the DUKW article included the information that the skirts on the DUKW were worn during the invasion, while they were removed in subsequent invasions in the Pacific. Perhaps they interfered with prototype operations, like the tank skirts included in most model Shermans and Stuarts, and were removed in the field of combat operations.

While it should be perfectly acceptable for a genXer to paint a Pink Panzer, it should also be acceptable for him to be laughed at by the knowledgeable. Those of us who are "plankholders" in FSM might lament the necessity of devoting valuable space in the magazine to the basics, but we forget that while this may be our hundredth copy of FSM, it is also the first for many others. Besides, everyone can benefit from a new take on something.

Perhaps due to my father's presence there, I have been a lifelong student of the D-Day invasion. I was surprised by two things in Dr. Guilmartin's account of D-Day. I always thought that the inventor of the Cullen plow was a sergeant, and I had never considered the possibility that the Allies might use the bomb on Germany.
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, June 12, 2004 10:53 AM
OUR.......hobby is as historical as it is hysterical.......CONGRATULATIONS on your D-Day special.......my dad was in the 2nd wave on Omaha beach and part of all that i model, especially if it is related to W W II, regardless of subject, is in part to honour his memory and to those of the "Greatest Generation".
Thanks for your insight..........
  • Member since
    October 2003
  • From: Clovis, Calif
Posted by rebelreenactor on Saturday, June 12, 2004 5:16 PM
I found the armor round up to be very helpful fo finding a kit for the D-day GB. Thanxs FSM.
John
  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: PA
Posted by mjohnson on Tuesday, June 15, 2004 1:51 PM
All of the articles about Normandy were good. It is difficult to pick just one.
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, June 17, 2004 4:20 AM
I agree that background information is necessary when modelling any historical subject. The ignorant may carp - particularly the wilfully ignorant - but many of us prefer to keep learning things all our lives. If you stop learning your brain dies, then you do.

I wish you had included a little more detail on some of the aircraft used on D-Day. I don't have my issue in front of me so correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall much about the heavy glider, the Airspeed Horsa, or the Short Stirling which served as glider tug and paratroop transport.

I realise your magazine is published in the US, but please remember that some of your readership is from other places. I first read your magazine in New Zealand and I am now living in Canada for a while. More than 20% of the allied troops on the ground on D-Day, as well as airmen and seamen, were neither Americans nor Brits. There were a very large number of Canadians (they were the main force that landed on Juno Beach and the only force to achieve ALL their objectives on the first day), plus substantial numbers of Poles and Free French in the ground forces. In the air and in the Channel there were significant numbers of those nationalities, plus Czechs, Dutch, Norwegians, Danes, Australians, New Zealanders, South Africans, and others. Once in a while it might be nice to see something about that, plus the Canadians, Kiwis, Indians, Poles, even the Brazilians etc in Italy; the Chinese armies of the Kuomintang and the Communists; the Brits and Indians keeping the Japanese out of India; the Mexicans in the Philippines; the Aussies, Kiwis, Poles, South Africans, Free French, Greeks etc alongside the Brits in North Africa; the Aussies, Kiwis, West Africans French and Dutch etc in South East Asia; the Aussies and Kiwis in the Southwestern Pacific; the Fijians in the Solomon Islands; the Canadians in the Aleutians; the Brits and Indians in Ethiopia; I could go on for pages... The modelling possibilities for doing something interesting and quite literally unique are almost endless and these are just the Western Allies.

The Soviets were not just Russians, but people from all those now-independent republics which have since broken away. They also had Polish formations, Free French airmen and various groups from other parts of Eastern Europe operating alongside them, plus American and particularly British Air Force formations operating from Russia at various times. Then there are the Arctic Convoys.

The Germans had allies too: the Italians and the Finns, Romanians, Hungarians, Slovaks, Croatians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Estonians, Bulgarians and White Russians, Ukranians and Cossacks, plus the Spanish Blue Division and volunteer SS formations of Norwegians, Dutch, French, Belgians Danes and Indians. Even the Japanese had the more or less reluctant co-operation of the Thai forces plus Burmese and Indian volunteers.

A little research will give a mind-boggling supply of potential subjects for armour or aircraft markings or for never-before-seen dioramas. Look beyond the many-times repeated GI versus Kraut, the Tommy versus Fritz, the leatherneck versus Jap, the Sherman or Churchill, Panther or Tiger, or T34, the P.51 or Spitfire, Fortress or Lancaster, Bf 109 or FW 190, Ju 88 or Me 262. It's all been done, folks. Sure you can do a variation on a theme, another permutation, but why not try something really different, something unique: Ghurkas versus Italian Blackshirts outside Addis Ababa, Soviet Mongolians versus Japanese on the Mongolia China border, or a Romanian IAR 80 on the Russian Front, a Thai Oscar, a Finnish or Yugoslav Hurricane, a Soviet Spitfire, a Bulgarian or Hungarian 109, a Vichy French Dewoitine D.520 in Syria. Anything, something. Look it up!

