Modeling and schematics
Looking for schematics or helpful tips on modeling? This might be the place for you to share your ideas.
Revl's u-505 ,a IX, or VII in disguise?
Posted by:
Einsamer Wolf
()
Date: August 07, 2000 06:51PM
Dear Friends,
I have now resigned myself to the fact that the Academy model I bought cannot be salvaged, for reasons even more basic than the ones I mentioned in a prior posting: the hull pieces do not fit on the waterline/deck piece correctly. In any event, I have made fairly in-depth inquiries on subcommittee.com and elsewhere about the quality of revell's u-99, as well as the quality of those highly suspicious nichimo kits for IX B and C.
Of course, any additional information any of you may have about those items would be appreciated. But I have located an opened U-505 by revell, a type IXC ship. I am writing to follow up on some older messages that suggested this was merely a VII in a box labelled IX. No one ever really conclusively determined whether or not this was true. Any information about this issue, as well as the 505's overall quality (basic detail of tower, hull, AA and deck guns, and especially the *prop gear*) would be appreciated, as well as any more info about u-99 and the nichimo kits.
As it pains me to throw away $25 on a miserable, unbuildable kit a first time, I am taking all possible measures to ensure that it does not happen again. After all, simply lighting a cigar with an Andrew Jackson would be a much more pleasant, debonair way to incur such a loss. I have a *much* more comfortable feeling about Revell's quality. BUt since those naive times when I made the bungling error of ordering that academy toy (that cannot even be assembled as a toy!), my new knowledge of uboats has led me to desire the superior design, armament, and overall capability of the IX vessels. Thus I am reluctlantly humoring the proposition of purchasing a nichimo kit, despite my strong suspicions. But if I can procure the now rare U-505 model--with assurances that it is in fact a IX, and not a VII--that would lock up the ultimate verdict, bringing this extended inquiry to a happy close. Once again, your guidance, erudition, and help are much appreciated by this new inductee into the burgeoning, cultish field of u-boat science.
Warm Regards,
Einsamer Wolf
I have now resigned myself to the fact that the Academy model I bought cannot be salvaged, for reasons even more basic than the ones I mentioned in a prior posting: the hull pieces do not fit on the waterline/deck piece correctly. In any event, I have made fairly in-depth inquiries on subcommittee.com and elsewhere about the quality of revell's u-99, as well as the quality of those highly suspicious nichimo kits for IX B and C.
Of course, any additional information any of you may have about those items would be appreciated. But I have located an opened U-505 by revell, a type IXC ship. I am writing to follow up on some older messages that suggested this was merely a VII in a box labelled IX. No one ever really conclusively determined whether or not this was true. Any information about this issue, as well as the 505's overall quality (basic detail of tower, hull, AA and deck guns, and especially the *prop gear*) would be appreciated, as well as any more info about u-99 and the nichimo kits.
As it pains me to throw away $25 on a miserable, unbuildable kit a first time, I am taking all possible measures to ensure that it does not happen again. After all, simply lighting a cigar with an Andrew Jackson would be a much more pleasant, debonair way to incur such a loss. I have a *much* more comfortable feeling about Revell's quality. BUt since those naive times when I made the bungling error of ordering that academy toy (that cannot even be assembled as a toy!), my new knowledge of uboats has led me to desire the superior design, armament, and overall capability of the IX vessels. Thus I am reluctlantly humoring the proposition of purchasing a nichimo kit, despite my strong suspicions. But if I can procure the now rare U-505 model--with assurances that it is in fact a IX, and not a VII--that would lock up the ultimate verdict, bringing this extended inquiry to a happy close. Once again, your guidance, erudition, and help are much appreciated by this new inductee into the burgeoning, cultish field of u-boat science.
Warm Regards,
Einsamer Wolf
Subject | Written By | Posted |
---|---|---|
Revl's u-505 ,a IX, or VII in disguise? | Einsamer Wolf | 08/07/2000 06:51PM |
text should read "unopened | Einsamer Wolf | 08/07/2000 06:52PM |
RE: Revl's u-505 ,a IX, or VII in disguise? | joe brandt | 08/08/2000 12:22AM |
Thanks! Now, what about Nichimo? | Einsamer Wolf | 08/08/2000 01:51AM |
RE: Thanks! Now, what about Nichimo? | joe brandt | 08/09/2000 12:18AM |
Thanks for your additional help | Einsamer Wolf | 08/09/2000 12:56AM |
RE: Thanks! Now, what about Nichimo? | Woody Cullum | 08/13/2000 05:39PM |
RE: Thanks! Now, what about Nichimo? | Einsamer Wolf | 08/16/2000 01:58AM |
RE: Thanks! Now, what about Nichimo? | Woody Cullum | 08/16/2000 08:45PM |
It was by Amati, right? | Einsamer Wolf | 08/16/2000 09:39PM |
RE: Revl's u-505 ,a IX, or VII in disguise? | Rainer Bruns | 08/08/2000 02:10AM |
Vielen herzlichen Dank, Herr Bruns! | Einsamer Wolf | 08/08/2000 03:14AM |