Random thoughts from 2015 Nats

[Janissary]

This was my third Nats (2012 Orlando and 2014 Virginia before this year). Columbus is a 3 hr drive from where I am. I did not take a model, just wanted to check it out and treat myself for a lone drive (which is relaxing to me).

- Contrary to what some others have said, I found this year's to be the best among the three I have been to. I liked the venue (except for the dark content room) and High Ave was pretty cool at night.

- I loved the seemingly endless number of vendor rooms. It was kind of nice to have them in separate rooms like that rather than having one giant vendor area.

- Prices were steep though. Not much of a bargain anywhere! On the bright side, I finally found VF-102 lo-viz decals in the exact markings I wanted!

- Craftsmanship in jet models, on average, is somewhat weaker than that I see in WWII / props models. This is something that I observed in all three shows I have been to (with the exception of Cyrus Tan's A-10 in 2012). I am exclusively interested in jets so I might be more sensitive to the issues I spot there, but I tried to be objective this time around and still had the same conclusion.

- When I see a model that I really love, I hate not being able to find the person who built it! I can see the name under the form but I usually have no idea who that is. It happened again this year, I asked around, but the people I asked either did not know the person or the modeler was not around when I found some people who knew him. I usually have many questions that all go unanswered.

- The crashed Hind diorama was my favorite. It was not very noticeable perhaps, but it was super cool, especially the rotor blades.

- I met Darren Roberts in person, which was cool too!

- Although I did enjoy my time there, I do anticipate that with each future Nats, it will take more for me to go. The web is far more convenient and competitively priced for all my needs. I also learn tremendously through various forums and blogs nowadays that there is very little educational value for me (except talking with Barry Numerick, though I get to see him in our local meetings too). So I understand what people are saying about the potentially diminishing returns of going to these shows. To be perfectly honest, there are so many models in the contest room that the whole thing quickly becomes overwhelming. It takes effort to find the diamond in the rocks and by then my eyes are already strained.

But, if everybody thought this way, there would be no show, would there?. There is something about entering your model to the competition and anticipating the outcome. So unless an online version of these contests can be truly devised (current attempts are far from satisfactory), I don't see the core of the show going anywhere; there will always be a critical mass who wants to see how their models fare compared to others in a refereed contest.

Edited July 26, 2015 by Janissary

[sierrascale]

This was my third Nats (2012 Orlando and 2014 Virginia before this year). Columbus is a 3 hr drive from where I am. I did not take a model, just wanted to check it out and treat myself for a lone drive (which is relaxing to me).

- Contrary to what some others have said, I found this year's to be the best among the three I have been to. I liked the venue (except for the dark content room) and High Ave was pretty cool at night.

- I loved the seemingly endless number of vendor rooms. It was kind of nice to have them in separate rooms like that rather than having one giant vendor area.

- Prices were steep though. Not much of a bargain anywhere! On the bright side, I finally found VF-102 lo-viz decals in the exact markings I wanted!

- Craftsmanship in jet models, on average, is somewhat weaker than that I see in WWII / props models. This is something that I observed in all three shows I have been to (with the exception of Cyrus Tan's A-10 in 2012). I am exclusively interested in jets so I might be more sensitive to the issues I spot there, but I tried to be objective this time around and still had the same conclusion.

- When I see a model that I really love, I hate not being able to find the person who built it! I can see the name under the form but I usually have no idea who that is. It happened again this year, I asked around, but the people I asked either did not know the person or the modeler was not around when I found some people who knew him. I usually have many questions that all go unanswered.

- The crashed Hind diorama was my favorite. It was not very noticeable perhaps, but it was super cool, especially the rotor blades.

- I met Darren Roberts in person, which was cool too!

- Although I did enjoy my time there, I do anticipate that with each future Nats, it will take more for me to go. The web is far more convenient and competitively priced for all my needs. I also learn tremendously through various forums and blogs nowadays that there is very little educational value for me (except talking with Barry Numerick, though I get to see him in our local meetings too). So I understand what people are saying about the potentially diminishing returns of going to these shows. To be perfectly honest, there are so many models in the contest room that the whole thing quickly becomes overwhelming. It takes effort to find the diamond in the rocks and by then my eyes are already strained.

