Subject: SMML31/03/98VOL135 shipmodels@wr.com.au ============================================================================ MODELLERS INDEX 1: Armored portholes? 2: Tom's Modelworks 1/350 Mo to Iowa convertion kit 3: Rigging in 1/350 scale 4: Titanic 5: "Models" vs "Models, " and Realistic Water 6: Re: Questions, questions 7: Ships Plaques 8: Re: Titanic models 9: Rigging in 1/350 scale 10: Re: Asiatic Fleet DDs ============================================================================ TRADERS & ANNOUNCEMENTS INDEX 1: Apology 2: Fletcher, Gearing & Sumner book 3: APMA: Australian Plastic Modellers Assoc 4: Thanks, and WTD! 5: Old USS Ranger kit found 6: PSM - 1/400 Arromanches / Bonaventure 7: Warship Update 8: 1:1200/1250 Scale News ============================================================================ MODELLERS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: JGordon262 <JGordon262@aol.com> Subject: Armored portholes? I recently built a small scale model of the Italian battleship Roma. It features what appear to be circular disks on the hull sides where the portholes should be. Did these Littorio class ships have their portholes covered with armor plate at some point in the war? Or is this just some imaginative model design? Jim ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: jpoutre@lehman.com (Joseph Poutre) Subject: Tom's Modelworks 1/350 Mo to Iowa convertion kit How is this kit, and what exactly is included? I'm planning to redo my Revell 1/350 Missouri to the NJ either in Korean War or WWII Pacific appearance. (I may even soon have two, so I can do both!) I know the Iowa and NJ weren't identical, but the NJ had the same rounded bridge structure, albeit covered instead of open, and was closer to Iowa that Missouri during 1943-1944. Also, where's the best price you've found for the kit, if you've bought it? Thanks in advance. JoeP ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: "Ritchie_deutag, Colin" <Colin.Ritchie@DEUTAG.CO.UK> Subject: Rigging in 1/350 scale >> I'm just about to start rigging my Revell SMS Emden and before I start I'd like to ask about rigging in general. From the instructions it looks like a massive job. Could anyone share some tips or hints on going about this task to make it easier? I've never done it before so I'd like to get it right. I haven't purchased any thread yet so tips would be greatly appreciated. Also, would it be wise to spray-paint the modell with flat laquer finish before or after the rigging? << Hi there Since I'm working on the rigging of my Hood and POW at the moment, here's my $0.02 worth. I've been using a mixture of "invisible " nylon thread, the thinnest I can find. I looks ok in place, and it holds in place with Cynao very well. For areas such as funnel stays etc I've used stretched sprue. It has the advantage that its reasonably rigid, and can be cut to length and attached very easily . I have a feeling that both of these approaches are a touch over scale, however once installed and painted they look very effective, (at least in my view) I still have problems with the materials to use for the radio lines that run from the yards down to the bridge. There looks best but it can be a real pain to get really taught. I'm sure more skilled modellers have other views, but I spent a very happy 2 hours yesterday afternoon finishing the rigging on Hood, and even my wife was impressed! Colin Ritchie ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: Dave Carter <xdt22@dial.pipex.com> Subject: Titanic Hi Alberto, >> A friend of mine wishes to build a Titanic model in 1/350 or aprox. The two kits I found in mail orders are Academy at $ 52.49 and Gunze San. At $ 143.81 as there is quite a gap can a good soul give Me a piece of advice << These are identical kits, and, as far as I am aware, the price differential is Gunze Sanyo's own huge mark up. (Quite why so much I don't know, as the Gunze Lusitania is almost half the price!) Basically, I think that the GS Titanic is being marketed in Japan.. anyone buying this kit at this price probably is not aware that the Academy offering is out there. Cheers Caroline Carter WEM ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: Hank_Lapa@signalcorp.com Subject: "Models" vs "Models, " and Realistic Water I think I've found a seed of useful thought in the wake of recent brushfires, one which hopefully serves to quell somewhat the remaining hot spots. Ship models seem to fall into 2 categories. I'll call the first "traditional," because to me it harkens back to the origins of the hobby, and it includes miniatures of ships which are built straight, clean, on a stand or base, generally full-hull, without figures, weathering (to speak of), or fake water. It is meant to provide the viewer with a small representation of the