Respectful suggestion (long post)

.

Respectful suggestion (long post)

Joined: February 11th, 2007, 9:44 pm

June 3rd, 2012, 3:18 am #1

I would like to respectfully suggest something to modelers in general. Ive read many threads on many sites about paint schemes, colors, patterns, markings, etc. It seems that some of us feel they are authorities on aircraft restorations and accurate modeling. Just for reference, go back to Jan 2011 and look at the comments regarding the FHC Fw-190 A-5 and D-13. I read that thread again today and felt I must comment, primarily because I was so pissed when I read it the first time over a year ago I quit posting on any modeling sites.
Let me say first, that I am a modeler. My father belonged to the IPMS and built models for numerous people, including Jimmy Doolittle. I was in the Air Force and worked on F-105s and F-5s, with a little time on A7s, F-111s, and F-4s. I have also participated in many actual aircraft restorations, due to my close working relationship with GossHawk Unlimited.
Regarding modeling, a little history might be useful here so that you know where I am coming from.. I was stationed in Thailand during the Vietnam War and worked daily on many F-105Gs. Being a modeler, I took note of all the little details on the aircraft and was amazed at all the little differences there actually were between aircraft, mostly internal but much on the external side as well. There where many things you would never see until all the aircraft were parked along side each other. Then it was obvious that camo patterns, colors, and details were not necessarily consistent from one plane to another. Colors faded a little, rattle can touch-ups altered patterns, tail code positions and colors changed slightly, and so on. In fact, when I returned to the world, I was invited to my Dads IPMS chapter to discuss F-105 wheel well colors. Three different groups were arguing over whether wheel wells on F-105s were silver, white, or zinc chromate (or various shades of green.). I mentioned that on my group of aircraft, I saw all three colors. In fact one aircraft had one of each. I explained that as these aircraft went through the IRAN facility, the intent was to get them back in service quickly and that the planes were stripped for inspection and repainted as they were being put back together. Depending upon the urgency, sometimes just having paint had priority over color. In addition, once on station, any repairs might have included a color change. After a bit of silence from the group, I was as much as told I was lying by a few of the more vocal types. Mind you, in the entire group, only a few had been in the military, and few of them had actually worked on aircraft. Apparently, my active daily involvement with the aircraft in question did not carry as much weight as an old photo. My active participation with modelers took a left turn right there.
All this being said, please understand that when you criticize another modelers work or that of a restoration shop, or in this case, Paul Allens two 190s, you may not have all (or the same) information that we did when we restored the aircraft. I know the painters of both airplanes, and I can assure you they did NOT haphazardly throw paint at the aircraft. There was much discussion and as much proof as could be found presented before the paint went on. As a side note, on one site I belong to, a modeler had derogatory comments about the way the word Commodore was painted on the nose of the Fw 190 D-13. He said something about some American interpretation of the way it would have been done. The fact that the painter, Steve Baber, had a very obscure photo of the nose, and spent days duplicating the word exactly, was evidently not enough for the commenter In addition, when you quote colors, they are not always exactly what they seem to be. The Fw 190s are a good example of that. There might 5 or 6 different shades of black on an airplane. We called them engine black, insignia black, cockpit black, radio black, etc. They were all different, but it wasnt obvious at all until they were next to each other.
In short, this is not intended to be a flame at anyone or modelers in general. I totally understand that we all strive for accuracy in our modeling. But please note that when you see a photo of an aircraft, it really only represents that aircraft on that day. When you see a camo pattern drawing, it was usually at best a suggested standard. In the fog of war, nobody paid attention to whether a fuselage band was 3 inches too far aft or if a pattern matched the standard. Accuracy is indeed a moving target. Its just that, having been involved with various scales over the last 50 years (including 1:1) I get a bit miffed at experts. Even they do not always get it right, so a little latitude and friendly discussion might be in order here and there.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 24th, 2002, 12:50 pm

June 3rd, 2012, 3:25 am #2

And this is why I don't get too anal about my little plastic toy model airplanes anymore. "Good enough is good enough" for me these days.





Steel cuts flesh. Steel cuts bone. Steel does not cut steel. --Stephen Hunter, The 47th Samurai.

We will march on a road of bones. --Hunter S. Thompson.