But, if everybody thought this way, there would be no show, would there?. There is something about entering your model to the competition and anticipating the outcome. So unless an online version of these contests can be truly devised (current attempts are far from satisfactory), I don't see the core of the show going anywhere; there will always be a critical mass who wants to see how their models fare compared to others in a refereed contest.

An online show would be pretty boring. As my wife kept telling me - it's a vacation: eat, drink, talk to people, buy stuff, look at models and have fun. I regret now that I didn't stay a couple nights. Have to plan for that in SC next year.

Yes, the contest lighting was fairly dim, just like in 09, but overall, except for the fact that I didn't get to see and talk to a number of people, it was a great time.

bob

sierra scale.

[Janissary]

Yep, if the dates work out for us, we want to make a vacation trip out of the Nats next year. We did that with Virginia beach, and worked out really nicely.

Here are two videos from the contest room.

Contest room floor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=74vKnjZB2nI

Contest room balcony view (lower quality):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvmBA7f-klM&feature=player_detailpage

Edited July 27, 2015 by Janissary

[chuck540z3]

- Craftsmanship in jet models, on average, is somewhat weaker than that I see in WWII / props models. This is something that I observed in all three shows I have been to (with the exception of Cyrus Tan's A-10 in 2012). I am exclusively interested in jets so I might be more sensitive to the issues I spot there, but I tried to be objective this time around and still had the same conclusion.

Hi Janissary, it's Chuck.

I have found the same thing with our local IPMS contests. There are less jets than props and the quality of jets is generally less as well- overall. You still see some great jet builds, but you always see several prop builds that are truly awesome.

Never having been to a Nats contest, I was wondering how my builds might do if I ever attended with an entry in 1/32, the only scale I build? ie: Would they likely be in the top 1/2, maybe medal, or fogetaboutit! Hard to tell without actually seeing my models in person, I know, but I've always wondered just how good the build quality and competition would be.

[niart17]

Hey Chuck, I've only been to one National and you're right, it is hard to say based just on pics (one reason is you take really great shots of your work so it's hard to compare to life) but in my assessment I'd think you'd easily be in the top half and possibly medal contingency. The only "disadvantage" I'd see if that you do SOOOOO much incredible detailing and add so much to your builds that it leaves that much more room for potential errors. I would hate that you'd change your build style just to place in a national because your work is seriously inspirational. But that's is about the only thing I could see knocking you out of some top places. Typically the simple but very well done builds are what wins. Just the nature of IPMS style contests and I can see their point honestly. Unless they develop a super-detailed category, I suspect that will be the case 90% of the time.

Bill

Edited July 27, 2015 by niart17

[Janissary]

Hi Chuck, yep, we seem to have similar thoughts. Let me try to explain my observations over the three Nats (specifically jets).

First of all, I have judged a few times in our local show here but never at the Nats. The idea is similar though. I really view myself as a modeler in training, and I have my own idiosyncrasies when building (e.g., banging my head over things others don't care or being blissfully ignorant on technical aspects I know other people take very seriously). Anyhow, my 1/48 F-16D took third in its category in 2012, and my F-14D took first in its category last year. I did not enter any models this year. Of note, in 2012 Columbus local show, my F-16 took the best in its category, best aircraft and best master model.

- I emphasize "in its category" for a reason. The structure is such that the model categories almost always get adjusted on site to make the improve the distribution and judging of the models. There are usually split categories (usually marked pre-planned split on IPMS' website) resulting in many subcategories (across scales and types) under say jets. So, in my two cases, for instance, there were not a whole a lot of models in their respective categories. The number can change but it can range from 7-8 to 10-15 to even 25-30 models per category. So in your case Chuck, I would imagine your models would almost always place and probably place first.

- But these categories are not all that exciting in themselves (at least to me). There is the "best overall aircraft" category where they choose the best aircraft in the contest room over all scales / categories. Now that means something. I cannot recall if there is a "best jet aircraft" but if there were, that would mean something too.

- Now, putting on my judge hat (again never judged at the Nats but did in local shows). For most jet models at the Nats (and the local shows), when I study what is on the contest table, it is fairly easy to eliminate a whole bunch of them quickly as non-competetive based on IPMS rules. As I said before, the finesse with jet models is not as high as I have seen with props. So, I cannot say that the competition is very stiff in the jet category. However, there are some builders that seem to build a whole bunch of models in a given year and bring most of them to the show. Some of these modelers have really nicely done jets (I am think of you Van Zandt, I kept looking for you but could not find you). So your success would be a function of whether those modelers have entries in your category.