factual *structure* (and color) of the ship, i.e., its "appearance" in and of itself, without "context." Examples range from builder's and owner's models to mass-market plastic kits. It is not a toy simply because it is not put into a non-model context to create a lifelike appearance. Indeed, one producer of exceptionally superb finished 1/350 liner replicas (not from commercial kits) today leaves deck fittings in bare, shiny brass as homage to "traditional" fine ship modeling rather that painting these fittings "accurately." The second category, which I'll call "realistic" (in a strictly non-judgmental way, I assure you), adds context to the model through a combination of setting (water, wharves, etc.), weathering, figures, etc., to create an illusion of action -- realism, and add "interest." I don't necessarily see that mode as superior modeling, just different. Good modelers probably can do either. If one were to blow up both categories to full size, I don't think either would stand out as a "better" representation. I'd expect the first to look like an underdone stage background and the second to look like an overdone stage background. Happily, none of our models will ever be blown up in such a way to reveal every builder-induced flaw of omission or commission. In any case, I don't see the sense in unfairly comparing "apples and oranges," because we are talking about two valid schools of ship modeling, not bad ship model toys and good illusion ship model pseudo diaramas. Now, how about some feedback on *this* idea -- I'm planning on using some wavy plexiglas sheet (shower door variety, I guess) as water under a Revell 1/550-1/600 ship or two, specifically SS UNITED STATES and perhaps USS HORNET. I figure that I could paint the flat (bottom) side of the wavy sheet the desired shade and mount the ship to the other side. My idea is to give the illusion of the water's "transparency," at least down to a scale depth of 10 feet. For the SSUS, because of the way the "secret" hull is molded, I used a coping saw to cut a hull-shaped hole in the wavy sheet, leaving the ship riding at the right level, and will add some sort of filler to the joint to enhance the effect. This is a decidedly non-choppy sea, so wake would be somewhat subdued. For HORNET, I may try to heat the sheet and bend it up to add "roll" to the sea. Anyone gone this route before?? Regards, Hank ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: drwells@hogpa.ho.att.com (David R Wells) Subject: Re: Questions, questions Les wrote: >> 1. Haze gray for modern USN ships. From reviews, seems as if people use many different paints for this color. Can someone tell me what FS number it's closest to? << Your guess is as good as mine. I think that this is going to be one of those endless debates. As for me, I just use Polly Scale Haze Gray, and hide when the color police come around. (OPEN UP!!!! WE KNOW YOU'RE IN THERE! PUT DOWN THE KRYLON & COME OUT WITH YOUR HANDS UP!!!) >> 2: 1:700 Fletcher-class. Are there any models available that include the hedgehog and any other changes made when some ships were reclassified DDEs in the 50s? << Not sure about the 1/700s, (Tamiya & Skywave) but the admittedly flawed old Revell 1/305 kit did include the DDE-style Hedgehogs. >> 3: Are there any 1:700 kits of Iowa-class BBs in their modern configuration with Tomahawks, etc.? << I don't think that there are any in 1/700, but there was a half decent 1/720 New Jersey from Revell, issued about 1983. The hull is very nice, but alas, many of the details are flawed. The Harpoon launchers are especially bad. The propellers should be replaced, (they don't look that good, and all four are four-bladed. The inner two should be five bladed) and the communications antenna on the bow is missing. The aft deck is not plated over as much as it should be. (looks like the helo pad from 1968-69, not 1983....) A couple of Skywave parts packs could solve many of the problems. If we ever get the next version of Rajen's list out, the review will be in there. David R. Wells ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: "Ritchie_deutag, Colin" <Colin.Ritchie@DEUTAG.CO.UK> Subject: Ships Plaques Hi all, A slight deviation from normal model making , but stay with me please. I've just about completed the WE 350th Hood, (I'll post a review is anyone is interested), however I'm entering it in the Scottish IPMS championships next month and I'd really like to finish the display base off properly. So is there anyone out there who knows of a company that produces reproductions of ships plaques. I'd love to add one to my base just. I'd prefer a complete painted one, but I'd settle for a simple shape. Which I'd complete. Obviously since I'm in Scotland, UK sources would be best, but I'll settle for anyone that can help! Can anyone point me in right direction. Colin Ritchie PS To the listmaster , Keep up the good work in keeping the less relevant, (I'm being diplomatic!), posts out of the lists , RMS is getting rather too serious these days ..... