Discussion in 'Ship & Watercraft Models' started by jrts, Jul 22, 2004.

  1. jrts

    jrts Active Member

    Hi all

    Here is my next build.

    Built:- New York Navy Yard
    Laid Down:- 06Jan1939
    Launched:- 29Jan1944

    Kit Published By:- GPM
    Scale:- 1/200

    8 pages of instructions
    16 pages of parts

    It would be unfair to comment on the detail and graphic's as this is an old kit, I think out of print now.

    This kit gives great scope to do a lot of upgrades as it's very basic.

    The first job to do is to run it through the old scanner.

    More when this has been done


  2. lgl007

    lgl007 Member


    Sounds like a challenge :D But looks like a fun project. Keep us posted on the build process... and post lots and lots of pics :wink:

    Cheers... and good luck with the build.

  3. Jim Krauzlis

    Jim Krauzlis Active Member

    Good one, Rob!
    She's gonna be a beautiful ship!!
    Really looking forward to seeing this one as you go along...of course!! :lol:
  4. Corporal_Trim

    Corporal_Trim Member

    At 1:200, that will be a most impressive model, Rob. I look forward to the build. :)
  5. Scorpio

    Scorpio Member

    Hello Corporal_Trim,

    Very good choice!
    I am already curious of your report.

  6. jrts

    jrts Active Member

    Hi all

    Two quick photos tonight as my camera took a dive, flatt again I will pull the other photos of tomorrow.

    The first photo is to give an idea of the size of the beast.

    The board that the mid deck sits on is the same board that Yamato fitted on with 4cms spare.

    The second photo shows a section of the deck I had to insert to make it the right length. The kit has print errors through out, as I'am slow on the up take it took some time to figure out what was wrong. I have never built a book kit before and did not want to destroy the originals I like CDs that you can print time and again :roll:

    The other formers have been laminated and cut and I will start to glue these in to position tomorrow.

    After the hull lines had been straightened out the deck was 2.5cms short of what it should be.

    More tomorrow


  7. Ajax

    Ajax Member

    And so it begins... the titanic struggle of Rob vs. the GPM Missouri! :lol: Wow, I read the comments about the kit on the other thread, but who would of thought it'd be so bad that you'd get shortchanged 2.5 cms already?! :shock:

    Here's hoping you're able to solve any future problems as nicely as you have this one!

  8. Jim Krauzlis

    Jim Krauzlis Active Member

    This is going to be a huge one, Rob!
    I wonder why the base is short a whole 2.5cm? That's an awful large difference for a printed model, as I see it.

    Just curious, since I haven't built one like this before, so this might seem like a novice question (well, yeah, I am a novice, but still... :D ) how did you discover the shortage? Did you compare the center former to the base and showed the short fall?

    It would be interesting to me to find out how you uncovered this error since it would be a good lesson for us beginners on how you should approach a build like this to avoid finding the error later when it would be too late to correct. I still find it a bit disconcerting to see such an error from a otherwise reputable publisher. And with such a major part and at such a early stage.... :?
  9. jrts

    jrts Active Member

    Hi Jim

    How it came to be noticed is that I when I scaned the kit I got out the old ruler to check the size (scale). As I run the ruler down the section I noticed that each measurement I took was slightly out. Bells started to ring, so I checked I was using the scanner right as Its a new one to me (only got it that day). No probs there so I checked the original and low and behold I had found it.

    So I scanned all the originals to keep, then made the corrections on the originals and scanned it again. After this I did a dry fit with it all and found parts did not match up.
    The kit has the spec's for the size the model should be so I just checked these against the model and worked the scale from the drawings Maurice gave the link for, and bingo it worked out.

    Its a print quality problem not design as far as I can see. Even the colours are blotched with small white patches. It could be a simple case of the paper going through the print process with a wrinckle in it which would shorten the lines on the finished print?.
    But I still think that GPM should do some quality control on kits to check these things!!!

