• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.

    Post 16 Update

    Post 17 Warning

RAZBAM SB2C-5 Helldiver

Piglet said:
Then there is the whole other world of SCALE. Some bits of dirt, or a chipped area, on a model would scale up, like 3 feet across in real life. Remember Airfix Rivets??
Click to expand...
That's because on a screen, as with plastic models, everything is seen at a reduced scale, and therefore certain details will have to be exaggerated. Everybody knows rivets aren't the size of coffee cups IRL but the fact of the matter is people expect rivets to be on a plane and so the coffee cup rivets look better than no rivets at all. Same thing with weathering and dirt. Sure it is exaggerated to some extent in games but at the reduced scale it looks more convincing than leaving it out simply because we expect surfaces to show certain details that may really be minute and we tend to react if they're amiss.
 
I guess it depends on the Commanding Officer, the Leading Chiefs and the Plane Captains. I can only relate to one Carrier. There the upkeep of planes was important, especailly the effects of corrosion.. Plus there was a "Bilge Rat" who used to crawl in the belly of the planes to pick up cigarette butts, chewing gum wrappers, various nuts and bolts. etc. I suppose there are ships (like some of our Allies) where keeping planes ship shape was not important.
A planes life typically would last anywhere from 3 to 6 months. Depending how much it got "stretched" during landing. Then it would be returned to A&R. So as far as my experience was concerned the planes were kept in very good condition. A lot of stuff that looks like weathering is because of the use of ubitiquos stencils. They had them every where. Even on the pressure relief vent for pilots with a weak bladder.
 
Gibbage said:
Not saying your wrong, but as I heard it, there was a LOT of time between deployments and action, even in wartime. Being a boat, it takes a long time to get from point A to point B. Weeks to even months can go buy, and there is little else to do then take care of the aircraft. After general maintenence is done, the only thing left to do was polish the birds! Even in wartime, there could be weeks between the action. I dont suggest factory fresh, but there is a lot of dirt on that thing that could be wiped off during some of the down time ;)
Click to expand...

My experience: There are no "down" times on a deployment. There is ALWAYS something to do, PM'ing aircraft to painting the ship etc. All aircraft are giving loving care. I was deployed on the LHA "Canal" and the LPH Iwo Jima (wwii carrier) and every helo was treated like a girlfriend, wife etc. Who wants to ride a broken down aircraft into or out of a firefight? Life at sea is 24/7, with little sleep and lots of coffee!
 
Sorry. "down time" was the wrong word to use. More like time between action when the aircraft were not A: being shot at and B: not flying. In the heat of battle, painting and cleaning is the last thing on your mind. Between sorties and action, it gets more attention.

P.S. to all vets, thank you for your service! :USA-flag:

Sadly, it looks like I started a weathering debate. Im sorry! I truly dont think there is a correct way or ammount of weather. Ultimatly its 100% up to the artist, and 100% up to each customer to like it or not.
 
I don't see it as a matter of debate but just a matter of personal taste. I like the worn and brand new look!
 
Gibbage said:
Sadly, it looks like I started a weathering debate. Im sorry! I truly dont think there is a correct way or ammount of weather. Ultimatly its 100% up to the artist, and 100% up to each customer to like it or not.
Click to expand...
It's all good Gib, we're just talkin' here. :) And you're right about the artist's choice of weathering. I've seen it a lot in my model railroad hobby. What looks realistic to one modeler might look totally over the top to somebody else.
 
Gibbage said:
. More like time between action when the aircraft were not A: being shot at and B: not flying. In the heat of battle, painting and cleaning is the last thing on your mind. .
Click to expand...

Sorry no, just wrong.
There where many ensignes dedicated to just serving the crates. That's true for all sides.
Add to it the fact that most crates didn't get old enough to develope any wear or tear you get the picture.
 
A lot of stuff that looks like weathering is because of the use of ubitiquos stencils. They had them every where. Even on the pressure relief vent for pilots with a weak bladder.
Click to expand...

And that´s exactly what you´re looking at , in those pics, other than the leading edges "chips" the rest are stencils.
I really like the "worn out" effect on the paint..it does add a lot to the atmosphere.
Since there will be a paint kit (layered) it will be open to the customer to edit the finish to his/her own taste.
best regards
Prowler
 
Skippybing, it was the British ships I had in mind when I mentioned "our allies". We tied up next to a Brtish Carrier in Panama City and the skipper looked at the lack of housekeeping there was on the other Carrier and ordered the crew to put on double rat guards. They had TBFs and F6Fs and they were in pretty rough shape as well as the general housekeeping on the ship.
 
Very simply TRUE about the Weathering.

1/Modern model, in time of peace - no, or very small Weathering.

2/Model of aircraft from any War or military period - no Weathering isnt true, anyone who thinks like this is wrong. Weathering is nessesery.
 
Helldiver please explain what your rantings has to do with the thread ???

You do'nt deserve allies with that attitude.

What Ship were you tied up next to ????

Helldiver said:
Skippybing, it was the British ships I had in mind when I mentioned "our allies". We tied up next to a Brtish Carrier in Panama City and the skipper looked at the lack of housekeeping there was on the other Carrier and ordered the crew to put on double rat guards. They had TBFs and F6Fs and they were in pretty rough shape as well as the general housekeeping on the ship.
Click to expand...
 
Helldiver said:
Skippybing, it was the British ships I had in mind when I mentioned "our allies". We tied up next to a Brtish Carrier in Panama City and the skipper looked at the lack of housekeeping there was on the other Carrier and ordered the crew to put on double rat guards. They had TBFs and F6Fs and they were in pretty rough shape as well as the general housekeeping on the ship.
Click to expand...

Helldiver, I figured as much*, to be honest without knowing what the RN ship had been doing prior to you seeing her it's not really safe to extrapolate from one example, i.e. if she'd just come from a couple of months in the North Atlantic she wouldn't look pretty. If she'd been alongside for a few weeks then there was something up with that ship.
As an example I've got pictures of VICTORIOUS from through out the war and in some she's in excellent condition while in others she's obviously been at sea for an extended period and needs a lot of ship's husbandry, depending on when you saw her you'd have widely differing views.
As regards the aircraft I think one reason the RN's looked worn throughout the war was due to the use of a matt finish paint. The UK specification was for this as it was felt gloss finishes were more likely to give away the aircraft's position through the sun glinting off them etc. A side effect of this is that it's almost impossible to keep a matt finish looking clean as anyone who's seen an RN Lynx would know, even after a foam wash some of the exhaust and oil stains are still there.
Another factor with the aircraft is that even with the lend lease ones a lot of parts had to be sourced from the UK as they were specific to those versions e.g. seat harnesses, radios etc.

*Only four nations had carriers during WW2 and you were unlikely to have seen the French one!
 
I'd love to meet Helldiver.

We have a friend his age who served in the Navy during ww2 and has the same attitude. He would be just like Helldiver if he was into joining forums like this one but actually would mean no harm by his comments but could be misunderstood in his attitude.

Of course - as I wont meet him, I can only hope he is genuine.
 
Helldiver said:
Skippybing, it was the British ships I had in mind when I mentioned "our allies". We tied up next to a Brtish Carrier in Panama City and the skipper looked at the lack of housekeeping there was on the other Carrier and ordered the crew to put on double rat guards. They had TBFs and F6Fs and they were in pretty rough shape as well as the general housekeeping on the ship.
Click to expand...

That happens with a real 'Warship', especially one that has seen combat.
:173go1:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top