Sat Cong!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 25th, 2009, 12:54 am

June 3rd, 2012, 3:34 am #3

I would like to respectfully suggest something to modelers in general. Ive read many threads on many sites about paint schemes, colors, patterns, markings, etc. It seems that some of us feel they are authorities on aircraft restorations and accurate modeling. Just for reference, go back to Jan 2011 and look at the comments regarding the FHC Fw-190 A-5 and D-13. I read that thread again today and felt I must comment, primarily because I was so pissed when I read it the first time over a year ago I quit posting on any modeling sites.
Let me say first, that I am a modeler. My father belonged to the IPMS and built models for numerous people, including Jimmy Doolittle. I was in the Air Force and worked on F-105s and F-5s, with a little time on A7s, F-111s, and F-4s. I have also participated in many actual aircraft restorations, due to my close working relationship with GossHawk Unlimited.
Regarding modeling, a little history might be useful here so that you know where I am coming from.. I was stationed in Thailand during the Vietnam War and worked daily on many F-105Gs. Being a modeler, I took note of all the little details on the aircraft and was amazed at all the little differences there actually were between aircraft, mostly internal but much on the external side as well. There where many things you would never see until all the aircraft were parked along side each other. Then it was obvious that camo patterns, colors, and details were not necessarily consistent from one plane to another. Colors faded a little, rattle can touch-ups altered patterns, tail code positions and colors changed slightly, and so on. In fact, when I returned to the world, I was invited to my Dads IPMS chapter to discuss F-105 wheel well colors. Three different groups were arguing over whether wheel wells on F-105s were silver, white, or zinc chromate (or various shades of green.). I mentioned that on my group of aircraft, I saw all three colors. In fact one aircraft had one of each. I explained that as these aircraft went through the IRAN facility, the intent was to get them back in service quickly and that the planes were stripped for inspection and repainted as they were being put back together. Depending upon the urgency, sometimes just having paint had priority over color. In addition, once on station, any repairs might have included a color change. After a bit of silence from the group, I was as much as told I was lying by a few of the more vocal types. Mind you, in the entire group, only a few had been in the military, and few of them had actually worked on aircraft. Apparently, my active daily involvement with the aircraft in question did not carry as much weight as an old photo. My active participation with modelers took a left turn right there.
All this being said, please understand that when you criticize another modelers work or that of a restoration shop, or in this case, Paul Allens two 190s, you may not have all (or the same) information that we did when we restored the aircraft. I know the painters of both airplanes, and I can assure you they did NOT haphazardly throw paint at the aircraft. There was much discussion and as much proof as could be found presented before the paint went on. As a side note, on one site I belong to, a modeler had derogatory comments about the way the word Commodore was painted on the nose of the Fw 190 D-13. He said something about some American interpretation of the way it would have been done. The fact that the painter, Steve Baber, had a very obscure photo of the nose, and spent days duplicating the word exactly, was evidently not enough for the commenter In addition, when you quote colors, they are not always exactly what they seem to be. The Fw 190s are a good example of that. There might 5 or 6 different shades of black on an airplane. We called them engine black, insignia black, cockpit black, radio black, etc. They were all different, but it wasnt obvious at all until they were next to each other.
In short, this is not intended to be a flame at anyone or modelers in general. I totally understand that we all strive for accuracy in our modeling. But please note that when you see a photo of an aircraft, it really only represents that aircraft on that day. When you see a camo pattern drawing, it was usually at best a suggested standard. In the fog of war, nobody paid attention to whether a fuselage band was 3 inches too far aft or if a pattern matched the standard. Accuracy is indeed a moving target. Its just that, having been involved with various scales over the last 50 years (including 1:1) I get a bit miffed at experts. Even they do not always get it right, so a little latitude and friendly discussion might be in order here and there.
Excellent points all around...and why I am in the same boat as Snake. I do my best but I don't drown myself in the minutia of the real item. We're making replicas...and replicas only represent a particular moment of the actual items's lifetime. We can reconstruct what picstures and regulations expect of any given item but variations do exist. And by the end of any war you have to figure the loser(s) ar just trying to make ends meet the best that they can.

