Scalemates, scale modeling database | stash manager
login | faq | facts | about us | privacy |
scale modeling database | stash manager
scalemates
Switch to DCM
scalemates (scalemates)
BE
Offline

 

Wall

scalemates just joined this community.
23. September, 18:31
23. September, 19:18
23. September, 22:25

September 18, 2020

Михаил Foxy Thank you, reported type: N

Thx for reporting an issue with naming, please add more info in the comments field below.

18. September, 04:47

September 15, 2020

Viktor Jutasi@scalemates
I am trying to upload the instructions for a kit, and the file appears to be too big, even though it is less than the 35mb Max limitation. I tried uploading at 34.7mb size and it stops after 75%, so then I compressed it to 33.2mb, and that stops after 80%. Could you please let me know if the size limitation has been changed? And if so, what is the Maximum File size for instructions. Thank you, Viktor
17. August, 20:04
scalemates
should be 35Mb.... after how much time (seconds) do you get the error? is it for example exactly 1min, 2mins?

there might be another timeout, please let me know
17. August, 20:10
Viktor Jutasi
It stops after 1 minute, then 30 secs later I get booted off saying there is a problem with the connection. Is the prob at my end??
V
17. August, 22:08
scalemates
I think there is a timeout somewhere of 60s. Let me dig up where it is, likely on our side
17. August, 22:08
Viktor Jutasi
Have you had a chance to look at the timeout issue? I am still trying to upload and keep getting timed out.
19. August, 17:06
Anthony Hazelaar
I have a similar problem here when uploading instructions. Even a small file, 672kB, doesn't come through. I however don't get any errors concerning the connection.
19. August, 17:40
Viktor Jutasi
My upload speed is over 40 Mbps, but the rate at which the data is received seems to be limited, so it is taking much longer to transfer, and reaching the 1 minute limitation before completion.
19. August, 17:48
Sean Sheppard
I also have this issue - I can't seem to upload any instructions
15. September, 17:27
Viktor Jutasi
I have notified SM and they have a service ticket in with their service provider to correct this. It has been a few weeks now, so hopefully it will be corrected shortly. Apparently there is a 60 second time-out, so if your upload time is longer than that, it shuts the download down.
15. September, 20:36
Sean Sheppard@scalemates
Hi, I am not sure if it an issue with my setting or one in general, but when I access the website on my MacBook through Safari it seems to go on the mobile version and seem very clunky, but when I do it through Chrome it is the normal desktop version - are you aware of any issues? Thanks, Sean
14. September, 17:20
Mike Bird
It seems fine for me on Safari (13.1.2) for MacBook (Catalina), for what it's worth!
14. September, 17:40
Sean Sheppard
Strange, I have the same version version of Safari and also Catalina. I have purposely changed any setting
15. September, 05:36
Sean Sheppard
So I figure it out... somehow my setting for this specific website were set to zoom in :)
15. September, 06:25

September 14, 2020

Sean Sheppard@scalemates
Hi, I am not sure if it an issue with my setting or one in general, but when I access the website on my MacBook through Safari it seems to go on the mobile version and seem very clunky, but when I do it through Chrome it is the normal desktop version - are you aware of any issues? Thanks, Sean
14. September, 17:08

September 13, 2020

scalemates Added a new review for:
YouTube
Previewed on channel
Unknown channel
13. September, 13:52
Soeren .@scalemates
Hi Tim,

I currently get the message "Upload failed" for all my photos.
Any clue what this can be?
I already decrease the size of the photos, but that didnt help
13. September, 12:37
scalemates
checking now
13. September, 12:38
scalemates
should be fine again
13. September, 12:43
Soeren .
Great work as always ;) Thanks a lot Tim! ;)
13. September, 12:45

September 7, 2020

scalemates just joined this community.
7. September, 14:43
7. September, 16:33
7. September, 22:10

September 6, 2020

bobfan4715@scalemates
will there be a large scale TBF Avenger plastic model kit produced?
6. September, 11:09
Augie
Maybe, if enough demand. Airfix did the hellcat recently on 1:24 so never say never
6. September, 11:17
bobfan4715
I built the 1/24 hellcat. Another just arrived. Did the 1/18 Dauntless. Amazing. I would love more
6. September, 22:31
bobfan4715@scalemates
will there be a large scale TBF Avenger plastic model kit produced?
6. September, 11:12
bobfan4715@scalemates
By large i mean 1:16,1:18,1:24
6. September, 11:10

September 5, 2020

Sergey Kalinov Thank you, reported type: R

Thx for reporting an issue with a review, please add more info in the comments field below.

