What Happened to The I-53 Thread?

You are all out of control (not you Stik-we parallel posted); Manny first of all because you are a pillar of the community here and have got to suck it up, man. As fast as you get baited you fire back. It looks stupid.

A thread gets poofed out to the ether by the mods, and it gets reinvented. 

I like Ships because it's a haven for sanity, in what is otherwise a very sane website. But to get all this crap flying around is not right. Even a while back JTilley weighed in with a totally uncharacteristic display of emotion.

I really think FSM ought to set up a rule where no vendor or store can be flamed until the poster has three good reasons why. 

...cowboy, and white is black, up is down.  You're so tied up with your ego you don't know which way is up now.

You have yet to establish a single one of your assertions; sustained a single one of your claims--I'm in the employ of Lindberg, for instance.  And now you're reduced to making accusations that I'm a troll. Wow, I guess that boob of an argument proves everything; frankly, I didn't expect that baloney.  But what other card can you play ?  I guess the next thing you'll spew is that I am a communist, too.  Gee, I'm offended.  One would think someone--anyone--could manage something like a reasonable discussion, but not you.  Your ego is too deeply involved in the issue.

Now back to the issue: what positive contributions have you made wrt the I-53 ?  You've had a week or two now; surely you can manage something.  Just what have you contributed ?  Come on now, you can manage something intelligible, can't you ?

I'd denounce you as a worthless troll but even trolls exhibit something like a decent argument.  Unfortunately, you haven't even managed that; please stop wasting my time.  Move on, admit you ain't gonna change my opinion of your non-abilities and just let it go; you're history fellow.  You haven't anything to commend your bile and we both know it.  So just let it go.  Contact me PM or here: r.stone.eal@juno.com and perhaps I'll grant you some time. 

You may wish to melt down the thread to protect your ego but it doesn't change the essential facts: you haven't a clue as to what you're talking about.

See ya bub,

Randy Stone

Randy, go away for a while, or forever.

Monday morning is a new day.

...and I have a bit more than Polmar and Carpenter to draw on. 

Lindberg blew it here and there's no denying that fact.  But we have to help them see the light and move beyond that essential issue.  Every time I look at advertisements (from Squadron or others) I just cringe but I ain't willing to let these guys just die on the vine.

Randy Stone

...bondoman (I never liked bondo, anyway) I just can't oblige you.  The facts dictate otherwise. 

I do agree with you that someone or something shouldn't be flamed until there are there are three (very good and sound) reasons why.  That hasn't happened here.

Randy Stone

...Halsey's typhoons, there is no reason for the heavy weather.  Some folks need to just take a deep breath and consider the issue maturely.

Randy Stone

subfixer wrote:

Stand by for heavy weather!  All hands, take a brace!

Making sense finally of this mess. 

Look folks, Captain Bondo (and yes thats what I go by, boy), will host a keg of rum on Friday at the secind dog watch, if'n ye'll all just SHUT UP! Otherwise it's off to the gratings, in pairs, cuz I know that's how you all like it.

No schoonerbum, I never pretend to be a sailor, just a rational person.

Randy Stone wrote:

The link should be easy to find by using a few choice search terms: I used, 'Merriman' 'Lindberg' and 'I-53.'  Here is the link:  http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1109801

Thank you Randy! I didn´t remember the nick of the builder or even in what forum that thread is. I build only static models so rc forums are like Area 51 to me...

bondoman wrote:

subfixer wrote: Stand by for heavy weather!  All hands, take a brace! Well some idiot never mentioned that September 19 was national "Talk like a pirate day", which riddles me bildges, chaps me apron, swells me rum and genneraalyy lays aver ta' if'nthere be a Turk brig onnna 4ter tha ne's a cannun ba' then it be dun! Making sense finally of this mess.  Look folks, Captain Bondo (and yes thats what I go by, boy), will host a keg of rum on Friday at the secind dog watch, if'n ye'll all just SHUT UP! Otherwise it's off to the gratings, in pairs, cuz I know that's how you all like it.   No schoonerbum, I never pretend to be a sailor, just a rational person.

Rational? We're cutting yer rations right now, ya sot!

subfixer wrote:

bondoman wrote:  subfixer wrote: Stand by for heavy weather!  All hands, take a brace! Well some idiot never mentioned that September 19 was national "Talk like a pirate day", which riddles me bildges, chaps me apron, swells me rum and genneraalyy lays aver ta' if'nthere be a Turk brig onnna 4ter tha ne's a cannun ba' then it be dun! Making sense finally of this mess.  Look folks, Captain Bondo (and yes thats what I go by, boy), will host a keg of rum on Friday at the secind dog watch, if'n ye'll all just SHUT UP! Otherwise it's off to the gratings, in pairs, cuz I know that's how you all like it.   No schoonerbum, I never pretend to be a sailor, just a rational person.   Rational? We're cutting yer rations right now, ya sot!