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: louellet@uism.bu.edu Subject: Re: Titanic models Alberto wrote: >> A friend of mine wishes to build a Titanic model in 1/350 or aprox. The two kits I found in mail orders are Academy at $ 52.49 and Gunze San. At $143.81 as there is quite a gap can a good soul give Me a piece of advice . The model is to be donated to the Venezuelan Museum of Transportation. << Alberto (and anyone else) If you have a choice between the Academy or Gunze version of the Titanic, buy the lower priced Academy kit. Why? Because they are the exact same kit! Academy produces the kit for Gunze, who sells it under their own label and box. Use the money you save to buy the Gold Medal Models Titanic/Lusitania photoetch sets. (Thanks to the person who originally posted this information to this list or to rec.models.scale.) Larry Ouellette Volunteer, USS Salem (CA 139) U.S. Naval & Shipbuilding Museum, Quincy Massachusetts http://www.uss-salem.org/ (USS Salem model kit information now available) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: John VCP <JohnVCP@aol.com> Re: Rigging in 1/350 scale Try strechted sprue - you can control the thickness and length, also very compatible with the cements we use. I do mine over a small alcohol burner - available at most casting supply / jewelry houses. You can control the flame height by adjusting the wick. John ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: "Dan Goodpasture" <cgoingblhp@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: Asiatic Fleet DDs Art Nicholson: >> Does anyone know what it would take to convert a 1941 Ward kit (GS or Classic) into a flush-decked destroyer of the Asiatic Fleet? I don't have Alden's book "Flush Decks and Four Pipes," so I can't check that. The weekend before last I did talk to a guy who'd been on one of the Asiatic Fleet destroyers, the Parrott, and he said the AA gun (he called it a 3-pdr) was on the quarterdeck, not just behind the No. 1 4" gun as in the GS kit of the Ward. Unfortunately (and not surprisingly), he was vague on other details; he couldn't remember that his ship had a crow's nest (he says they certainly didn't use it) anddidn't think his ship had shields on any of the 4" guns (the GS Ward kit has a shield on No. 1 gun). He also didn't think the ship's hull numbers had been repainted. As you'd guess, I'd like something a little more definite, so any help would be appreciated. << Art: I've had the same thing in mind for a while. I can't give you any specifics on ships except what I've read in the Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships: The Ward was of the earlier Wickes class, while all the Asiatic fleet ships were of the Clemson class (I might have this backwards, as I don't have the DANFS available to me right now). IIRC, the Clemsons had a couple more feet draft and consequently a few more tons displacement (probably neglible in 1/350). I think that in all other respects the two classes were virtually identical. The armament differed from ship to ship, near as I can tell the 3" AA gun was not always mounted; for example, the John D. Ford mounted one or two .50 cal, but no 3". Regarding color: Alan Raven in PSM contends that the Asiatic Fleet was painted from Standard Navy Gray #5 (light gray) to the darker "Cavite Blue" on the eve of war (the decks retained the pre-war Deck Gray #20). One of my books on the Asiatic Fleet bears this out. In "The Fleet the Gods Forgot", Capt. Walter Winslow, a SOC pilot aboard the Houston, speaks of orders coming down to paint the ships in "wartime blue." However, in the confused mess that was ABDA, it is entirely possible that some ships fought on in pre-war light gray. Hull numbers, well...I don't have any info on that but, I think there are a couple of wartime pictures of Asiatic Fleet destroyers in that book, I'll look when I get home. BTW, Floating Drydock has plans for the John D. Ford in 1940 and 42. If I can put the money together before Gulfstream runs out of Wards, I hope to try this conversion. The library in the next county has DANFS and "Flush Decks and Four Pipes." Give me a yell if you want some copies. Dan ============================================================================ TRADERS & ANNOUNCEMENTS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: Paolo Pizzi <timeelapsed@earthlink.net> Subject: Apology It wasn't my intention to denigrate anyone's work and no "cheap shot" was aimed at Mr. Herne, whose models I've never had the privilege of seeing. I simply expressed my humble opinion which may differ from Mr. Herne's but which in no way was intended to denigrate his modeling work. I apologize if my message was seen as an ad personam attack, it wasn't. As Mr. Mackie once said I can't write in a decent English and most communication misundertandings should be attributed to my poor handling of a language which isn't my native tongue. Paolo Pizzi Navismagazine.