- I have to say, perhaps due to their shear physical size (hence the difficulty of doing justice at that scale), 1/32 jets can be less competitive giving 1/32 modelers like you an advantage. But this can be a hit or a miss. Last year, for instance, there was a fantastic 1/32 F-18 depicting factory assembly that was amazing. My generalizations are simply that, generalizations.

- I know you care a lot about accuracy and all the fellow members here at ARC have been a great resource for your builds. I have to say at the Nats though, accuracy - to the level you aspire to meet - would not count as much. Each judge has to go through tons of models and the judges may not be experts in your subject. IPMS rules therefore explicitly focus on craftsmanship and prohibit judging based on historical or technical accuracy. Some people like this, some people don't, but that is the game here. This has always been questionable to me though. For well known subjects like the F-14; if you swap the vertical stabs so that they are inward canting, but the craftsmanship is perfect, what does a judge do? Now, compare this to F-4 landing gear bay door (the ones closer to the middle of the fuselage); if these were reversed, they will be nearly unnoticeable, but conceptually it is no different than the F-14 example.

Another example I keep thinking of is the F-15 main landing gears. The legs and the wheels are visibly outward canting. If you build your model this way, I can see many judges dinging your model for that. What do you do? You bring photographic evidence to prove your case, but you are counting on the judges actually going through all that material. In my view, building a model for a show is different than building a model for your own pleasure. Luckily I am not at that level of mastery so I have not been too concerned with this. At the end, there is definitely a human factor here, which I think is ok. All in all, however, I think the current judging system is healthy.

- I respect those who judge and volunteer to judge. It is a thankless job, and in the very nature of it is criticism and fault finding. There are these great models sitting in front of you whose quality you know you will never achieve, yet you are there to find its faults. But as a judge, you still take in all the joy before and after the judging process, so nothing is lost.

- Getting back to craftsmanship in jets vs props; perhaps the most talented builders are drawn more to props/bombers than jets, because the former makes more interesting modeling subjects with more opportunities for artistry.

Finally, while these are my takeaways from the three Nats I have been to, I hope no jet builder here who has had a model at the Nats takes this personally. My remarks are truly an "on average" basis. No matter what show you go to, you will find quite a bit of jets that will wow you.

Edited July 27, 2015 by Janissary

[chuck540z3]

Hey Chuck, I've only been to one National and you're right, it is hard to say based just on pics (one reason is you take really great shots of your work so it's hard to compare to life) but in my assessment I'd think you'd easily be in the top half and possibly medal contingency. The only "disadvantage" I'd see if that you do SOOOOO much incredible detailing and add so much to your builds that it leaves that much more room for potential errors. I would hate that you'd change your build style just to place in a national because your work in inspirational. But that's is about the only thing I could see knocking you out of some top places. Typically the simple but very well done builds are what wins. Just the nature of IPMS style contests and I can see their point honestly. Unless they develop a super-detailed category, I suspect that will be the case 90% of the time.

Bill

Thanks a lot Bill for that feedback. You're right, my modifications have hurt me a few times in the past, but I'll never change my "heavily modified style", because I find that part the most fun. Having said that, now that I have more experience over the years, I now understand why I was given certain deductions that I thought were silly before. Live and learn!

[niart17]

- Getting back to craftsmanship in jets vs props; perhaps the most talented builders are drawn more to props/bombers than jets, because the former makes more interesting modeling subjects with more opportunities for artistry.

It's kind of funny how this works and it may have something to do with what models are popular and have more releases at the time. Back in the later 80's when I was more contest involved, THE category to place in was 1/48 scale jets. It was always loaded down with a ton of really good builds and typically would win best in show. If you could take a top 3 place in that category, it meant you were really doing great. But that was the time when Hasegawa started coming out with a lot of good 1/48th scale subjects and top gun had everyone interested in jets etc...now, that doesn't seem to be the case. Back then, props were sort of the back seat category. 1/48th jets and armor ruled the day back then. Man, I'm getting old.

Bill

[Rex]

Chuck, there is a way to get some idea of how your models might stack up against other models.

Find a show in your area (or driving radius) that judges with the G/S/B system. It won't tell you how one of your Phantom models might do against 17 others,,,,,,but, it sure does help you find out what flaws in construction the judges look for and will find.