Research is the other side of modelling. It keeps modelling from getting into a rut of technically better and better models of the same old same old. Why not keep expanding your knowledge of subjects at the same time as you expand your knowledge of techniques. All the above variety is just the tip of the iceberg of Second World War subjects. There is a staggeringly huge lot of before and quite a bit of after that. The first figure diorama I did when I was a teenager was a post-Roman British horseman slashing down at a crouching Saxon. Later subjects included the Maori Land Wars in 19th Century New Zealand, Japanese mercenaries for the Spanish in 17th Century Philippines, Spanish and German adventurers in 16th Century Colombia and Byzantines versus Bulgars.
  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Harrisburg, PA
Posted by Lufbery on Thursday, June 17, 2004 10:26 AM
Lawrence and the rest of the staff at FSM,

The July issue was fantastic.

Here is another vote for the history article. Keep the history sidebars and occasional full articles coming!

The articles were excellent except for two -- one that was in the magazine, and one that should have been. The article on working with clear parts was good as far as it went, but I would have liked to have seen more -- maybe a build up of the kit that appears on the first page of the article.

Secondly, where was the kit round-up of ships that participated in the D-Day invasion? The aircraft and armor round-ups were great, but it's a sin to leave out the ships. Sad [:(]

Overall, it was a great issue. Now, get us that ship round-up.

Regards,

-Drew

Build what you like; like what you build.

  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, June 18, 2004 3:31 AM
.....maybe..???????just maybe??????????........when the inkling is borne to imagine your very first modelling project and you open the box and begin handling all that styrene........history and research are as far from your mind as all the resin & photo-etch add-ons yet to infiltrate your imagination.........but, somehow.............little by little.......model by model some seed begins to grow about the "next" one........who built the real version..........why was it manufactured..........what was it's purpose.........what was it like to operate............what were its characteristics in operation...........where did it serve...........
maybe all curiosities........maybe more..........
i can't help but think we all whether we know it or not...........are subject to many if not all of the same "curosities"...........hence the compulsion to model a simple subject or a historical subject...............from our growing collection of research material......and that is as unique to each individual as our choice of subjects and modelling manufacturers................
sooooooooooo...............to each his/her own, as the debate continues over what modelling magazines should offer us..................
FSM for me, 99% of the time, does it right.............
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, June 18, 2004 11:33 PM
I have to say, I appreciated the mini historical D-Day article very much. I also feel that it is very appropriate to be included in this mag. There is a reason that there is a kit modeled after a full size vehicle. What is a model or diorama without a background story? How or why did you make the choice to pick the model you bought or scratch built? There will always be a story that would peak your interest and enhance your modelmaking skills. Younger people seem uninterested in modelbuilding mainly because they are detached from the reason for making a model.
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, June 25, 2004 7:53 PM
I enjoyed the July issue very much. My uncle was with the 101st Airborne and jumped on D-Day during the invasion of Normandy. He lasted 10 days and was killed on the 16th of June somewhere around St. Loue. Thanks for the great articles and the whole issue, I enjoyed it all. Bart Bartholomew, Mount Vernon, Wa
  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: Rowland Heights, California
Posted by Duke Maddog on Friday, June 25, 2004 10:25 PM
Overall I 'd say that the issue was great! Smile [:)] I loved the historical article on D-Day, and felt that the Invasion stripes and DUKW articles were excellent. I felt that there could have been more on the canopy article myself as well. My favorite Ace was Frances Gabreski and I envy deeply the person who got to meet him. Seeing how to model his aircraft was a benefit I didn't expect. I'll be doing it in 1/72 scale though, but I'll finally have it! I loved seeing all the boxed kits of the Aircraft in the Aircraft Round-up article. Well done on that! Big Smile [:D]Big Smile [:D]

Now for my Rant SoapBox [soapbox]

I did feel cheated by the Armor Roundup article since it seemed the author didn't do enough research on what kits are out there in small scale. Sure, he mentioned all the 1/35th scale kits of the various vehicles used, but only mentioned three kits being offered in 1/72 scale! This is misleading to anyone who may be starting the hobby and might want to build some small scale armor. It gives the impression that Small Scale Armor is dead, when it's very much alive! Proof of that is in the at least 45+ kits of various D-Day vehicles in 1/72 scale currently on the market. One of these is the DUKW, which wasn't mentioned in the article, yet was featured in the Reader's Gallery! Not one 1/72 scale M-4 Sherman kit was mentioned, nor were any Pz IV kits; much less the GMC CCKW truck and the 3/4 ton truck! Granted I'm in the 'minority' that builds these small kits, but that doesn't mean that they should be slighted, particularly since it gives an incorrect impression of the state of the hobby. Besides, many kids I met while working in a hobby shop for 5 years wanted to build a tank, but were too put off by the size and sophistication of the 1/35th scale tanks. Yet, whenever we got in the 1/72 scale armor offerings, they flew off the shelves! Finally, I am in full agreement that the ships and landing craft should have been featured in a Kit Roundup as well. In many respects, if it hadn't been for the ships offshore, D-Day would never have happened, much less succeeded!

Well, that's my opinion for what it's worth. I'm glad I was able to pick up an issue despite my rant! Overall, I'd give it Cool [8D]Thumbs Up [tup]Thumbs Up [tup]
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, June 27, 2004 7:19 PM
I look foward to the magazine,theres allways something to learn,thanks again for a magazine thats a step above the rest.
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.