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: "Jeff Herne" <jherne@hotmail.com> Subject: Fletcher, Gearing & Sumner book Alberto, (and anyone else) I'll gladly autograph anyone's book, when it becomes available from the publisher, simply request an autographed copy. I will do this for as many as I can, however, it means holding up the delivery of your book, since my wife took away my crayons and finger-paints. Please request what color crayon you'd like the book autographed in... Seriously, since I'm not exactly Ernest Hemmingway, I was thinking of a generic signature, that way I can autograph several copies at a time insuring that you'll receive on. Please specify when you order the book. Here are some sample salutations: Hugs and Kisses (or the generic xxxx & oooo) Thanks for the lobotomy... All my love... Wishing you a Happy Groundclutter day... Also specify whether you want the signature to be legible or simply a scribble line across the page. Worst case, you can always say your grandchild attacked your book with crayons... I am flattered that anyone would want my autograph, I will accomodate as best I can. Thank you in advance for ordering the book, I hope you enjoy it. Jeff ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: Shane & Lorna Jenkins <sljenkins@tac.com.au> Subject: APMA: Australian Plastic Modellers Assoc Hi all: I just wanted to put in bit of a blurb about my modelling club APMA. We meet on the 2nd Saturday of each month(except for December when it is the first saturday) at the Ryde Senior Citizen's centre at 33 Blaxland Rd Top Ryde, Sydney, NSW, Australia. All are welcome to attend especially if you are visting from overseas. We have mainly aircraft & armour, But we have a small but vocal ship modelling fraternity two of them are on the committee & another one edits our newsletter(Lindsey Charman who has written articles for IPMS UK). We put out 4 issues of the magazine & at least 4 newsletters annually which is included with membership. So if you are in the area you more than welcome to drop by(we are having a ship competition on the 14th June. Hopefully I will have started & finished one by then if I can make up my mind which one.). APMA is a small but friendly & down to earth club with members worldwide. We have talks & display thematics. We had a ship display last year & brought many ship modellers out of the closet to have the biggest display of models for the year. Any enquires please email me: mailto:sljenkins@tac.com.au All the best: Shane & Lorna Jenkins APMA committee members ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: Greg Lee (Listmaster - SMML) Subject: Thanks, and WTD! Firstly, I would like to say thanks to all readers who took the time to reply to the comments I made last night. Your support has been truly overwhelming. For those of you who requested not to have your notes published, they have been read, and I thank you for your support and comments/criticism. For those who wanted to have your say in the matter, your notes are published after the end of tonights edition. I have published notes tonight only, anymore received tommorow will not be published, as I, and I am sure most of you, would truly like to see the matter close. Thanks again to All. Secondly, I am in desperate need of a Black "MISSOURI" stern nameplate decal for my 1/350. Anybody have anything? Or perhaps one of you chaps who print out your own may be able to help me? Thanks All, Greg (Listmaster - SMML) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: LeadSled58 <LeadSled58@aol.com> Subject: Old USS Ranger kit found Ahoy mates, This past weekend I obtained a 1968 Revell picture fleet model of the Ranger, CV-61. I bought it to build but before I do, as this is an old kit, does anyone collect these or want it? I don't want a profit, just what I paid for it. Otherwise it is getting built. Thanks alot. Tom ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: DHJonesPSM <DHJonesPSM@aol.com> Subject: 1/400 Arromanches / Bonaventure The latest issue of Plastic Ship Modeler magazine features an article that may be of interest to 1/400 scale modelers. Ray Bean describes how he converted the Heller Arromanches kit to the Canadian carrier Bonaventure. His novel solution to the aircraft problem was to have scale crewman manning the deck adges and spelling out the ships name. Also featured is the concluding part of the Alan Raven camouflage