Plasticbender wrote:

The facts are VERY,VERY,VERY SIMPLE.....the kit is wrong in profile and details, is an expensive kit...and PLEASE don't give me the line "is targeted to the saving pennys kid to buy a kit"..$150 is A LOT of pennys and is VERY probable the "kid" will gladly spend the money in the newest video game in the market than a model kit, I know since none of the kids in my family  are interested in modeling, they look at my work and say "that's cool" and that's it!! I ask them if they want to learn how to build,make,create scale models and their replay is "no thanks, is to dificult and boring"....and I must confess that after seeing several of their video games and the "action/reaction" needed to "survive" one of this things is very dificult to convince them to sit down at a table a cut,clean,glue,prime,paint and enjoy a static model kit.....competition of video games/computers is very high. This kit is, no matter what other people say now, targeted to the adult modeler in a VERY particular field of naval modeling with the added expectation to atract others to this offering, if the kit was at least accurate in profile would have been an a smash hit, secondary things like deck details and other things could have been reworked by the buyer...hey no kit is perfect, but this kit really "broke the mold" in terms of what the modeler got after waiting with a LOT of expectation for this sub kit and then the replays of "the submarine model is accurate, we used the navy data for it" "it's a late war variation" etc,etc made the problem even more bizarre. I know making a model in this scale is not cheap or easy and it takes guts to undertake something like this in the times we live  when as stated above the new generation of kids are more interested in "virtual reality" than a 3 dimensional fisical object they build with their hands, and this is why I don't understand why this kit was left to become such a bad representation of the real thing since the principal buyer of this model will be enthusiast scale modelers with the aim of having an accurate representation of a VERY rare WW2 naval subject in a very nice scale. The company who made the model have the "turn at bat" right now, I think they should concentrate their efforts in making a good model of the I-20, and make sure to get things right on this one, the catch is..do it right and fast, if they do, the path to better reviews and future considerations to their offerings will be meet again with the high expectations/exitement as this kits received when they where first published to the scale modelling world. PS/excuse my grammar, but english is not my main language.

Randy Stone wrote:

I'd denounce you as a worthless troll but even trolls exhibit something like a decent argument.  Unfortunately, you haven't even managed that; please stop wasting my time.  Move on, admit you ain't gonna change my opinion of your non-abilities and just let it go; you're history fellow.  You haven't anything to commend your bile and we both know it.  So just let it go.  Contact me PM or here: r.stone.eal@juno.com and perhaps I'll grant you some time.  You may wish to melt down the thread to protect your ego but it doesn't change the essential facts: you haven't a clue as to what you're talking about. See ya bub, Randy Stone

Searat12?  Searat??!!  Is that you...?    (I know, I know, this is wrong on so many levels.... but sometimes I can't help myself.... the voices in my head make me do it....)

Well this thread went into the toilet fairly quick. If it gets deleted do I lose my post count?

I guess the I-53 is ok for RC folk and perhaps that was the main focus as was mentioned in an earlier post. In that case, no complaint really. Some models make the cross-over from static to RC and the reverse as the 1/72 Revell Corvette and some do not as the 1/125 Blue Devil- or they do but with a great deal of work. I am cheap and do not spend more than $50 for a kit but do see a $100 kit eventually being Ebayed at $50 in a few years if is declared less than acceptable.

Anyway, have test shots of the I-20 been posted? Does it look ok?  

Randy, please cool it. Even if/when one is right, they can be wrong if negative emotions interfere. I am not saying M-R was incorrect either. I do not see why differences of opinion and expression have to degenerate to personal attacks.

Manny, the Kaitens from the kit are a whole seperate issue. I am not in my area and am only passing on what I was told by more knowledgeable folks on this subject than myself and comparing to reference stuff I saw.  Their outline matches a 2nd generation Kaiten dimensionally and shapewise. But It does not match an first model/generation Kaiten. The moldings are VERY thick for the scale. A properly scaled early Kaiten was brought for comparison- there was none. The kit comes with five later model, but I was told, I-53 was supposed to carry six of the early model variant. The dimensional differences (1.8m later model vs 1m early model) in the diameter.

Here is my personal feeling on the kit- When first announce, I had very high hopes because 1) It was from Lindberg (I realy do want another US based model company to succeed and show it can be done right for less stateside) and I thought it would not be too pricey (more in line with Revell USA's Gato rather than Revell Germany's U-Boat); 2) their marketing had given the impression this was to be a state of the art kit; 3) I really like Japanese warships, and the announcement of a Pearl Harbor type really got me interested-I figured if I could get just one 1/72 sub, THAT would be the one.

But again, after seeing it with my own eyes and approaching it with an open mind, in spite of all I had already read online, I would not be willing to pay MSRP, or anywhere near that, for this kit.

