What Happened to The I-53 Thread?

Randy Stone wrote:

So the questions remain these: where and how did the problems arise ? and what can be done to fix them ?

Randy, I know you get satisfaction from "coming to Lindberg's rescue" by contacting their top management and having a "beer summit" so as to help them pull themselves out of this I-53 mess, but the majority of us don't see it as our job, or desire to help a for profilt company survive by doing their research for them...If you have that kinda time and the resources, good for you---knock yourself out. They should put your name on the box under, "credits"...But like I mentioned before, most modelers expect that this is done up front and paid for in the cost of the kit...most expect a quality kit when they lay out the money. This position is not radical, rude or an "attack" on Lindberg, it is just a simple fact of capitalism...

As far as my not being constructive, I offered up a question that many have, how is Lindberg going to "make things right" with those folks who have bought the defective I-53 if they correct the kit?...there were several constructive answers to that post...

WOW, there are some SERIOUS fireworks going off in here!  Sorry I missed the original thread - I love a good bar brawl...

 

Randy Stone, please check your PM's...

Felix C. wrote:

Quick question. Where there any issues regarding the Revell 1/72 iteration of their U-boat and Gato?  I do not know of other 1/72 submarine releases. Are there any images of the I-20 type Lindberg 1/72 submarine?  Can we agree there were no dual I-20 submarines as occurred with the I-53. Does this not mean we can expect an accurate I-20type?

 

No, there are no 'dual' I-20 submarines.  I'm not convinced that 'dual' I-53 submarines is the cause of the problem here anyway--there are many more problems than that and the 1927 I-53 had a different stern as well, a stern which is not replicated by Lindberg.  Again, without knowing the precise specifics of how Lindberg's I-53 was researched and designed I can't say how they messed it up, I can only guess.  And I don't want to do that.

My intent is to make the attempt to prevent this from happening to the I-20 (or the GZ, for that matter).

Randy Stone

...M-r conducted his vendetta via PM, a PM would have been the appropriate forum.  But since he did not--and has since attacked me personally since I told him I needed no assistance from him--he has taken the possibility out of the equation.  His modeling skills are not the issue, his manners are.  And I find it a little surprising that you would confuse disgust with such 'manners' with a 'seeming condescending tone.'  Personally, I am surprised the poisonous invective he has directed toward Lindberg is so deep seated and personal; you'd think they took money out of his pocket. 

Quick question. Where there any issues regarding the Revell 1/72 iteration of their U-boat and Gato? 

I do not know of other 1/72 submarine releases. I had the Amati 1/72 U-47 once and sold it as I thought I could not build it properly.

Are there any images of the I-20 type Lindberg 1/72 submarine?  Can we agree there were no dual I-20 submarines as occurred with the I-53. Does this not mean we can expect an accurate I-20type?

 

 

Mr. Stone, Why do you continue to air your beef with Manstein's Revenge in public? Why don't you just PM him so you don't get another thread yanked? You seem a bit condescending in your tone, what are your credentials? We all know what Manstein's Revenge is capable of in his modeling work, how about you? Are you a yacht broker from Rhode Island? (Don't get the last question?)

Just PM!

...I can see it yanked, particularly in today's climate but the important thing is that the kit itself is salvageable.  And more than that, it can be modified into several of the other, related, variants of Japanese long range submarines.

My hope is to demonstrate to Mr. Petit, of Lindberg, that stepping up the original research will go a long ways to bringing Lindberg not only back to life--it appears that many of their kits are sold on the basis of nostalgia, natch'--but put it into bigger and better leagues.

I confess I do not understand how the numerous inaccuracies of the kit were incorporated into the mold.  Just by sight I was suspicious of a number of things and fifteen minutes after pulling various sources it began to look pretty dark for Lindberg.  Now, none of this detracts from what Lindberg is attempting to do, it only detracts from what they have done in this specific instance.  So the questions remain these: where and how did the problems arise ? and what can be done to fix them ?

Randy Stone

...M-R no, what I directed your way was my sentiment that--having pointed out the flaws of this kit (for which you applauded my 'stones' for having written so [how soon you seem to forget])--I neither needed nor required the services of someone who hasn't the slightest interest in positive or constructive criticism as opposed to making a science out of trashing someone's else's efforts.  This site is populated by modelers who--for better or for worse--enjoy what they do and look forward to honing and improving their craft.  It's just my opinion, but it's my feeling that a modelmaker is entitled to the same respect and assistance even the greenest of modelbuilders may need.  If you are that good...if you are so perfect, then maybe you don't even need to be here because there is a lot of imperfection in the modeling world, including my own.