Even if you get a poor GSB score, you get the judging tick sheets with notes on them to look at.

That same model that captured Gold in the local GSB contest might still get beat by 3 others in a 1-2-3 show, but at least you will know you aren't trying to hit 1-2-3 with a model with enough "dings" against it to ensure that it is really a 5th place build. (which would still be a pretty good showing in a group of 17 models)

I took a Corsair down to Chattanooga, and it scored below Bronze by three judges, and scored Bronze by one of them,,,and I didn't think it would even be a model that they'd bother scoring at all. My joke that day was that I brought a model for the Copper/Pewter/Lead division, haha. But, those three score sheets and their online published judging rules help build better models,,,,,,even if I never compete again.

I think it is very important to get other people's eyeballs onto our models,,,,,we are all a bit biased about our own builds, sometimes we might think our model is better than it is,,,and other times, it might be better than we think.

[chuck540z3]

Hi Chuck, yep, we seem to have similar thoughts. Let me try to explain my observations over the three Nats (specifically jets).

..................

Another example I keep thinking of is the F-15 main landing gears. The legs and the wheels are visibly outward canting. If you build your model this way, I can see many judges dinging your model for that. What do you do? You bring photographic evidence to prove your case, but you are counting on the judges actually going through all that material. In my view, building a model for a show is different than building a model for your own pleasure. Luckily I am not at that level of mastery so I have not been too concerned with this. At the end, there is definitely a human factor here, which I think is ok. All in all, however, I think the current judging system is healthy.

......

Thank you sir. Very detailed an enlightening observations!

Your example of the F-15 landing gear hits home. There are a number of modifications I make to my builds- and other ones I don't make- because I just KNOW that some model contest judge will view it as a flaw, even if it's real. For example, the AOA vane on the A-10 is off center within a circular base plate that's behind it. I was afraid it would look like an error if I installed it off-center, so I installed it dead center to avoid any controversy. On my current P-38L build, there is a horizontal seam line on the front of the wings which is subtle, but real if you get up close. If I left the seam line here, it would look like the classic modeling error of not filling the seams on the wing, so I filled it in, again to avoid any contest hassles in the future. Caving in to model contest judges over accuracy? You bet! A few builds ago I puttied in the rivet and panel line detail on the wings of my P-51D as was done at the factory, but after reviewing some war time pictures, I decided to "partially" putty them in to reveal some subtle detail from behind as the putty was compressed with boot marks and wear and tear. BIG mistake! I should have left the rivet and panel line detail alone or filled it all in completely, because I've been explaining my "inconsistent panel lines and rivet detail" ever since. Lesson learned. Keep it simple stupid!

[chuck540z3]

Chuck, there is a way to get some idea of how your models might stack up against other models.

Find a show in your area (or driving radius) that judges with the G/S/B system. It won't tell you how one of your Phantom models might do against 17 others,,,,,,but, it sure does help you find out what flaws in construction the judges look for and will find.

Even if you get a poor GSB score, you get the judging tick sheets with notes on them to look at.

That same model that captured Gold in the local GSB contest might still get beat by 3 others in a 1-2-3 show, but at least you will know you aren't trying to hit 1-2-3 with a model with enough "dings" against it to ensure that it is really a 5th place build. (which would still be a pretty good showing in a group of 17 models)

I took a Corsair down to Chattanooga, and it scored below Bronze by three judges, and scored Bronze by one of them,,,and I didn't think it would even be a model that they'd bother scoring at all. My joke that day was that I brought a model for the Copper/Pewter/Lead division, haha. But, those three score sheets and their online published judging rules help build better models,,,,,,even if I never compete again.

I think it is very important to get other people's eyeballs onto our models,,,,,we are all a bit biased about our own builds, sometimes we might think our model is better than it is,,,and other times, it might be better than we think.

Thanks Rex, which brings up an opportunity to brag I guess. The local IPMS chapter held the Western Canadian Regional Model Contest near here in June, so I brought my most recent A-10C build. I won Gold in the 1/32 "Super Detailed" category and 4 other special awards, including "People's Choice", out of ~ 450 entries in all categories. It obviously did very well and likely better than I deserve, but I've always wondered how it and some of my other builds would stack up in the "big leagues" like the Nats? At this local contest, the 1/32 categories typically have maybe 5-8 models in them, so your chances of getting a medal is pretty good. At the Nats, I see many, many 1/32 models, so I know the chances of winning something is reduced, but is the overall build quality that much better or are there just more models? As with any contest, I'm sure a big factor is "who/what shows up" that year. If John Vojtech shows up with something, we can all forget about Gold. :D

[RiderFan]

Hi Chuck.