Later,

Lee
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 8th, 2008, 10:57 am

June 3rd, 2012, 3:47 am #4

I would like to respectfully suggest something to modelers in general. Ive read many threads on many sites about paint schemes, colors, patterns, markings, etc. It seems that some of us feel they are authorities on aircraft restorations and accurate modeling. Just for reference, go back to Jan 2011 and look at the comments regarding the FHC Fw-190 A-5 and D-13. I read that thread again today and felt I must comment, primarily because I was so pissed when I read it the first time over a year ago I quit posting on any modeling sites.
Let me say first, that I am a modeler. My father belonged to the IPMS and built models for numerous people, including Jimmy Doolittle. I was in the Air Force and worked on F-105s and F-5s, with a little time on A7s, F-111s, and F-4s. I have also participated in many actual aircraft restorations, due to my close working relationship with GossHawk Unlimited.
Regarding modeling, a little history might be useful here so that you know where I am coming from.. I was stationed in Thailand during the Vietnam War and worked daily on many F-105Gs. Being a modeler, I took note of all the little details on the aircraft and was amazed at all the little differences there actually were between aircraft, mostly internal but much on the external side as well. There where many things you would never see until all the aircraft were parked along side each other. Then it was obvious that camo patterns, colors, and details were not necessarily consistent from one plane to another. Colors faded a little, rattle can touch-ups altered patterns, tail code positions and colors changed slightly, and so on. In fact, when I returned to the world, I was invited to my Dads IPMS chapter to discuss F-105 wheel well colors. Three different groups were arguing over whether wheel wells on F-105s were silver, white, or zinc chromate (or various shades of green.). I mentioned that on my group of aircraft, I saw all three colors. In fact one aircraft had one of each. I explained that as these aircraft went through the IRAN facility, the intent was to get them back in service quickly and that the planes were stripped for inspection and repainted as they were being put back together. Depending upon the urgency, sometimes just having paint had priority over color. In addition, once on station, any repairs might have included a color change. After a bit of silence from the group, I was as much as told I was lying by a few of the more vocal types. Mind you, in the entire group, only a few had been in the military, and few of them had actually worked on aircraft. Apparently, my active daily involvement with the aircraft in question did not carry as much weight as an old photo. My active participation with modelers took a left turn right there.
All this being said, please understand that when you criticize another modelers work or that of a restoration shop, or in this case, Paul Allens two 190s, you may not have all (or the same) information that we did when we restored the aircraft. I know the painters of both airplanes, and I can assure you they did NOT haphazardly throw paint at the aircraft. There was much discussion and as much proof as could be found presented before the paint went on. As a side note, on one site I belong to, a modeler had derogatory comments about the way the word Commodore was painted on the nose of the Fw 190 D-13. He said something about some American interpretation of the way it would have been done. The fact that the painter, Steve Baber, had a very obscure photo of the nose, and spent days duplicating the word exactly, was evidently not enough for the commenter In addition, when you quote colors, they are not always exactly what they seem to be. The Fw 190s are a good example of that. There might 5 or 6 different shades of black on an airplane. We called them engine black, insignia black, cockpit black, radio black, etc. They were all different, but it wasnt obvious at all until they were next to each other.
In short, this is not intended to be a flame at anyone or modelers in general. I totally understand that we all strive for accuracy in our modeling. But please note that when you see a photo of an aircraft, it really only represents that aircraft on that day. When you see a camo pattern drawing, it was usually at best a suggested standard. In the fog of war, nobody paid attention to whether a fuselage band was 3 inches too far aft or if a pattern matched the standard. Accuracy is indeed a moving target. Its just that, having been involved with various scales over the last 50 years (including 1:1) I get a bit miffed at experts. Even they do not always get it right, so a little latitude and friendly discussion might be in order here and there.
Stuart
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 19th, 2007, 9:06 am