Further, I never once mentioned that you're the only one "...on the face of the earth not happy with the kit...," --heck, my own comments about the kit put lie to that completely dishonest statement.  Nor do I, as you so freely assert without the slightest factual basis, work for Lindberg or profit from their efforts; that's just another example of you talking too much.  So attempting to alter my disgust with your behavior into some kind of acceptance of Lindberg's kit is a dog that just don't hunt.  Rather, my objection is that you haven't shown the least bit of common decency in this matter and let's just grant that there's nothing which will alter my good taste...or your bad.  It's one thing to get your facts wrong, as you (and Lindberg, for that matter) have here; it's quite another to act as though you actually know what you're talking about.

As I originally wrote in my reply to your antics: you have offered nothing, nada, zilch wrt what is wrong with Lindberg's kit, how it can be corrected or what you may do to help.  All you've done is offer pointless complaint and invective.  On the other hand, I will discuss the kit in more detail once I put together my sourcing and this will be forwarded to Mr. Petit, who happens--by general consensus--to be a pretty nice guy.  Having spoken with him personally--that's called initiative and it easily trumps complaining--I found Mr. Petit quite open to constructive criticism and I intend to show him the respect to which he is due.  I can't understand why that is such a difficult concept for you to fathom. It's long passed time you attempted to measure up to his good manners and this imbroglio could prove the opportunity for you to learn a few manners.  If it salves your feelings, you may apologize to me by PM or by r.stone.eal@juno.com.  I'm open to contrition.

Oh, and by the way, it's my understanding that the kit sells out rather quickly.

Randy Stone

  i never read the original    i think manny could have something

 

 

 

and let me say i hope i am wrong but......

this post could be off into lock up or   go back in time to 1984 when big bro just erased what is deemed as bad

It's hard to believe that a popular post like that one (I think there were around 4,500 views before it was yanked and about 90 posts) could have been pulled. Who complained?

Firecaptain wrote:

OK Randy....thanks....didn't know if things really got out of hand yesterday. I've seen threads on other forums get yanked before when a supporting vendor is trashed etc slander, and or the language and tit for tat gets way out of hand. Just that in my short time here I don't recall a thread getting pulled......at least the ones I have followed in A/C, Armor, and here. Model on folks.....nothing more here......lol...

They don't usually get yanked unless the self-imposed posting police get involved, such as Mr. Stone, whose sole contribution to the Forum thus far has been his defending Lindberg's inept business practices concerning the I-53...This kind of thing makes him feel important and more intelligent than the rest of us who don't agree with him...He wants people to believe I am the only person on the face of the earth not happy with the kit, when it is clear that there are legions...

I know I am just a rookie here, but I have a feeling that thread was pulled because two particular posters continued to snipe each other long after Mr. Matthew Usher requested they cease and desist, as they now continue to do in this thread!  Don't be surprised if this thread disappears also.  Copy that link before its gone!

OK Randy....thanks....didn't know if things really got out of hand yesterday.

I've seen threads on other forums get yanked before when a supporting vendor is trashed etc slander, and or the language and tit for tat gets way out of hand.

Just that in my short time here I don't recall a thread getting pulled......at least the ones I have followed in A/C, Armor, and here.

Model on folks.....nothing more here......lol...

Trabi wrote:

Can someone post the link to that building thread, please. I didn´t add it to my favorites, because I thought I can always found it here...

The link should be easy to find by using a few choice search terms:

I used, 'Merriman' 'Lindberg' and 'I-53.'

This isn't meant to be snide, just a learning tip for other searches.  Here is the link:

 http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1109801

 

 

... factual basis for this stupendous assertion ?

My money is that your continuous and pointless attacks were far more responsible for the removal.  That must make you feel real important.  Too bad you couldn't have expended one-tenth the effort in constructive criticism that you did in spewing venom...but, then, poison is so much easier to sling around.

What your efforts don't impede--and never will, however, is the attempt to make matters right.  See you later, bub.

Randy Stone

Can someone post the link to that building thread, please. I didn´t add it to my favorites, because I thought I can always found it here...

Felix C. wrote:

I think it is just that as kits become more expensive, there is an expected increase in the quality and accuracy of the components. Perhaps also demographics, more expensive kits tend to purchased by adults not children. I read on SN (and cannot find the post) that the typical ship modeler is an adult male, reasonably well compensated and educated. Sounds like the type of customer who knows and expects a return on the value of his dollar invested.

...careful there...you could be accused of spreading venom and vitriol...might be reported...

I think it is just that as kits become more expensive, there is an expected increase in the quality and accuracy of the components. Perhaps also demographics, more expensive kits tend to purchased by adults not children.

I read on SN (and cannot find the post) that the typical ship modeler is an adult male, reasonably well compensated and educated. Sounds like the type of customer who knows and expects a return on the value of his dollar invested.

 

 

My guess is that one (or all) of the Lindberg apologists complained and it got yanked...