 
In-box review
b282.blogspot.com
5. September, 20:57
Sergey Kalinov
Опубликовал в своем блоге обзор модели буксира Revell Harbour Tug Boat.
5. September, 20:59
Sergey Kalinov Thank you, reported type: R

Thx for reporting an issue with a review, please add more info in the comments field below.

 
In-box review
b282.blogspot.com
5. September, 20:56
Sergey Kalinov Thank you, reported type: R

Thx for reporting an issue with a review, please add more info in the comments field below.

 
In-box review
b282.blogspot.com
5. September, 20:27
Sergey Kalinov
I have decided to write my review of Revell Harbour Tug Boat (in Russian).
5. September, 20:28
Sergey Kalinov Thank you, reported type: R

Thx for reporting an issue with a review, please add more info in the comments field below.

Scale Modelling News
In-box review
Scale Modelling News
5. September, 18:51
Sergey Kalinov Thank you, reported type: R

Thx for reporting an issue with a review, please add more info in the comments field below.

Scale Modelling News
In-box review
Scale Modelling News
5. September, 18:49
Sergey Kalinov Thank you, reported type: R

Thx for reporting an issue with a review, please add more info in the comments field below.

Scale Modelling News
In-box review
Scale Modelling News
5. September, 18:47
Sergey Kalinov Thank you, reported type: R

Thx for reporting an issue with a review, please add more info in the comments field below.

Scale Modelling News
In-box review
Scale Modelling News
5. September, 11:08
SilverBeard Thank you, reported type: E

Thx for reporting an error with this entry, please add more info in the comments field below.

5. September, 06:18

September 4, 2020

scalemates just joined this community.
4. September, 05:00
4. September, 07:36
Erik Francisco Zimmermann
Hello, Hallo, Hola
4. September, 12:19
Sebastian Meyner@scalemates
Good morning! I recently ran into a problem concerning book reviews. The problem is I cannot add any book review, neither on a PC nor on my mobile device. Not sure what happened?!
4. September, 05:22

September 3, 2020

scalemates added this book to his wishlist
3. September, 07:04

August 30, 2020

TWong

Thx for reporting this "DOUBLE". Please add the link of the other "double" in the field below.

Merged to:
30. August, 12:49

August 25, 2020

scalemates wants this item
25. August, 18:27
scalemates wants this item
25. August, 18:27
scalemates wants this item
25. August, 18:27
scalemates added this book to his wishlist
25. August, 15:33

August 21, 2020

Vince Jackson@scalemates
I am more than a little frustrated. I just spent a fair amount of time updating markings only to find my work was undone. Now reading the subject box, I see that the subject for ships and sci-fi is the ship name. Doing so gives a markings list like this:
Starship Constitution-class
U.S.S Endeavor
Starfleet
• NCC-1895
U.S.S. Constellation
Starfleet
• NCC-1017
U.S.S. Constitution
Starfleet
• NCC-1700
U.S.S. Defiant
Starfleet
• NCC-1764
U.S.S. Essex
Starfleet
• NCC-1697
U.S.S. Exeter
Starfleet
• NCC-1672
U.S.S. Hood
Starfleet
• NCC-1703
U.S.S. Intrepid
Starfleet
• NCC-1831
U.S.S. Lexington
Starfleet
• NCC-1709
U.S.S. Potemkin
Starfleet
• NCC-1657
U.S.S. Republic
Starfleet
• NCC-1371
U.S.S. Yorktown
Starfleet
• NCC-1717

The way I had been doing it was putting the ship class in the subject and the ship name in the unit. (Coming from a military background I associate a ship as a unit). Doing it the way I have the markings lists like this:
Starship Constitution-class
Starfleet
• U.S.S. Constellation NCC-1017
• U.S.S. Constitution NCC-1700
• U.S.S. Defiant NCC-1764
• U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701 | 2265
• U.S.S. Excalibur NCC-1664
• U.S.S. Exeter NCC-1672
• U.S.S. Farragut NCC-1647
• U.S.S. Hood NCC-1703
• U.S.S. Intrepid NCC-1631
• U.S.S. Lexington NCC-1709
• U.S.S. Potemkin NCC-1657
• U.S.S. Republic NCC-1371
• U.S.S. Yorktown NCC-1717

To me, the latter is a much more cleaner and efficient listing of the ships in the class. Am I wrong? Is there a reason the previous way is preferred? Please let me know. I don't want to waste my or anyone else's time going back and forth correcting each other's work.
17. August, 02:29
View full thread (17 Comments)
 