June 3rd, 2012, 3:50 am #5

I would like to respectfully suggest something to modelers in general. Ive read many threads on many sites about paint schemes, colors, patterns, markings, etc. It seems that some of us feel they are authorities on aircraft restorations and accurate modeling. Just for reference, go back to Jan 2011 and look at the comments regarding the FHC Fw-190 A-5 and D-13. I read that thread again today and felt I must comment, primarily because I was so pissed when I read it the first time over a year ago I quit posting on any modeling sites.
Let me say first, that I am a modeler. My father belonged to the IPMS and built models for numerous people, including Jimmy Doolittle. I was in the Air Force and worked on F-105s and F-5s, with a little time on A7s, F-111s, and F-4s. I have also participated in many actual aircraft restorations, due to my close working relationship with GossHawk Unlimited.
Regarding modeling, a little history might be useful here so that you know where I am coming from.. I was stationed in Thailand during the Vietnam War and worked daily on many F-105Gs. Being a modeler, I took note of all the little details on the aircraft and was amazed at all the little differences there actually were between aircraft, mostly internal but much on the external side as well. There where many things you would never see until all the aircraft were parked along side each other. Then it was obvious that camo patterns, colors, and details were not necessarily consistent from one plane to another. Colors faded a little, rattle can touch-ups altered patterns, tail code positions and colors changed slightly, and so on. In fact, when I returned to the world, I was invited to my Dads IPMS chapter to discuss F-105 wheel well colors. Three different groups were arguing over whether wheel wells on F-105s were silver, white, or zinc chromate (or various shades of green.). I mentioned that on my group of aircraft, I saw all three colors. In fact one aircraft had one of each. I explained that as these aircraft went through the IRAN facility, the intent was to get them back in service quickly and that the planes were stripped for inspection and repainted as they were being put back together. Depending upon the urgency, sometimes just having paint had priority over color. In addition, once on station, any repairs might have included a color change. After a bit of silence from the group, I was as much as told I was lying by a few of the more vocal types. Mind you, in the entire group, only a few had been in the military, and few of them had actually worked on aircraft. Apparently, my active daily involvement with the aircraft in question did not carry as much weight as an old photo. My active participation with modelers took a left turn right there.
All this being said, please understand that when you criticize another modelers work or that of a restoration shop, or in this case, Paul Allens two 190s, you may not have all (or the same) information that we did when we restored the aircraft. I know the painters of both airplanes, and I can assure you they did NOT haphazardly throw paint at the aircraft. There was much discussion and as much proof as could be found presented before the paint went on. As a side note, on one site I belong to, a modeler had derogatory comments about the way the word Commodore was painted on the nose of the Fw 190 D-13. He said something about some American interpretation of the way it would have been done. The fact that the painter, Steve Baber, had a very obscure photo of the nose, and spent days duplicating the word exactly, was evidently not enough for the commenter In addition, when you quote colors, they are not always exactly what they seem to be. The Fw 190s are a good example of that. There might 5 or 6 different shades of black on an airplane. We called them engine black, insignia black, cockpit black, radio black, etc. They were all different, but it wasnt obvious at all until they were next to each other.
In short, this is not intended to be a flame at anyone or modelers in general. I totally understand that we all strive for accuracy in our modeling. But please note that when you see a photo of an aircraft, it really only represents that aircraft on that day. When you see a camo pattern drawing, it was usually at best a suggested standard. In the fog of war, nobody paid attention to whether a fuselage band was 3 inches too far aft or if a pattern matched the standard. Accuracy is indeed a moving target. Its just that, having been involved with various scales over the last 50 years (including 1:1) I get a bit miffed at experts. Even they do not always get it right, so a little latitude and friendly discussion might be in order here and there.
I take opinions like any other source of information and add them all up to see what I got. I don't get pissed and go home, nothing has ever got me upset in about 20 years of reading modelling forums that was related to the subject.
Last edited by Gluehuffer on June 3rd, 2012, 3:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: November 17th, 2006, 1:18 pm

