German Destroyer comparisons...

cerberusjf

A scuttle is another name for a porthole.  I have seen them molded so they are round seen from the side, my Trumpter “Richelieu”has them for example.  But I have never seen them as “deformed” as those on the Dragon Z-39 and they seem to be better on the Trumpeter Z-25. 

Looking more closely though, it looks like it is because the hull of the dragon kit has more flare at the bow and if you compare it to photos of the original for example, it is very accurate.  I don’t know if Z-25 had a hull identical to Z-39, but if it did then Trumpeter’s model is not as good as Dragon’s by a long way.  Everything else on the Dragon kit looks better.  In fact credit where it’s due, Dragon’s kit looks dangerously close to perfect.

Sorry about the font size etc., I copied and pasted from Word..  oops!

A scuttle is another name for a porthole.  I have seen them molded so they are round seen from the side, my Trumpter “Richelieu”has them for example.  But I have never seen them as “deformed” as those on the Dragon Z-39 and they seem to be better on the Trumpeter Z-25. 

Looking more closely though, it looks like it is because the hull of the dragon kit has more flare at the bow and if you compare it to photos of the original for example, it is very accurate.  I don’t know if Z-25 had a hull identical to Z-39, but if it did then Trumpeter’s model is not as good as Dragon’s by a long way.  Everything else on the Dragon kit looks better.  In fact credit where it’s due, Dragon’s kit looks dangerously close to perfect.

What's a scuttle?

If you look at the scuttles straight on they're round; what you're seeing is the "distortion" caused by the bow not being a flat surface. This is a fairly common appearance on ship models; while I can't attest to the Z-25 I can say that I've seen the same thing on my 1/200th Arizona by Trumpeter as well as most of their older kits I own.

Tracy White

You can compare the detail in the following reviews:

ModelWarships Z-25 Review

ModelWarships Z-39 Review

Shall we compare stack detail? Trumpeter / Dragon

Other specific areas can be targeted that way as well.

Weren't the scuttles on Z-39 round?  Dragon have made them a peculiar shape at the bow.  And would the rivet detail on the funnel really have been  seen on the real ship at 1/350 equivalent distances?

I would think that developing a set of generic PE rails would be in a company's best interest. Make them generic & supply them with all ship kits so it's cost-effective. Rivet counters would be buying something more accurate anyway, or be able to modify the supplied railings to suit them. Beginners would probably not try it, but average-joe modelers would be happy to have something that looks like a railing included.

Now about this PE railings issue...when are they gonna start including full sets in these new destroyer kits?

Gents,

I locked the other thread because it had clearly gotten out of hand. If this one goes south I will do the same thing and the people responsible, and I mean everyone, will have account suspended. I have said it before, and I am pretty sick of saying it, personal attacks and insults will not be tolerated.

Aaron

Thanks for dropping in on my new thread---you seem to enjoy them.  maybe you can contribute to this one?

warshipbuilder

b) Why was the other thread locked? Who lobbied for this action and why?.

I reported Manstein's last post where he insulted another member. It was deleted and the thread locked.

Manstein's revenge

Rare German destroyer footage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlslM81ie4M&feature=player_detailpage

Wow, they're much smaller than I thought!

Manny, RCN used mostly Tribal Class as well as the smaller Corvettes (Flower Class??) built up for WW2, I think the Brits would have been similar, any other DD class was probably earlier & being phased out by the Tribals.

I think...

keilau

WallyM3:

There's a veritable alphabet soup of Btitish DDs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_World_War_II_destroyers

 

The alphabet soup classes were smaller. The Tribal class was designed and built in responses to the larger German destroyer during WW-II and also entered service with the Canadian and Australian Navy post war. It will be very good to see the 2 adversary along side each other. The Canadian and Australian services will probably generate wider interest too.

Les Brown's "British Destroyers- A-I and Tribal Classes" in the Ship Craft series is a good reference for the modelers.

WallyM3

There's a veritable alphabet soup of Btitish DDs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_World_War_II_destroyers

The alphabet soup classes were smaller. The Tribal class was designed and built in responses to the larger German destroyer during WW-II and also entered service with the Canadian and Australian Navy post war. It will be very good to see the 2 adversary along side each other. The Canadian and Australian services will probably generate wider interest too.

Les Brown's "British Destroyers- A-I and Tribal Classes" in the Ship Craft series is a good reference for the modelers.

Just outside of Naples Harbor. I recognize the water.

I'll stop now.

Rare German destroyer footage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlslM81ie4M&feature=player_detailpage

There's a veritable alphabet soup of Btitish DDs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_World_War_II_destroyers

One of the ship "know-it-alls" insulted me and it went downhill from there...

You know, I want a British destroyer in 350th, but I'm not sure I want it to be from the Tribal class...what other types did they have that were common? And, did the Italians have many destroyers?

How about a Norwegian destroyer?

warshipbuilder

b) Why was the other thread locked? Who lobbied for this action and why?.

That is a good question. I was puzzled m'self. Usually when Matt or Aaron swoops in, they leave a smack-down message. But this was done completely anonymously...

a) I'm getting Trumpeter's kit, and yes it is principally down to cost, not to mention that Dragon's isn't in the UK yet

b) Why was the other thread locked? Who lobbied for this action and why?.

Did I mention that I love the Tirpitz?

Well, I asked because as we've seen, price is a very important feature of a kit to some people.  Some people value fidelity of details, where others want fewer pieces. I will say that on my trumpeter kits I don't worry about whether or not I sand down and lose details as I'll probably be replacing them anyway, whereas with the Scharnhorst and USS Buchanan kits I've worked on the detail is so fine I've worked to keep it. Although I now have one of the Z-39s, I haven't had a chance to directly compare it to the Trumpeter Z-25s.

You can compare the detail in the following reviews:

ModelWarships Z-25 Review

ModelWarships Z-39 Review

Shall we compare stack detail? Trumpeter / Dragon

Other specific areas can be targeted that way as well.

Manstein's revenge

...hmmmmmmm...bestest?

More bestest-er? Least worstest?

Actually, I asked someone in the locked thread a question that never got answered?

He said that the Dragon kit had more detail.  I asked for specifics.  He gave none...

Let's start there...

By the way, I'll end up buying one of each (or more) so I'm not really biased towards eiter company, just like a good, honest  debate,..

...hmmmmmmm...bestest?

Manstein's revenge

So which is better:  Trumpeter's or Dragon's ???

Does not compute: define "better."

I have a natural aversion to anything sold by Trumpeter. I'm not judging, just my thing. That being said, does either one include PE railings? Price? Never built either so I'd have to go by what comes in the box.