I know you mentioned this yourself in another thread, but the thought of what would be involved in trying to get your builds through customs without damage is horrifying. I just can't see how you would do that.

I've only taken my, incredibly mediocre, builds across the border once as part of a move, and the border agent in Maine insisted on "inspecting" (read handling) each one out of their packing. You know, because there just might have been cocaine stuffed into the intakes or something!

Edited July 27, 2015 by RiderFan

[chuck540z3]

Hi Chuck.

I know you mentioned this yourself in another thread, but the thought of what would be involved in trying to get your builds through customs without damage is horrifying. I just can't see how you would do that.

I've only taken my, incredibly mediocre, builds across the border once as part of a move, and the border agent in Maine insisted on "inspecting" (read handling) each one out of their packing. You know, because there just might have been cocaine stuffed into the intakes or something!

Roger that David, which is why my models stay off airplanes. I have a tough enough time getting my camera stuff through security without some security guard breaking something, so I can't imagine a super fragile model. Even if I got it through security unscathed and placed it carefully in the overhead bin above my seat, some dumbass would jam his oversized carry-on baggage into it to get the door closed.

[Janissary]

….. Back in the later 80's when I was more contest involved, THE category to place in was 1/48 scale jets. It was always loaded down with a ton of really good builds and typically would win best in show. If you could take a top 3 place in that category, it meant you were really doing great. But that was the time when Hasegawa started coming out with a lot of good 1/48th scale subjects and top gun had everyone interested in jets etc...now, that doesn't seem to be the case. Back then, props were sort of the back seat category….

Bill

Interesting, didn't know that. Makes sense. Going on a tangent here but thinking of 80s vs today, one trend I see is changing is dead flat finishes. Going through very old forum entries and FSM magazines, I see that a dead flat finish was something everybody was trying to achieve. Now, not so much. If I see a dead flat finish on a jet today, I can't help but think it must be from an older modeler. Despite the so called "striving for accuracy" argument, there are trends that come and go in this hobby just like anywhere else.

Thank you sir. Very detailed an enlightening observations!

Your example of the F-15 landing gear hits home. There are a number of modifications I make to my builds- and other ones I don't make- because I just KNOW that some model contest judge will view it as a flaw, even if it's real. For example, the AOA vane on the A-10 is off center within a circular base plate that's behind it. I was afraid it would look like an error if I installed it off-center, so I installed it dead center to avoid any controversy. On my current P-38L build, there is a horizontal seam line on the front of the wings which is subtle, but real if you get up close. If I left the seam line here, it would look like the classic modeling error of not filling the seams on the wing, so I filled it in, again to avoid any contest hassles in the future. Caving in to model contest judges over accuracy? You bet! A few builds ago I puttied in the rivet and panel line detail on the wings of my P-51D as was done at the factory, but after reviewing some war time pictures, I decided to "partially" putty them in to reveal some subtle detail from behind as the putty was compressed with boot marks and wear and tear. BIG mistake! I should have left the rivet and panel line detail alone or filled it all in completely, because I've been explaining my "inconsistent panel lines and rivet detail" ever since. Lesson learned. Keep it simple stupid!

Yes, I can see judges taking off points on all three cases, so I understand the dilemma.

Edited July 27, 2015 by Janissary

[niart17]

...Going on a tangent here but thinking of 80s vs today, one trend I see is changing is dead flat finishes. Going through very old forum entries and FSM magazines, I see that a dead flat finish was something everybody was trying to achieve. Now, not so much. If I see a dead flat finish on a jet today, I can't help but think it must be from an older modeler. Despite the so called "striving for accuracy" argument, there are trends that come and go in this hobby just like anywhere else.

That's very true. I never really thought about the change in dead flat but yes, I never did quite like the look of a dead flat finish, BUT getting a really accurate finish with all the subtle sheen variations without it looking splotchy to me is one of the most complicated painting tasks. I've only seen a few builds that really nail the look of it. So I think to keep it simple, an even coat is what most people were doing and obviously gloss wouldn't work unless you're doing a glossy plane. But if you were to semi-gloss the decals like a lot of real planes are the judges would knock that down all day long. Funny how that works.