June 3rd, 2012, 3:59 am #6

I would like to respectfully suggest something to modelers in general. Ive read many threads on many sites about paint schemes, colors, patterns, markings, etc. It seems that some of us feel they are authorities on aircraft restorations and accurate modeling. Just for reference, go back to Jan 2011 and look at the comments regarding the FHC Fw-190 A-5 and D-13. I read that thread again today and felt I must comment, primarily because I was so pissed when I read it the first time over a year ago I quit posting on any modeling sites.
Let me say first, that I am a modeler. My father belonged to the IPMS and built models for numerous people, including Jimmy Doolittle. I was in the Air Force and worked on F-105s and F-5s, with a little time on A7s, F-111s, and F-4s. I have also participated in many actual aircraft restorations, due to my close working relationship with GossHawk Unlimited.
Regarding modeling, a little history might be useful here so that you know where I am coming from.. I was stationed in Thailand during the Vietnam War and worked daily on many F-105Gs. Being a modeler, I took note of all the little details on the aircraft and was amazed at all the little differences there actually were between aircraft, mostly internal but much on the external side as well. There where many things you would never see until all the aircraft were parked along side each other. Then it was obvious that camo patterns, colors, and details were not necessarily consistent from one plane to another. Colors faded a little, rattle can touch-ups altered patterns, tail code positions and colors changed slightly, and so on. In fact, when I returned to the world, I was invited to my Dads IPMS chapter to discuss F-105 wheel well colors. Three different groups were arguing over whether wheel wells on F-105s were silver, white, or zinc chromate (or various shades of green.). I mentioned that on my group of aircraft, I saw all three colors. In fact one aircraft had one of each. I explained that as these aircraft went through the IRAN facility, the intent was to get them back in service quickly and that the planes were stripped for inspection and repainted as they were being put back together. Depending upon the urgency, sometimes just having paint had priority over color. In addition, once on station, any repairs might have included a color change. After a bit of silence from the group, I was as much as told I was lying by a few of the more vocal types. Mind you, in the entire group, only a few had been in the military, and few of them had actually worked on aircraft. Apparently, my active daily involvement with the aircraft in question did not carry as much weight as an old photo. My active participation with modelers took a left turn right there.
All this being said, please understand that when you criticize another modelers work or that of a restoration shop, or in this case, Paul Allens two 190s, you may not have all (or the same) information that we did when we restored the aircraft. I know the painters of both airplanes, and I can assure you they did NOT haphazardly throw paint at the aircraft. There was much discussion and as much proof as could be found presented before the paint went on. As a side note, on one site I belong to, a modeler had derogatory comments about the way the word Commodore was painted on the nose of the Fw 190 D-13. He said something about some American interpretation of the way it would have been done. The fact that the painter, Steve Baber, had a very obscure photo of the nose, and spent days duplicating the word exactly, was evidently not enough for the commenter In addition, when you quote colors, they are not always exactly what they seem to be. The Fw 190s are a good example of that. There might 5 or 6 different shades of black on an airplane. We called them engine black, insignia black, cockpit black, radio black, etc. They were all different, but it wasnt obvious at all until they were next to each other.
In short, this is not intended to be a flame at anyone or modelers in general. I totally understand that we all strive for accuracy in our modeling. But please note that when you see a photo of an aircraft, it really only represents that aircraft on that day. When you see a camo pattern drawing, it was usually at best a suggested standard. In the fog of war, nobody paid attention to whether a fuselage band was 3 inches too far aft or if a pattern matched the standard. Accuracy is indeed a moving target. Its just that, having been involved with various scales over the last 50 years (including 1:1) I get a bit miffed at experts. Even they do not always get it right, so a little latitude and friendly discussion might be in order here and there.
many other photos, good dwgs/artwork and info that I can find in my library.

I also only build for myself, and the occasional atta boy/that's nice from my girlfriend and three modelling buds.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 24th, 2005, 12:21 am

