View Single Post
  #6  
Old 09-05-2018, 05:23 PM
tdracer's Avatar
tdracer tdracer is offline
Scale Modeler Extrodinare
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 5x7
Were the glossy pics in your scale packet?

No, I didn't include any 'glossy' photos.
Although I'm a long time builder, and have built some beautiful scale models (I have a number of scale models on display in the Seattle Museum of Flight), I'm something of a novice at NAR scale competitions. Aside from the recent NARAM 60, the only other NAR scale competition I've entered was NARAM 52, also in Pueblo (that's not a coincidence, it's my old home town...).

There are really two issues here - one is my frustration that I didn't do better in scale. My Saturn 1B was beautiful - I was in second place coming out of the static judging - and I was eligible for enough 'mission' points that if I'd had a clean flight I would have held on to second. But the first flight was anything but 'clean' - the upper section parachute didn't open (I still don't really understand why) and while I was able to make a second flight that qualified, the damage point deductions dropped me to fourth - 'out of the money'. Hugely disappointing...

The second thing is that I take a lot of pride in my scale models - especially the manned spacecraft from the 1960s - and I want them to be accurate. Years ago I had a similar discussion regarding matte/flat vs. gloss. I noted that I'd seen actual Mercury and Apollo spacecraft - and they were not gloss - but it was pointed out that these were post re-entry and hence not representative of how they looked pre-launch - which the photos that we could find looked glossy. That's when I decided to go 'gloss' on most of my finishes.
You can't tell anything from the rockets currently on display - most have been in the weather, and all have been repainted (I saw the Saturn V in Houston about 35 years ago - pre restoration when it was still sitting outside - it was in horrible shape, with many layers of flaking point over obvously corroded metal). I'm on vacation in New York City at the moment - we went to the Intrepid museum today and they have Mercury and Gemini capsules on display - definitely gloss - but also definitely not original spacecraft.

Hence my questions - what really is correct? Earl, you seem pretty definitive in your response - do you have first hand knowledge? Not trying to be combative here - I honestly want to know. Period photos that really show an accurate finish seem to be few and far between.
Reply With Quote