Edited July 27, 2015 by niart17

[hawkwrench]

An online show would be pretty boring. As my wife kept telling me - it's a vacation: eat, drink, talk to people, buy stuff, look at models and have fun. I regret now that I didn't stay a couple nights. Have to plan for that in SC next year.

Yes, the contest lighting was fairly dim, just like in 09, but overall, except for the fact that I didn't get to see and talk to a number of people, it was a great time.

bob

sierra scale.

Wow, will your wife marry me or come talk to my wife!!!

My wife comes along, but would rather be at home. And the spending money allowance?- we won't even go there. But I still love her!!!

Tim

[Darren Roberts]

I'm going to wade into the fray, only because I just judged Nats at Columbus. I asked the very question posed about accuracy. The head judge stated that for things that are obvious, such as an F-4's tailplanes being put on upside down, then accuracy can play a part. However, for less obvious items, the benefit of the doubt goes to the modeler. In the case of the F-15's landing gear, it would not be downgraded so long as both gear were angled symmetrically. The one thing I've learned from judging is to provide reference, either in the form of photos and/or notes. When I was judging, there were quite a few times I wished the modeler had explained more about what they had done, because we had questions about some things. The notes are most definitely read if something looks different than the expectation. Bottom line: The more information the modeler can give, the better chance of there not being a misunderstanding about something done on the model. The biggest example of this is a couple of years back. John Votech built a gorgeous 1/32 F-15 that was lit. It eventually sold for $15K on commission. It didn't win because there was a small circular plate on the inside of the intake. The judges took it to be an ejector pin mark that wasn't filled. If he had photos/notes, that could have been avoided. The thing to remember is that on any given day, you may or may not win.

[Janissary]

The biggest example of this is a couple of years back. John Votech built a gorgeous 1/32 F-15 that was lit. It eventually sold for $15K on commission. It didn't win because there was a small circular plate on the inside of the intake. The judges took it to be an ejector pin mark that wasn't filled. If he had photos/notes, that could have been avoided. The thing to remember is that on any given day, you may or may not win.

I'm not 100% positive but if I recall correctly, John did have photographs showing that section. I think the issue was John used an ejector pin mark without filling it to add rivet or fastener details on top of it. I remember reading discussions here where people said "Had he filled in that ejector pin, he would've had to carve it back out again at the same spot, so it does not make sense for the judges to ding him for that..". Now, I really don't know if this was the real issue, or if there is an ejector pin mark at that location on the kit itself, but I am just saying I remember reading those discussions.

I talked to John about that a few years ago at a local show. He said that such a big deal was made out of that decision that he was very surprised by the uprise on the internet. He was very cool about the whole thing and did not seem to hold any grudges against anyone.

[Darren Roberts]

I'm not 100% positive but if I recall correctly, John did have photographs showing that section. I think the issue was John used an ejector pin mark without filling it to add rivet or fastener details on top of it. I remember reading discussions here where people said "Had he filled in that ejector pin, he would've had to carve it back out again at the same spot, so it does not make sense for the judges to ding him for that..". Now, I really don't know if this was the real issue, or if there is an ejector pin mark at that location on the kit itself, but I am just saying I remember reading those discussions.

I talked to John about that a few years ago at a local show. He said that such a big deal was made out of that decision that he was very surprised by the uprise on the internet. He was very cool about the whole thing and did not seem to hold any grudges against anyone.

If that's the case, it makes the judges decision even worse!

[skyhawk174]

Hi Janissary, it's Chuck.

I have found the same thing with our local IPMS contests. There are less jets than props and the quality of jets is generally less as well- overall. You still see some great jet builds, but you always see several prop builds that are truly awesome.

Never having been to a Nats contest, I was wondering how my builds might do if I ever attended with an entry in 1/32, the only scale I build? ie: Would they likely be in the top 1/2, maybe medal, or fogetaboutit! Hard to tell without actually seeing my models in person, I know, but I've always wondered just how good the build quality and competition would be.

Hi Chuck

I was not aware that you have not been to an IPMS USA Nationals. It was always my dream to do that when I started in modeling so many years ago. There are several others on my bucket list such as Telford in the UK and a couple of the European ones. I know those are different too. Several of my friends and colleagues have been over to Telford and from their reports, it sure is great. Again, different in that the contest there is secondary where as in the US, the contest IS the main focus of the show.