June 3rd, 2012, 4:12 am #7

I would like to respectfully suggest something to modelers in general. Ive read many threads on many sites about paint schemes, colors, patterns, markings, etc. It seems that some of us feel they are authorities on aircraft restorations and accurate modeling. Just for reference, go back to Jan 2011 and look at the comments regarding the FHC Fw-190 A-5 and D-13. I read that thread again today and felt I must comment, primarily because I was so pissed when I read it the first time over a year ago I quit posting on any modeling sites.
Let me say first, that I am a modeler. My father belonged to the IPMS and built models for numerous people, including Jimmy Doolittle. I was in the Air Force and worked on F-105s and F-5s, with a little time on A7s, F-111s, and F-4s. I have also participated in many actual aircraft restorations, due to my close working relationship with GossHawk Unlimited.
Regarding modeling, a little history might be useful here so that you know where I am coming from.. I was stationed in Thailand during the Vietnam War and worked daily on many F-105Gs. Being a modeler, I took note of all the little details on the aircraft and was amazed at all the little differences there actually were between aircraft, mostly internal but much on the external side as well. There where many things you would never see until all the aircraft were parked along side each other. Then it was obvious that camo patterns, colors, and details were not necessarily consistent from one plane to another. Colors faded a little, rattle can touch-ups altered patterns, tail code positions and colors changed slightly, and so on. In fact, when I returned to the world, I was invited to my Dads IPMS chapter to discuss F-105 wheel well colors. Three different groups were arguing over whether wheel wells on F-105s were silver, white, or zinc chromate (or various shades of green.). I mentioned that on my group of aircraft, I saw all three colors. In fact one aircraft had one of each. I explained that as these aircraft went through the IRAN facility, the intent was to get them back in service quickly and that the planes were stripped for inspection and repainted as they were being put back together. Depending upon the urgency, sometimes just having paint had priority over color. In addition, once on station, any repairs might have included a color change. After a bit of silence from the group, I was as much as told I was lying by a few of the more vocal types. Mind you, in the entire group, only a few had been in the military, and few of them had actually worked on aircraft. Apparently, my active daily involvement with the aircraft in question did not carry as much weight as an old photo. My active participation with modelers took a left turn right there.
All this being said, please understand that when you criticize another modelers work or that of a restoration shop, or in this case, Paul Allens two 190s, you may not have all (or the same) information that we did when we restored the aircraft. I know the painters of both airplanes, and I can assure you they did NOT haphazardly throw paint at the aircraft. There was much discussion and as much proof as could be found presented before the paint went on. As a side note, on one site I belong to, a modeler had derogatory comments about the way the word Commodore was painted on the nose of the Fw 190 D-13. He said something about some American interpretation of the way it would have been done. The fact that the painter, Steve Baber, had a very obscure photo of the nose, and spent days duplicating the word exactly, was evidently not enough for the commenter In addition, when you quote colors, they are not always exactly what they seem to be. The Fw 190s are a good example of that. There might 5 or 6 different shades of black on an airplane. We called them engine black, insignia black, cockpit black, radio black, etc. They were all different, but it wasnt obvious at all until they were next to each other.
In short, this is not intended to be a flame at anyone or modelers in general. I totally understand that we all strive for accuracy in our modeling. But please note that when you see a photo of an aircraft, it really only represents that aircraft on that day. When you see a camo pattern drawing, it was usually at best a suggested standard. In the fog of war, nobody paid attention to whether a fuselage band was 3 inches too far aft or if a pattern matched the standard. Accuracy is indeed a moving target. Its just that, having been involved with various scales over the last 50 years (including 1:1) I get a bit miffed at experts. Even they do not always get it right, so a little latitude and friendly discussion might be in order here and there.
As someone who also spends his daily work life around aircraft(unfortunately not Thuds or F-4s) I'd like to congratulate you on a great post.
Many of the experts here whom have excellent theoretical knowledge have been no closer to a real aircraft than a walk around at an airshow or a museum.
Yes theoretical knowledge based off great references is a great thing to have but without being tempered by spending thousands of hours around aircraft it can be blindly misleading.
Like you we operate numerous of one aircraft type and the finish on all is subtly different in many ways.
Weathering paint type contractor all play a part in the finished machine..and hese re 100 million dollar airliners. I can only imagine the differences some 70 years go in wartime production conditions being applied by slave labour.
For some reason people think airliners a shiny and bright there entire lives, military aircraft don't get dirty and WW2 aircraft are mud free.
Where that comes from I have no idea..
So for people to openly criticize based off knowledge obtained solely off the net or photos as you said which are not as good as those obtained by restorers over many years after researching one aircraft extensively is totally arrogant at best.
Aircraft are even when produced by the thousand are individuals
Really glad you took the time to post and speak openly about he rude attitude displayed by many because they have an interest in a subject and because they have 15 or 20 Fw-190 books in their library they know far more than people who have dedicated themselves for years to a project.
Well said and again wonderful post..
Cheers

Darren
Time to spare..go by air!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 26th, 2005, 11:18 pm