Manstein Revenge,

The small kaitens are not perfect in detail BUT MUCH more better in my opinion to work with and make a good scale representation of the real thing with some scrachtbuilding and detailing, some modelers think that the size could be off in this scale but not by much, others thinks they are OK..BUT again with extra work..WOW, this kit DO have problems!! Also the way they are mounted on the deck in the kit is debatable and can be much more improved.

I have found my GAKKEN japanese submarine publication and the only submarines with the "slope bow" profile don't even come close to the shape of the I-53 kit.

I remember there was a Japanese resin kit (very limited edition) of these Kaitens in resin with photoecht detail also a SUPERB 1/150 (if I remember right) scale I-400 submarine, I saw the photos in a Hobby Japan magazine about 6 or 7 years ago....the sub went for $1,250 USD!!!!! the kaitens for $90.

stikpusher wrote:

...after seeing it with my own eyes and approaching it with an open mind, in spite of all I had already read online, I would not be willing to pay MSRP, or anywhere near that, for this kit.

Here you can find Kaitens 1:72: http://www.hlj.com/product/FNMFS-01

These are real beauties!

bondoman wrote:

subfixer wrote:  bondoman wrote:  subfixer wrote: Stand by for heavy weather!  All hands, take a brace! Well some idiot never mentioned that September 19 was national "Talk like a pirate day", which riddles me bildges, chaps me apron, swells me rum and genneraalyy lays aver ta' if'nthere be a Turk brig onnna 4ter tha ne's a cannun ba' then it be dun! Making sense finally of this mess.  Look folks, Captain Bondo (and yes thats what I go by, boy), will host a keg of rum on Friday at the secind dog watch, if'n ye'll all just SHUT UP! Otherwise it's off to the gratings, in pairs, cuz I know that's how you all like it.   No schoonerbum, I never pretend to be a sailor, just a rational person.   Rational? We're cutting yer rations right now, ya sot! Now we're makin' headway!

Actually, Saturday WAS Pirate Day! In WoW!  Be ye a gamer then?

Trabi wrote:

Here you can find Kaitens 1:72: http://www.hlj.com/product/FNMFS-01 These are real beauties!

Yes, this is what was brought in for comparison to the Lindberg Kaiten. Huge difference. Not counting dimesional differences, it was a huge qulity in difference in detail and moldings.

In a nutshell, yes, your analogy hits it. now had they marketed it as such, that may have lessened teh flak it is getting so far. But all those issues aside, the quality of the kit is certainly not worth the price tag. The thickness of moldings is THICK. I realize that scale thickness on 1/72 is nery impossible to duplicate in styrene plastic. But just using the bulkhead thickness on the kaitens and the mothership, they are grossly overthick. The simulated wood grain on the deck planking are also done heavy handed.

I really do hope that they take all this to heart, go back and double check everything on their next issue 1/72 Japanese sub, and make sure they get it right (measure twice cut once). If they do, I am willing to bet that builders and fans of large subs snatch up the kit.

tucchase wrote:

So, to simplify what everyone has said so far...What a mess!

Pretty much sums it up...

I'd say you were being generous.   There is no reason to assume that Lindberg faithfully or even roughly copied Japanese navy plans for a variation of the I-53.   The massive and illogical variations between IJN design as built, and the Lindberg kit, obviously occurred inside the kit designer's head.  

I agree on your big mess comment.  I think its a pretty obvious  case of a hack designer not able to interpret drawings, not willing to admit he wasn't up to the task, and a manager not really giving a damn when it counted, now struggling to do damage control.  

Dave 

tucchase wrote:

So, to simplify what everyone has said so far, Lindberg made a model of the I-53, but they used plans for a variation that the I-53 was never converted to (according to photos after the war), and they equipped it with the later model Kaiten that the I-53 was never documented as having carried.  Wonderful!  That would be kinda like putting 18 inch guns on an Iowa Class and calling it a Montana.  I really doubt any one here would go for that scenario either.  What a mess!

Trabi wrote:

Here you can find Kaitens 1:72: http://www.hlj.com/product/FNMFS-01 These are real beauties!

FWIW.....here is a review of the Fine Mold Kaitens for those interested...

http://www.modelshipwrights.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=2583

stikpusher wrote:

I really do hope that they take all this to heart, go back and double check everything on their next issue 1/72 Japanese sub, and make sure they get it right (measure twice cut once). If they do, I am willing to bet that builders and fans of large subs snatch up the kit.

I do too.  It would be nice to have an American company show they can do it right for a change.  However, if they screw it up as badly again, we may have to consider the old adage about "Once is an accident, twice may be enemy action." (How's that for paranoia?)  Or they really are just that incompetent....

tucchase wrote:

It would be nice to have an American company show they can do it right for a change.  However, if they screw it up as badly again, we may have to consider the old adage about "Once is an accident, twice may be enemy action." (How's that for paranoia?)  Or they really are just that incompetent....