    All this aside I have had fun doing it and I realy look forward to bashing this kit like mad :lol:

    I should have the upper section of the hull done tonight.

    More later


  10. Darwin

    Darwin Member

    From your description of the kit, I'm glad I decided to drop out when the ebay bids reached the stratosphere. Out of curiosity, are you doing the build from the original kit or scans? (Not sure what your source was for the kit, but if I had paid nearly $100 on Ebay to get it, I sure wouldn't cut it up.) An inch gap sounds horrible on its face, but for a ship the size of the Mo, it is a shortfall of "only" two percent, which could easily creep in during the scanning/printing process. Lest you take umbrage, this comment isn't directed toward you, Jim (I'm not trying to teach Granma how to suck eggs....just pointing out to newbies how a "minor" little problem in the process can add up to a huge error in the final product.)
  11. jrts

    jrts Active Member

    Hi darwin

    What I have done is to scan the original mistakes and all and burned it to CD. Then I made the corrections and scaned it again and on to another CD. As my scanner is A4 and the paper I use is A4 it took some scanning to get all the parts as the kit is A3. I cut the kit for the hull sections up to get the most parts on to one page.

    For the hull section Iam using the originals for the build, but the rest will be redrawn and coloured scans ect. Basicly what I have done is to convert an A3 kit to an A4 CD model.

    You are right with regard to mistakes, any slight cock up and it will show big time in the finished item. In this case though it is the kit, beeing slow on the up take with computors I checked and checked again and again to make shure I had it right.


  12. Jim Krauzlis

    Jim Krauzlis Active Member

    Darwin, no umbrage is taken at all; how exactly DOES Grandma suck eggs? :lol:

    You're right, that was exactly my question/concern, that the difference in the base piece would end up multiplied as Rob went on in the build (but, of course, we are talking about Rob, not a newbie like me, and he caught it from the outset :D ). This type of problem would be something I would have cursed up a storm over as I tried to lay the deck and she took on a ski-jump front instead of the beautiful bow she is supposed to have! :lol:

    Truth be known, I probably would have caught on when I laid the framing and found the problem, but it shows how vitally important it is to test fit everything before gluing in place and I surmised a fitting problem like this could require a major re-sizing of the rest of the parts to make sure they all fit; sure, a basic building technique, but it does show how a fitting problem can come up even with a kit from an otherwise outstanding commercial publisher. A great lesson for all of us newbies, I think.

    There are a lot of old, out of production GPM kits going into the market on eBay these days and I wonder how many could possibly have similar fitting problems. There are some, like this kit, of ships not otherwise available today, and it's surprising, at least to me, that such a complex kit would have a fitting problem of this magnitude on something as basic as the base (maybe other areas too, I suppose), particularly when we are talking about a problem with the original printing.

    Rob, just so I understand your checking method, you measured the waterline/base and compared it to the Maurice drawings (worked out to scale, of course) and found the measurement off? I was wondering whether the increased and corrected length of the base piece might also affect how the central former lines up with the corresponding placement of the thwartship formers when compared it to the original piece. If you added 2.5 cm to the base, did you find the original formers were also short or was it the correct size; was it only the base that was off or did you have to adjust the remaining pieces of the framing? Also, was the problem a length problem or did you have to make other adjustments (width, not just the length) to make everything fit properly? Have you discovered whether or not the deck pieces are a bit off too, or are they of the correct length now that the base is re-sized? I gather you tried to rescale the base piece to increase to the correct length, but still found it was off; I suppose my very basic question is what exactly did you have to do to arrive at the correct base piece re-scaling using Maurice's drawings, and whether you did something else to the remaining pieces (thwartship formers and profile former) to get them to all fit properly?

    Sorry about all the questions, guys, but I have been fortunate in my limited experience to not come across such a problem and would like to know how the experienced fellows go about detecting the problem and what steps are taken to ensure a correct fit to the rest of the kit.