June 3rd, 2012, 4:17 am #8

I would like to respectfully suggest something to modelers in general. Ive read many threads on many sites about paint schemes, colors, patterns, markings, etc. It seems that some of us feel they are authorities on aircraft restorations and accurate modeling. Just for reference, go back to Jan 2011 and look at the comments regarding the FHC Fw-190 A-5 and D-13. I read that thread again today and felt I must comment, primarily because I was so pissed when I read it the first time over a year ago I quit posting on any modeling sites.
Let me say first, that I am a modeler. My father belonged to the IPMS and built models for numerous people, including Jimmy Doolittle. I was in the Air Force and worked on F-105s and F-5s, with a little time on A7s, F-111s, and F-4s. I have also participated in many actual aircraft restorations, due to my close working relationship with GossHawk Unlimited.
Regarding modeling, a little history might be useful here so that you know where I am coming from.. I was stationed in Thailand during the Vietnam War and worked daily on many F-105Gs. Being a modeler, I took note of all the little details on the aircraft and was amazed at all the little differences there actually were between aircraft, mostly internal but much on the external side as well. There where many things you would never see until all the aircraft were parked along side each other. Then it was obvious that camo patterns, colors, and details were not necessarily consistent from one plane to another. Colors faded a little, rattle can touch-ups altered patterns, tail code positions and colors changed slightly, and so on. In fact, when I returned to the world, I was invited to my Dads IPMS chapter to discuss F-105 wheel well colors. Three different groups were arguing over whether wheel wells on F-105s were silver, white, or zinc chromate (or various shades of green.). I mentioned that on my group of aircraft, I saw all three colors. In fact one aircraft had one of each. I explained that as these aircraft went through the IRAN facility, the intent was to get them back in service quickly and that the planes were stripped for inspection and repainted as they were being put back together. Depending upon the urgency, sometimes just having paint had priority over color. In addition, once on station, any repairs might have included a color change. After a bit of silence from the group, I was as much as told I was lying by a few of the more vocal types. Mind you, in the entire group, only a few had been in the military, and few of them had actually worked on aircraft. Apparently, my active daily involvement with the aircraft in question did not carry as much weight as an old photo. My active participation with modelers took a left turn right there.
All this being said, please understand that when you criticize another modelers work or that of a restoration shop, or in this case, Paul Allens two 190s, you may not have all (or the same) information that we did when we restored the aircraft. I know the painters of both airplanes, and I can assure you they did NOT haphazardly throw paint at the aircraft. There was much discussion and as much proof as could be found presented before the paint went on. As a side note, on one site I belong to, a modeler had derogatory comments about the way the word Commodore was painted on the nose of the Fw 190 D-13. He said something about some American interpretation of the way it would have been done. The fact that the painter, Steve Baber, had a very obscure photo of the nose, and spent days duplicating the word exactly, was evidently not enough for the commenter In addition, when you quote colors, they are not always exactly what they seem to be. The Fw 190s are a good example of that. There might 5 or 6 different shades of black on an airplane. We called them engine black, insignia black, cockpit black, radio black, etc. They were all different, but it wasnt obvious at all until they were next to each other.
In short, this is not intended to be a flame at anyone or modelers in general. I totally understand that we all strive for accuracy in our modeling. But please note that when you see a photo of an aircraft, it really only represents that aircraft on that day. When you see a camo pattern drawing, it was usually at best a suggested standard. In the fog of war, nobody paid attention to whether a fuselage band was 3 inches too far aft or if a pattern matched the standard. Accuracy is indeed a moving target. Its just that, having been involved with various scales over the last 50 years (including 1:1) I get a bit miffed at experts. Even they do not always get it right, so a little latitude and friendly discussion might be in order here and there.
Of applause and some beer.
Well said and right on.
Andy



Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 27th, 2005, 3:49 am

June 3rd, 2012, 4:32 am #9

I would like to respectfully suggest something to modelers in general. Ive read many threads on many sites about paint schemes, colors, patterns, markings, etc. It seems that some of us feel they are authorities on aircraft restorations and accurate modeling. Just for reference, go back to Jan 2011 and look at the comments regarding the FHC Fw-190 A-5 and D-13. I read that thread again today and felt I must comment, primarily because I was so pissed when I read it the first time over a year ago I quit posting on any modeling sites.
Let me say first, that I am a modeler. My father belonged to the IPMS and built models for numerous people, including Jimmy Doolittle. I was in the Air Force and worked on F-105s and F-5s, with a little time on A7s, F-111s, and F-4s. I have also participated in many actual aircraft restorations, due to my close working relationship with GossHawk Unlimited.
Regarding modeling, a little history might be useful here so that you know where I am coming from.. I was stationed in Thailand during the Vietnam War and worked daily on many F-105Gs. Being a modeler, I took note of all the little details on the aircraft and was amazed at all the little differences there actually were between aircraft, mostly internal but much on the external side as well. There where many things you would never see until all the aircraft were parked along side each other. Then it was obvious that camo patterns, colors, and details were not necessarily consistent from one plane to another. Colors faded a little, rattle can touch-ups altered patterns, tail code positions and colors changed slightly, and so on. In fact, when I returned to the world, I was invited to my Dads IPMS chapter to discuss F-105 wheel well colors. Three different groups were arguing over whether wheel wells on F-105s were silver, white, or zinc chromate (or various shades of green.). I mentioned that on my group of aircraft, I saw all three colors. In fact one aircraft had one of each. I explained that as these aircraft went through the IRAN facility, the intent was to get them back in service quickly and that the planes were stripped for inspection and repainted as they were being put back together. Depending upon the urgency, sometimes just having paint had priority over color. In addition, once on station, any repairs might have included a color change. After a bit of silence from the group, I was as much as told I was lying by a few of the more vocal types. Mind you, in the entire group, only a few had been in the military, and few of them had actually worked on aircraft. Apparently, my active daily involvement with the aircraft in question did not carry as much weight as an old photo. My active participation with modelers took a left turn right there.
All this being said, please understand that when you criticize another modelers work or that of a restoration shop, or in this case, Paul Allens two 190s, you may not have all (or the same) information that we did when we restored the aircraft. I know the painters of both airplanes, and I can assure you they did NOT haphazardly throw paint at the aircraft. There was much discussion and as much proof as could be found presented before the paint went on. As a side note, on one site I belong to, a modeler had derogatory comments about the way the word Commodore was painted on the nose of the Fw 190 D-13. He said something about some American interpretation of the way it would have been done. The fact that the painter, Steve Baber, had a very obscure photo of the nose, and spent days duplicating the word exactly, was evidently not enough for the commenter In addition, when you quote colors, they are not always exactly what they seem to be. The Fw 190s are a good example of that. There might 5 or 6 different shades of black on an airplane. We called them engine black, insignia black, cockpit black, radio black, etc. They were all different, but it wasnt obvious at all until they were next to each other.
In short, this is not intended to be a flame at anyone or modelers in general. I totally understand that we all strive for accuracy in our modeling. But please note that when you see a photo of an aircraft, it really only represents that aircraft on that day. When you see a camo pattern drawing, it was usually at best a suggested standard. In the fog of war, nobody paid attention to whether a fuselage band was 3 inches too far aft or if a pattern matched the standard. Accuracy is indeed a moving target. Its just that, having been involved with various scales over the last 50 years (including 1:1) I get a bit miffed at experts. Even they do not always get it right, so a little latitude and friendly discussion might be in order here and there.
On the subject of your post, it is excellent and spot on. I have spent years laughing at some of the so called experts and the insistence on book learning and specs over reality. Because we venerate these planes the way we do, we psychologically resist the idea that they were built haphazardly and maintained even worse, if at all! All it takes is to get your nose out of a book(and stop looking at models for reference!!!!) and take a walk down a flight line or a look at an unrestored aircraft.

I do have one question though. When all the hooplah about the 190A-5 was going on, I held back for the most part. When everyone was griping about colours I decided that I was not going to argue with the guy that A) owns the plane and B) did a wack load of colour analysis with a large budget and access to modern science. I would be a fool to argue with that kind of concrete evidence, especially using some old black and white photos as ammo! The problem that I have with the D-13, A-5 and especially the new A6M3 they just rolled out at FHC is this: While they got the colour right, the application looks at best contrived and at worst, abysmal. I am particularly thinking of the Zero here, though the 190's are varying degrees of the same issue. The demarcations are too clean and obviously masked and sprayed on the tail of the A-5. The D-13 looks like it was painted with a template. The Zero is just hideous and bears absolutely no resemblance at all to any Zero ever flown! A brief glimpse at a photo would have shown this in all cases. The application of the paints is at least as important to the final look as anything else. How many times have we heard that as an excuse from the B+W photo interpreters? My personal suggestion back when was that the guys that painted the A-5 should have been given a case of beer and 3 hour time limit to paint it in the parking lot of the museum. For most authentic results, take a Yak and do a strafing run sometime during the process.

Seriously, why the ridiculous contrived look when so much effort has gone into the research of the overall scheme?

Thanks,

Chris
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: November 17th, 2006, 1:18 pm

June 3rd, 2012, 4:52 am #10

Pebble Beach and other shows, are better than showroom too in many cases.

A real world, correct, 'shoddy', Zero would prob upset many more of those viewing her than the 3-4 she's gonna po now.

His a/c, to do w/ as he pleases.

Like the 1% that notices errors in Hollywood war movies, few viewers of the Zero will notice/care about the 'mistake'.
Quote
Like
Share