So far I have been to four IPMS USA Nationals, the most recent being Phoenix in 2010 and Omaha in 2011. A couple of my friends have been to them continuously since the 90’s but I really did not have the time or money to be able to do that. I am planning on trying on making Omaha in 2017.

As background I have judged at local and regional model shows both in Canada and the US. I have also judged at the US Nats too but that was for special awards on specific subjects. I have even entered at the US Nats but I knew I was toast as soon as I put my model down. It was then that I learned what I had to do if I really wanted to win.

Anyway, getting back to what you said about how you think your models would do at an IPMS USA Nats. Well I can tell you they would do quite well. However sometimes lots of detail does not mean it will automatically win. In almost every category there is an out of the box model entry. At the US Nats there is no separate category for OOB models and it is part of the regular categories. I have seen it many times where an OOB entry has come in first over other detailed entries in the category. Basics were simply better.

What judges are looking for is a build with the basics done well. By basics I mean, no seams showing, no silvering of decals, finish, alignment of landing gear or tailplanes etc. Even stuff like foggy canopies will be a ding to the model. List is long but not impossible. I still recall to this day a statement that was told to me by a respected American friend who has judged at US Nationals and won many, many awards. He said "we never asked him to add all this detail. All we ask is for a competent build with all of the basics covered". That stuck with me for the entirety of my modelling career and I still have trouble with it.

Also, due to the sheer work load involved in judging the entries in a category (depending on the category of course) there are cuts that are made at the beginning. By that I mean, all the models are examined and the ones that have blatant errors are set aside. To use a golf analogy, didn’t make the cut. Something as simple as silvered decals will make this happen since there are going to be other models in the category with no silvered decals. If you get my point. This is a 1st, 2nd and 3rd system so no multiple awards like a Gold, Silver and Bronze system. AMPS uses a G, S, B system and as far as I know each model is judged on its own merits so multiple golds, silvers or bronzes can be awarded.

The bottom line is that if you are going to enter something at the IPMS USA Nationals you pretty much have to build to an entirely different level. You may be competing against guys who have spent over a year on one model. Personally I don’t think I can do that but I don not begrudge anyone else who does. I wish I had the skills and time to do that. I am in awe of them.

In your case, your detail is first rate. Take for example your A-10. I can see a couple of items that would knock it down a little but no question you will make the initial and other cuts. You really have to be brutally honest at the national level with what you are submitting. I have even asked others to check my work since you are so close when building that you miss stuff.

I am going to try and get something finished for the 2017 show but it will probably be OOB and something small so that it will fit in a small box that I can carry on board the plane unless we decide to drive. I was thinking about a 1/72nd 109 but that is just crazy talk :)

The next time I see you we can sit down for a drink and we can wax physiological about this. Sorry for being so long winded too. Also these are just my opinions based on past experience.

[Flyboyf18]

72nd; you have finally seen the light!!!!

Good points, things we have talked about here over and over, if you don't get the basics right the model doesn't go far.

[skyhawk174]

72nd; you have finally seen the light!!!! :whistle:/>

Good points, things we have talked about here over and over, if you don't get the basics right the model doesn't go far.

Yeah the only reason is space in my suitcase :)

Although having said that I am looking at that new Piaggio from Amodel and the Be-6 both in 1/72nd.

[TaiidanTomcat]

Loved it. Got my largest softest Hawaiin shirt and largest pair of cargo shorts (special ordered) and waddled my way through nats. It was great because I didn't see any kids. Didn't mind the lighting, reminded me of my basement or shower --if I had one that is.

Saw a lot of ARCers including one portly guy covered in stripers, "hotter than any porn I've ever watched." They looked like they were engaged in some kind of quid pro quo.

Saw one angry guy staring at me with about 500 dollars worth of stuff and his wife yelling at him. Looked like he was complaining about it on the internet.

[Flyboyf18]

Yeah the only reason is space in my suitcase :)/>

Although having said that I am looking at that new Piaggio from Amodel and the Be-6 both in 1/72nd.

Easy Padawan, rush things do not do! One by one.

Should have an 'in progress' thread on 72nd A/C soon for the Piaggio.

[Rex]

Funny summary, TT.