Vince Jackson
yes. Flt II or Flight 2 is a subclass and design change in the Arleigh Burkes. Flight 2 have different control and the ability to launch updated weapons. Flt. IIA or flight 2A have the addition of two helicopter bays that the earlier Burkes didn't have. Soon the newest DDG-51 class will have Flight 3 ships beginning with DDG-125.
17. August, 15:11
Vince Jackson
From what I can tell by looking at the entry procedure, you are making the subject a primary database entry and an important sorting tool. I understand the need for this. The problem may be in my own ignorance in that I am monolinguistic. I was taught that topic and subject are the same thing. Taking a deeper look into your organization I realized you are using topic as an organizational tool of the subject and the subject as what's actually in the kit. If that is true then you really don't need to list the subject information in the markings section since it is covered by the title of the page.
In the example, the way you are suggesting to enter, you put the ship and the hull number in the subject and re-enter the hull number in the number field. This will create a redundant listing of the hull number. And as show in the example, Starfleet is repeated for each ship listed even though they all fall under the authority of Starfleet.
This problem (I believe) is the different definitions of the subject between land, sea and air. Land subjects (tanks, artillery, vehicles, etc.) and aircraft are sold by the kit manufacturers by model (F-15, B-17, M1A1, M4A3E8, etc.) while ships are sold by name primarily with options of other ships of the class. Very rarely is this not the case and is usually done with subjects of historical significance. The examples of the B-17 Memphis Belle and B-29 Enola Gay come to mind.
So as I see it, the problem lays out like this (with examples):
Land Air Sea
Topic Tank: (M1A1) Fighter (F-15) Carrier (Nimitz-class)
Subject: What the kit is
Country: For illustrative purposes I will use United States
Organization: USA/ USMC USAF/ USN/ USMC US Navy
Unit*: Co./ Bn./ Regt./ Div. Squadron/ Wing/ Group/ Air Force ??
Number: Serial No. Serial No. (USAF)/ Bureau No. (USN) Hull No. (CVN-68)

*This is where it gets wonky. Technically you can list carrier battle groups, destroyer squadron or even fleets as naval units. But I have yet to meet someone who builds a model based specifically on DESRON 23 (Little Beavers) or any other unit of that type. I'm not saying they aren't out there. But those people have researched their subject deeper than what is needed here and for the most part those units are not identifiable on the model. That is why I suggest using the ship name in the unit field because organizationally it equals an Army company or an Air Force squadron.
So for display purposes only for markings, may I suggest that the subject be used for internal purposes only. Put on the unit box a note for ships to list the ship name. I know it will require more work in the data entry process, but I am willing to do so for a more streamlined result. And I am sure my fellow modelers will feel the same way. This will only apply to ships as they are the only outlier in the organizational process.
17. August, 16:21
Vince Jackson
I tried to create a table for the example and it got overwritten by the format. Sorry for the confusion.
17. August, 16:23
scalemates
Suppose we follow the 'keep subject' empty rule...

Wouldn't the "name" field be more appropriate for the Name of the ship than hijacking the "Unit" field for the name, and keeping that one empty (or be able to fill it in in the rare case of a kit specifying DESRON 23 (Little Beavers) )

for me seeing "USS Enterprise" as the unit and in the unit filters feels odd (that might be a pure personal feeling)
Also, wouldn't the identifier of the unit need to include the Hull?
Unit: "USS Arleigh Burke (DDG-51)" vs "USS Arleigh Burke"


17. August, 18:20
Vince Jackson
When assigning ships to naval units they are done by ship. A carrier battle group consists of a carrier (CVN), a cruiser (CG), then a number of destroyers for a particular destroyer squadron usually aligned with the particular battle group (DESRON) and a carrier air wing (CVW) made up of 4 squadrons (VFA) and smaller detachments of support aircraft. These are usually done to fit the desired mission using units available. This changes frequently due to training/ maintenance requirements. In the rare case of a naval squadron being assigned to a kit, it can be expanded much the same as a bomber squadron ie: 9 BS 28 BW. Putting it in the nickname field will work but it will appear as a black bar. And ships have nicknames as well, ie USS Enterprise (CV-6) is the Grey Ghost and USS Lexington (CV-16) is known as the Blue Ghost. The number field seems appropriate for the hull number.
17. August, 18:43
Günther Debiscop
Just have a look here as an example for the US Navy ORBAT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wik..ts_of_the_United_States_Navy
20. August, 07:40
Vince Jackson
These are not set in stone. CSG-3 was just assigned to CVN-72 after her RICOH. Last year it was assigned to CVN-74 before Stennis went in for her RICOH. In 2013 VFA-151 was part of CVW-2 and was reassigned to CVW-9. Naval unit assignments are fluid unlike land (USA/ USMC) and air units (USAF). You will also note that there are 5 destroyers listed in DESRON 23 under CSG-9. But there are 6 DDGs in the squadron. One is always not deployable due to training/ maintenance needs. What is listed in Wikipedia today may not be accurate tomorrow.
20. August, 18:18
Günther Debiscop
That's why I wrote "example". Also Air Force, Army and Marine units are sometimes re-assigned...
Unfortunatly there is 'as far as I know, not yet a complete list of when an unit was part of which orbat...
I got one for several USAF units, but also not for all of them and only until 2000/2010...
21. August, 06:21