series with 16 Navy camouflage patterns especially produced for PSM. Subscriptions are: USA: $18.00, Canada: $20.00, Overseas: $25.00. (4 issues). Plastic Ship Modeler P.O. Box 2183 Arvada, CO 80001-2183 FAX 303-466-0959 Dan Jones (Editor/publisher) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: "Rob Mackie" <Rmackie@pacbell.net> Subject: Warship Update Classic Warships has announced 7 new 1:350 scale releases, the first of which will be available in May. You can see the full list as well as pictures of the master patterns in the News section of Warship (http://warship.simplenet.com). In addition a new Japanese producer of 1:700 waterline ships, WWS, has surfaced. Their extensive product line can also be viewed in the Warship News section. Rob Mackie http://warship.simplenet.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: "Rob Mackie" <Rmackie@pacbell.net> Subject: 1:1200/1250 Scale News The 1:1200/1250 Scale section of Warship, "The 1250 Line", has opened. Paul Jacobs, a recognized authority with 40 years of collecting and building ship models, will edit this portion of the site. Read his informative articles about the evolution of 1200/1250 scale as well as the vendors and manufacturing techniques involved in producing these remarkable models. Click on the "1250 Line" logo on the Warship home page at http://warship.simplenet.com Rob Mackie Warship Editor ============================================================================ End of Volume ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Duane Fowler <dlfowler@apple.com> Subject: Re: SMML30/3/98Vol134 Hello Greg, More power to ya! Thanks so much for the great resource that the SMML has been. I agree with you that flames and snide or sarcastic remarks have no place in it. I hope that we are involed in model building for the fun and enjoyment it provides. We can have differing opinions without personal attacks. I appreciate the fine work that you have done and aplaud your efforts and motive. Once again, thanks! Best regards, Duane Fowler ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "graham walker" <graham@katzcom.demon.co.uk> Subject: Comments Here,Here well said my man. We have enough flame wars on RMS so we don't want them here, lets just talk ships. Best wishes Graham (cruiser magazine) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SantMin <SantMin@aol.com> Subject: Re: SMML30/3/98Vol134 >> Sorry - But I *WILL* keep SMML a flame free environment, solely for the purpose of discussions of building model ships, any private grudges should be done "PRIVATELY", thats why addresses are supplied with each post. Keep it OFF the list! Thank-you. << CAN YOU HEAR THAT LOUD ROAR OF APPLAUSE? Good going Greg, Bob Santos ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BECJPARKER <BECJPARKER@aol.com> Subject: Re: SMML30/3/98Vol134 Dear Greg: Just read your comments about the bickering going on, on SMML and other news groups by some of our more vocal friends. Leave them in word for word, taking them out is like taking the comics and editorial out of a news paper. How else are we going to find out what these folks are really like. A man should have the right to make as big a fool out of himself as he can, no one should stand in his way. Just my opinion and please do print it, if we lose our humor we have nothing left. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael Kear <mkear@healey.com.au> Subject: Keep it off the list >> Sorry - But I *WILL* keep SMML a flame free environment, solely for the purpose of discussions of building model ships, any private grudges should be done "PRIVATELY", thats why addresses are supplied with each post. Keep it OFF the list! << Good for you!! More power to you. I just hope it doesn't add to the job so much that you get the shits with the whole thing. Greg this is building into a worthwhile resource and you are on the right track. You need to create and maintain a culture on this list of helpful, interested and interesting modellers. You're quite right, flame wars belong on the lesser lists. Fair winds and following seas, Mike Kear, ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Terry Sumner" <tsumner@cyberzone.net> Subject: Editing out non-modeling posts! Greg, Bravo! Bravo! Too bad we can't keep this drivel out of RMS also. Terry Sumner IPMS 35079 "If you're not making any mistakes, you're probably not building anything." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Alberto Rada <rada@argonaut.net> Subject: Re: SMML30/3/98Vol134 Hi Greg I would like to refer to your message in SMML. First of all as I am a newcomer to ship modeling as well as to the list, my opinion could be wrong , but at least it is not polluted. Your list represents many things, to start with a tremendous effort by your part without the corresponding recognition ( you won't get a medal for this ) and due to the quality of the effort a bunch of very nice people have gathered around, I have been reading it now for about a month and I am impressed by the camaraderie that I have found. But it puts a responsibility in your shoulders, not only to nurse it in its commencement but also to preserve its quality and aims, you see, if you don't, the people that now make it such a nice place to visit, will start to migrate. So you should not be worried for the censorship you are about to apply, as keeping war mongers away is only but to the benefit of our community . SALUDOS Alberto ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dbrown303 <Dbrown303@aol.com> Subject: Re: SMML30/3/98Vol134 >> Sorry - But I *WILL* keep SMML a flame free environment, solely for the purpose of discussions of building model ships, << THANKS! Enough of this shows up on RMS already. Derek ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: KDur597268 <KDur597268@aol.com> Subject: Re: SMML30/3/98Vol134 >> Sorry - But I *WILL* keep SMML a flame free environment, << Greg - Right on! I totally support you in this decision. For many obvious reasons. People can go to r.m.s. to vent this stuff. I'm really happy we won't have to consider it here. Ken Durling ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: witsie/ken mckelvy <witken@hotcoco.infi.net> Subject: Re.: Notice from Listmaster Greg: Thanks. I was beginning to wonder if the promised 'flame-proofing' of the list had gone by the boards. You may, indeed, receive some protestations claiming an infringement of rights; my own feeling is: so be it. 'Rights' carry with them a responsibility to use them in a temperate and judicious manner; this aspect is all too often ignored. While I agree that an individual has the right to say anything, even in an irresponsible way, that right does not require that I listen; there is no "right to an audience." Ken McKelvy ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Settle <Settlem@mindspring.com> Subject: Re: SMML30/3/98Vol134 >> ****Notice from Listmaster**** Sorry - But I *WILL* keep SMML a flame free environment, solely for the purpose of discussions of building model ships, any private grudges should be done "PRIVATELY", thats why addresses are supplied with each post. Keep it OFF the list! << Greg, I am behind you 100% in your decision to keep SMML "accusation free". It is very tiresome to see all of this stuff in RMS, which is an unmoderated newsgroup. I'm glad I won't have to see it here also. Mike Settle ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shane & Lorna Jenkins <sljenkins@tac.com.au> Subject: Re listmaster rules & regs Hi Greg: I could'nt agree more with you in respect to "getting heavy" with subscribers. For what's it worth I fully support your efforts in keeping SMML flamefree. I like the new look as well. Keep up with the good work, & hopefully I will start posting info instead of being a "lurker". All the best: Shane Jenkins ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bradford Chaucer <BChaucer@ix.netcom.com> Subject: Re: SMML30/3/98Vol134 >> ****Notice from Listmaster**** So from tommorow nights issue onwards - I will trim postings of sarcastic signatures and non-relevant remarks before posting them, and in their place will be a notice that the message has been snipped. Sorry - But I *WILL* keep SMML a flame free environment, solely for the purpose of discussions of building model ships, any private grudges should be done "PRIVATELY", thats why addresses are supplied with each post. Keep it OFF the list! << No, thank you! Nothing ruins a list or newsgroup faster and more completely than the neverending series of flame wars! By all means, lets keep it to ship modeling. I'm a refugee of too many newsgroups, mailing lists and older fido echos that died due to flamewars. Regards, Bradford Chaucer ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John VCP <JohnVCP@aol.com> Subject: Re: Flame free Sounds good to me. John ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: CHRIS DRAGE <Chris@cdrage.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: SMML30/3/98Vol134 Hi Greg, >> I *WILL* keep SMML flame free environment, solely for the purpose of discussions of building model ships, any private grudges should be done "PRIVATELY", thats why addresses are supplied with each post. << Hear! hear! Well done Greg! Regards, Chris ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DaveRiley1 <DaveRiley1@aol.com> Greg, Bravo!!!! I am in full agreement with your "snip" policy. Congratulations on providing a very useful service to the ship modeling community. Dave R Portsmouth, RI ----------------------------------------------------------------------------