WWII Weathering Fallacy or Truth. Accuracy.

[urumomo]

Hey momo? That was a very interesting read, thank you for sharing.

Anytime !

Holy flush batman! 125 tons in one shot!?

Big plant .
we trained on mostly sub gear ; school was a lot of the S5W reactor plant .
Then prototype training , the plants used a hodgepodge of old equipment recovered from small boys like WW2 destroyers .
The first time me and like 4 other guys finally got our dosimetry , our TLDs , and were able to go down into the plant ,
we arrive at these machines that are the size of small buildings and have no idea what we are seeing ,
and one of us read out the label plate .
" these are GENERATORS ?! "
lol
9 MW each , two of them .
2 level tall , essentially 4 deck high compartment .
I think the generator in the plant I trained on was 260 kW . Size of a minivan .

 

[BarleyBop]

TLDs

Thank goodness for instant lookup: 'Thermoluminescent Dosimeters'!
I'd have no clue!
Seems the military really is as fond of ACRONYMS as Telecom! (...since retired)

 

[Jakko]

TLDs

I read that as top-level domains — .com, .edu, .nl, .uk, etc.

 

[Jakko]

model stowage just seems to stick to vehicles in the most precarious places, as if by some magic magnetic force

That's the Verlinden School

 

[urumomo]

I read that as top-level domains — .com, .edu, .nl, .uk, etc.

You can call it that too . It will still work the same .

 

[Edbert]

Looks like about a dozen different shades of tan on this GW1 Tornado.


GWOT A-10 in Afghanistan over 20 years later.


Being on a boat doesn't keep 'em clean either.

 

[athabascamaverick]

I've read that the B-17 had a life expectancy of only 11 missions (probably less than 6 weeks) and a Sherman was built to last for 40 hours of combat (or a year non-combat).
I spent 3 years in the US Army in Germany - we cleaned and spot painted our vehicles at least weekly (mostly for busywork since we were a tactical unit with no war to fight. Never saw a spot of camo on a US vehicle back then either (unless our spot painting applies .

 

[Peppylepugh]

View attachment 136380
Looks like about a dozen different shades of tan on this GW1 Tornado.

View attachment 136381
GWOT A-10 in Afghanistan over 20 years later.

View attachment 136382
Being on a boat doesn't keep 'em clean either.

 

[MJY65]

Those are certainly some filthy aircraft. Take a look at the logic of where the filth is, though. The A-10 is soot from the nose gun. The others have some paint fade, but also hydraulic fluid and fuel residue that has been pulled aft by airflow. When building, I try to think of where the points of origin would be. Control actuators, fuel vents, gear doors, etc. What none of them has is a perfect, uniform dark "frame" around every single panel.

 

[Peppylepugh]

'It's your model, build it for you'.
Years ago, back when go ogle, wanted everyone to have a g+ account, there was a similar discussion that went on for weeks.
Informative, yes. Opinionated, oh without a doubt. But, everyone came away, with the same amount of blood, with no cuts and bruises.
Two of the main topics was, the color of tools on the surfaces of tanks and the colors of the handles.
The other was, the pursuit of correct colors.
The majority were in agreement, that the tools were painted at the same time the vehicle was painted. The need and stress for someone new in the hobby to show the wood grain on a shovel, because it's the current fade is a mountain too high.
Fair enough?
Show me a picture of the wood grain on an hickory Ace Hardware shovel handle at 35 feet and I'll buy lunch.
The IPMS rules state, color is not a consideration in the final judgment in the first three spots in any category.
Weather to your taste.
The Japanese philosophy of wabi sabi, to appreciate the beauty in imperfect, impermanent and incomplete, translates to scale modeling almost to the 'T'.
It really is in the beholder and most don't know what they are looking at, when you show them.

 

[BarleyBop]

35 feet

Ha, put that way, seems pretty ridiculous doesn't it!
But so perversely satisfying, especially if you darken the wood where grubby hands would have grabbed it!

 

[Peppylepugh]

Ha, put that way, seems pretty ridiculous doesn't it!
But so perversely satisfying, especially if you darken the wood where grubby hands would have grabbed it!

Exactly.
I get the technique and the practice, but c'mon.
It's not real. Realistic on its own, sure. As a standalone model in and of itself. Yep. Very realistic. On the side of a Ferdinand in the foothills of the Gustav line at 35-40 feet.
Mmm, I'll mentally give it a pass.

 

[OldManModeler]

Having been here a few times...
https://www.mclbbarstow.marines.mil/

And seen vehicles like this, and many others....



They don't look like a model kit.

They are serious. They are transport and killing machines. The reality is bland and in-your-face serious. No video games. No fun. No fine weathering.

In the middle east it's just sand colors and more sand grit in your mouth and clothes. Orders and protocol. There isn't much fun about it. It was the same in WWII. It was and is a sad place to be.

It's get it done to save your country or other countries that value Freedom.

But we, in the plastic scale world... This modeling of scale models is an Art.

You are ALL artists. ARTISTS.

Not necessarily warriors. But appreciated still.

Carry on.

Be well. Model on.

Eric

 

[OldManModeler]

So, find the joy in building plastic kits of historical value, and that can indeed be joyful. Do it out of your personal respect in doing quality in your achievements. Or for the sake of history. Or as respect to the men and women who died for freedom...

..... So later, you could buy and build plastic kits of armor or cars or aircraft, or whatever. And be free.

 

[Jim62]

Though I like to see other folks weathering, I've taken to doing clean builds on my aircraft. They just look better to me on my shelves.

 

[urumomo]

Show me a picture of the wood grain on an hickory Ace Hardware shovel handle at 35 feet and I'll buy lunch.

IDK if that's a good analogy .
I assume you are saying that a 1:1 human eyeball one foot away from a 1/35 model would see what the 1/35 eyeball would .
But the 1:1 eyeball is a 175 mm objective lens at that scale ( internet says the average pupil is 2 to 8 mm diameter depending on light , so I pick the middle @ 5mm for this )
The 1/35 pupil is a pinpoint .
or maybe I haven't had enough coffee .

 

[MJY65]

^^^^
I'm not sure how the eye actually works compared to a lens, but in photography, a 50mm lens was considered "normal". It gives roughly the field of view you get with your eyes.

That aside, the scale assumption is that you are viewing that model from 3' away. The assertion is that anything you would see at that viewing distance would be visible at 105' in real life. I call BS on that one as a premise for detailing. You may be able to walk up to that 1:1 tank or airplane and be mere feet away. That's the equivalent of viewing your model from inches. If someone wants to paint dirt on shovel handles, I think it looks fine. Real shovels have hand prints. Real airplanes have stains. Neither one has a glorious pre-shaded grid pattern laid out on the flat surfaces. Just my preference.

 

[urumomo]

I consider scale modeling to be a multidisciplinary art .
People should do what they want .
Go all Jackson Pollock on that battleship if you want .

The camera comparison to the whole giant eyeball thing -- I need to look into later this evening .
what is the F-stop of my eyeball ?
I need to re-watch some old Six Million Dollar Man episodes . Get it going on .

 

[MJY65]

I consider scale modeling to be a multidisciplinary art .
People should do what they want .
Go all Jackson Pollock on that battleship if you want .

Agreed. I build little toy plastic airplanes. If model builders were "normal", we'd be embarrassed to admit it.

 

[urumomo]

I'll start by trying to figure out the focal length of my mind

probably