    One additional thing this experience shows is how helpful it is to scan your kit, even a commercially published kit, before building so that such adjustments can be made. I don't want to belabor the lesson here or to go off on a tangent on this thread, but, if possible, a further, short explanation of what exactly you did, Rob, would be very informative to the less experienced fellows out there, like me, I believe.

    Okay, the newbie student now puts his hand down awaiting the lessons from the teacher. :D

  13. jrts

    jrts Active Member

    Hi all

    The photos show just how far out the original kit is with its measurements.
    This is the bow section before you get to the part were I inserted the extra part. So this is from the original with no joints in to throw of the measurements at all. straight from the book it should fit :roll:

    Bulk heads 1 to 5 fit great then bulk head 6 is 1.5mm out, bulk head 7 is 2mm out the same with bulk head 8. As you go down the bulk heads it pans out that some line up great and some are 1 to 2mm out as these are.

    Jim the idea with checking the scale against the drawings is so I don't loose the correct scale of the ship along the way. To sort it all out is just a case of using the originals as a template only and not trusting them in any way.

    Darwin as for cutting the kit it as it is it can't be used as anything but a template. It has saved me from having to start from scratch on a design.

    Good fun though and tests the gray matter a bit :lol:

    Its taking time to sort it out but I will get there in the end :lol:

    More later regards

  14. barry

    barry Active Member



    Teaching granny to suck eggs, maybe you should n't cut more keyways until checked (he says ducking the large object being thrown) :lol:

    I'm glad it's you doing it not me !!!


  15. Jim Krauzlis

    Jim Krauzlis Active Member

    Thanks, Rob!
    I admire you for tackling this one with all the problems from the get go, but I hear what you say about a challenge! :D

    Those frame positions seem to go off a bit progressively as you go aft; how do they line up the rest of the way aft? :? I imagine you can re-locate the slots in the profile template, but wonder if the deck will also show a similar length problem. Thank goodness for Maurice and the plans! And I agree with Barry; better you than me! :wink:

    I know you will keep at it, Mate.
    You know we're all behind you 110%! :lol:

  16. Darwin

    Darwin Member

    Rob, that is why I like working from scans. Once the parts are digitized, I then do a "virtual build" of the eggcrate (including the deck) by overlaying the parts in my favorite drawing program and doing an indepth dimensions check. It often leads to a complete redraw of the kit (and with older Maly kits, I don't even bother with the check-I just start the redraw), but I wind up with a set of parts with fit accuracy right down to the pixel....which the printer usually takes care of, but that is a whole 'nother discussion.
  17. barry

    barry Active Member


    Which is favourite drawing program please ?

  18. jrts

    jrts Active Member

    Hi darwin

    I agree totaly with what you say. The only problem with that for me is Iam a thicko with computors and Iam just getting to grips with the various ways of doing these things through the tutorial threads the lads are running on this site. As a result until I sort out this I have to use the gray stuff and a pencil :oops: Then scan what I have done into my system.

    long way of doing things but I know it works for me :roll:
    Thats why its important that the boys keep going with the tutorials for a thick sod like me to learn!!


  19. jrts

    jrts Active Member

    Hi all

    Should have posted this the other night but lost the CD until now :roll:

    These just show the upper formers in position and a 45cm rule next to it.
    Some size this beast is, I thought Yamato was big :shock:

    I have done loads of things to this to get it all to fit, on the photos you can see all sorts of lines. These are the original kit lines and I did not want to waste the card, well we all must recycle :lol:
    The formers look bent, this is the amount of weight I had to press it down, a little OTT I think :roll:

    More tonight as the lower hull is on and the main deck. Still laid up to dry.


  20. barry

    barry Active Member


    I think you need another board, I thought I was supposed to be the "tight tyke". Nowt wrong with pencils mate. Look forward to the rest later


Share This Page