Ahoy, ye maties!

The news desk is always hunting and gathering the breaking kitset and accessories news from all around the world.

Here is the latest and greatest details on the new release from Trumpeter.

Check it out!


Link to Item

If you have comments or questions please post them here.

Thanks!



Sean

Based on these photos I just may have made up my mind between this kit and the Academy version.

Hmmm... I wonder how long it will be until some after market company comes out with a resin fake funnel for her, like she used when trying to impersonate a British cruiser.

Well, now that I am totally broke they start to come out with ships I really want.

Maybe I can find a blood bank close by. LOL

Trumpeter molded the foredeck in one piece--very nice. Perhaps the Academy kit could be used for the post-scuttling Graf Spee?

--Karl

I feel your pain. Then when they DO come out with what I want, and I FINALLY scrape up the money, all I need is a 28 hour day so I have the time to actually build the thing.

Trumpeter's version of this kit may be better, but sure the hell ain't $50+ better.

Haven't seen the Acdemy, but I preordered thia one and it was $40 more. Based on past experiences and seeing that one piece deck, I am thinking I made th right decision to stay with this version. You usually get what you pay for. 4 feet away they probaly look the same, but up close I'll bet this one will be crisper and won't slack on the details

I wasn't that impressed with the Academy Graf Spee that I saw at the IPMS/Nationals. Granted, I never got back to see the built up kit, just what was in the box. I'd have to see this one up close to make a determination of which I thought was better.

Why are you guys saying it has a one piece deck? From the images of the parts and of the instructions, the deck is clearly in three pieces - one for the quarterdeck and two for the main deck.

As we all know sometimes quality does cost more.

I will be interested in seeing this one first hand.


C|:-)

The deck is indeed in 3 pieces -

Yep, so it is. I hope the break is underneath the boat deck overhang.

--Karl

If you look at the drawings they've miss-labelled the parts.

'Fore Deck' and 'Rear Deck' should be swapped around !

TTFN
Tom

Just as long as you don't try to mount them that way

*Cough*

Images copied from http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10094293 and watermark covered, or cropped out. You really don't understand or care about copyright, do you?

Tracy,
You are kidding right? Your link above is to images taken by a kit retailer of a manufacturers kit, box top, sprue photos etc. You actually think that there is a copyright violation to use/modify these photos? I don't think you understand the "Fair Use" clause of U.S./International Copyright law. Use of these images is to PROMOTE THE PRODUCT. I would dare this Japanese retailer to prosecute our site for copyright violation in using their photos to help promote Trumpeters new release. They would get a cease and desist letter from Trumpteter so fast it would make their heads spin.

I am quite frankly tired of these comments from you about your 'perceived' violations of copyright law. You are not an affected party and until an actual copyright holder approaches us about a misuse of their photos I am not interested in hearing from anyone else.

Good day,
Jim

PS: I am going to restore the photos.

So, has anyone actually purchased the Trumpeter version yet?

If so, what are the pitfalls?

It seems, from reading webwide sources, that neither kit is without it's faults.

Therefore, my question must be, which kit has the fewer inaccuracies? Or should I forgo the dubious pleasures of both, and hang on to my funds for when Dragn's 1/350 Scharnhorst eventually arrives?

Go Mr. Starkweather!!
If I can have simply one complaint, and I don't complain (much), is that people get on the internet and under it's anonymity, make statements meant to ire and cause trouble.
I would hope that we could all realize that we are "brothers and sisters" doing a hobby that not many folks have the patience nor desire to even attempt. We are artists. We make art for others to enjoy, and there isn't a one of us that doesn't achieve a sense of pride when we see an unitiated person marvel at our work.
I ask you, Mr. White...please quit trying to cause problems.

AMEN!! And what's REALLY bad is that I want the Admiral Hipper, Prinz Eugen, Hasegawa Akagi (1/350th) and all the PE that I can find for all the kits.
I may have to take up heisting banks.

Trumpeter version now available from Freetime for $76.95,since I won't be starting either one any time soon,I will wait to hear a little more about the Trumpeter version before I buy one or the other.

I went out and bought the Prinz Eugen today. So far, I have only given it a cursory inspection, yet two minor complaints arise. Realize too, someone else may not find these items as being a big deal...simply my own opinion here folks.
The wood deck looks a lot better than the raised lines I'm used to seeing. However, if one looks at the "ends" of the planking, they are curved inwards. In reality, this would not occur except for on an extremely old and unmaintained deck. I assume this is the result of the manufacturing process, pressing(?) into the plastic, curving the plastic in.
Also, regarding the treadplate walking deck surface. Again, I applaud the attempt to recreate something not found on any ship kit I've ever built before. However, this detail is horribly out of scale. Put a 1/350 scale sailors foot next to the design...you'll see what I mean.
At first glance, this kit is OUTSTANDING, with the exception of my minor pickiness. I do believe I will set this baby aside for a couple of months, and wait to see what aftermarket stuff comes up. Just look how fast PE and resin aftermarket stuff came up right after the 1/35th S-boot came out!! (Hint hint: A wood deck, as well as PE rails, hose reels, gun details, doors and portholes would be GREAT).

I'm going to reply to you glue, simply because you're new and don't know what you're talking about.

I am not trying to cause trouble. I have less anonymity than you because hey, guess what, I used my real name whereas you saw fit to post behind a handle.

I was one of the original moderators on ModelShipWright. I thought Jim was a man of honor and would like to know how the people he had entrusted with this site were behaving.

I harp on copyright because I was once threatened with a lawsuit myself. I endeavored to learn about it to protect myself, but I also try and TEACH OTHERS so that they do not get sued. I don't agree with most of our copyright laws, but that doesn't mean that I ignore or flaunt them.

I had a gentleman a couple of days ago message me (elsewhere), assuming that anything that was posted to a web forum lost its copyright, in fact, here's the exact passage:




Do you see the danger of not knowing?

Let's take it to another level, where my real gripe with a moderator here lies. Respect. taking someone else's work and re-posting it indicates a lack of respect. By copying pictures and text from other sites verbatim and not citing that as such, you demonstrate that you don't think the guy or gal who originally wrote it is worthy of your respect. And then to lay some claim upon it and make notions of publication..... the term is "hack." If you're going to spend the time, why not try and create something completely new that no one's read before?

Instead of copying the pictures and badly trying to hide the (admittedly minor) copyright infringement, the respectful thing to do would have been to say, "hey, Look, I found these on XX site." and link to them. Everyone here would still get to see the pictures, and the company that took the time to shoot the pictures might actually sell a kit or two more, which ultimately is a win-win for all of us.

Previous efforts to help here were ignored and refused, so I'm done; Jim wants to hang himself out like that, it's his prerogative. If you want to "rah rah" for him be my guest, but be aware of what you are truly rooting for.

I'm not a model ship afficiondo (armor being my main interest), but the Graf Spee has been one of my favorite warships of all time, having built it several times in both 1/750 and 1/1200 scales. I bought the Academy one when it was released and thought it looked pretty good, then a few days ago I saw the Trumpeter version on the shelf. Being a sucker for new models I bought this one up as well. I compared the two kits and the Trumpeter one is by far the better one. Trumpeter has a water-line with lower hull option as opposed to
Academy's single full hull kit. All the parts appear more accurate and have finer detail, doors and hatches are crisper, especially the smaller parts (hose reels, etc.) have detail not present on the corresponding Academy parts and there is less moulded on detail. The armored covers over the toperdo tubes on Trumpeter have detail which is completely absent on the Academy one. Several Academy parts appear crude compared to Trumpeter. Trumpeter includes one of their clear plastic Arado planes which is also superior to the one in Academy. In addition Trumpeter also includes two frets of P/E railing which are more in scale than the plastic ones with Academy. Granted, there is a $20+ price difference between the two kits, Trumpeter being the more expensive, but some people (myself included) will find it well worth it in the long run. Anyone want to buy an unstarted Academy Graf Spee??

As I have stated in an earlier post I have completed the build of the Academy Graf Spee.
I expect details of the build to be shown on this website soon

The Academy model is quite good and presents a nice model when completed but it does have some short comings.
The problems I encounted with the build was the uncertain fit of thedeck to the hull requirering some adjustment. The hull could do with a cross beam amidship to take the bounce out of the middle section.
The rails are out of scale and do tend to spoil the overall result whereas photo etch would be preferable at this scale.
Trumpeter has this feature which must be a plus.
These factors if realised early in the build will still make a nice model. When after market
fittings become available it will make a difference.
Regards Les

And this fellow, I am sure from your response, is still in the dark. Did this person want to use the photos in a book? Because he DOES HAVE THE RIGHT to copy them and use them for his own interests or as resource photos. Heck he even has the right to put the photo in a forum as a discussion topic. As long as he does not profit by them or cause damage to the copyright holder. It's called FAIR USE. You should look it up sometime.




And what competing site are you a staff member now Tracy? This whole post smacks to be of 'news' envy. MSW has content the site you now work on doesn't. Boo hoo.

I thought you were a man of honor as well. But regardless I am hereby informing all staff members or moderators to remove any further 'so-called' copyright infringement posts that you leave in this forum. If you want to complain, do it on your site.

Jim

Just to throw more gas on the fire;

Tracy I think if you recheck you will find that Lincoln's name is posted on his commentary. It is Lincoln Stafford written in bold black letters above his callsign "superglued fingers" as is my name Steve Joyce written above my call sign Blaster

I was just looking at pics of the recovered Graf Spee's stern eagle made of bronze. Was this eagle painted over during wartime? In one BW pic reportedly in Montevideo harbor, the swastika appears to be much lighter than both the bronze eagle and the hull..does this indicate that the swastika was painted white and that the rest of the eagle was left unpainted bronze? I realize that overpainting the bronze eagle for camo purposes is probably questionable and unnessessary.

I am not sure about your specific example, but I read somewhere (cant find it now) that in many early post WW2 pics re-prints the swastica was "bleached" out in the negative, giving off a different shade on the print. I cant remember the source, was in the context of the Bismarck...




As for copyright stuff... I am a college professor and have been 'schooled" in the Fair Use copyright issues (Section 107). We all have our "cheat sheet" in our offices... here is couple salient items that relate to this posting:

Examples of activities that courts have regarded as fair use:

1- quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment;

2- quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author’s observations;

3 - reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson;

Seems to me, in my humble opinion, that the posting of the illustration falls in all three categories. Moreover, no one has profited from this posting. I would have posted the link in addition to the illustration; or place a textbook within the illustration with the source as reference. One key to Fair use is to post LIMITED amounts of the material, and do not make a derivative work.

Lets get back to modelling!