August 17, 2020

Viktor Jutasi@scalemates
I am trying to upload the instructions for a kit, and the file appears to be too big, even though it is less than the 35mb Max limitation. I tried uploading at 34.7mb size and it stops after 75%, so then I compressed it to 33.2mb, and that stops after 80%. Could you please let me know if the size limitation has been changed? And if so, what is the Maximum File size for instructions. Thank you, Viktor
17. August, 20:06
Łukasz Gliński@scalemates
Can't add the *.jpg boxart to "Opty" Jacht (Waku , 1:50)

1:50 "Opty" Jacht (Waku )
 
17. August, 12:58
scalemates
We have plenty of diskspace left... others see issues as well?
17. August, 13:07

August 15, 2020

M G@scalemates
@scalemates Hello! I believe you are missing an entry...for a 1/12 motorcycle kit by Gunze Sangyo. Currently you list only this kit:

BSA DBD34 Gold Star (Gunze Sangyo G-620, 1:12)

1:12 BSA DBD34 Gold Star (Gunze Sangyo G-620)
 


as the lone BSA DBD34 kit from Gunze. There were two versions of the BSA kit...the kit you list as G-617 in the link is mis-numbered...it should be part number G-620. The real part number G-617 had a yellow "Clubman" label on the front, and some small differences including the gas tank. I can't attach photos here, but I have both kits and can send photos if you would like...thank you.
15. August, 21:52
scalemates
Hi MG! thank you, it is always great when missing items are reported

You can add missing items here SCM Contributor Page
15. August, 21:54
M G
Hi, I just went to the original listing and modified the part number....I think it said it needs to be reviewed.
15. August, 21:58
scalemates
Ok! Thank you
15. August, 22:08
Mr Britmodeller@scalemates
Hi, I cnt seem to link product J6047 to the rest of the product line from Airfox
15. August, 12:58
scalemates
The scales don't match! Yours is 1:24... the others are not
15. August, 13:06

August 13, 2020

Nathan Dempsey@scalemates
Howdy Tim. It appears that much of the website appears to me in German language with some areas still in English. I don't recall changing any settings on my end. Although I can muddle through I'm not going to claim to be smart enough to be able to navigate everywhere.

I did survive a week in Berlin but admittedly that was thanks mostly to very kind and understanding Berliners :)
13. August, 20:24
scalemates
clicking this link should put it back in English?
SCM News Feed (BETA)
13. August, 20:26
Nathan Dempsey
Yay! It worked.
13. August, 20:53
scalemates marked magazine book as tradeable/sellable.
13. August, 06:00

August 12, 2020

Mike Bird@scalemates
Hello, it looks like the CSS is broken on the product timeline for this model: Supermarine Spitfire Mk.IXc/XVI (Revell 04554, 1:48)

I'm on macOS 10.15 and in both Safari and Chrome I see two lines going from the selected model to the original new tool, and the new tool is escaping from the top of the table.


1:48 Supermarine Spitfire Mk.IXc/XVI (Revell 04554)
 
1 | 11. August, 22:11
scalemates
same here! thx will look into it. (ps: it is not CSS but a generated SVG, not that it matters :) )
11. August, 22:13
Mike Bird
Ha, thanks for taking a look! I'll be sure to right-click and "Inspect Element" next time!
11. August, 22:15
scalemates
this is fixed! it was a data issue (a new tool linked to another new tool) causing the problem.
12. August, 07:30
Mike Bird
Great work, thanks!
12. August, 12:21
Eddie Poole

Thx for updating product: This message will be hidden when your update is verified

12. August, 01:57

August 11, 2020

Mike Bird@scalemates
Hello, it looks like the CSS is broken on the product timeline for this model: Supermarine Spitfire Mk.IXc/XVI (Revell 04554, 1:48)

I'm on macOS 10.15 and in both Safari and Chrome I see two lines going from the selected model to the original new tool, and the new tool is escaping from the top of the table.


1:48 Supermarine Spitfire Mk.IXc/XVI (Revell 04554)
 
1 | 11. August, 22:14

wnolder.php?lang=en

2020-08-11 22:14:32

2011-01-07 16:38:05

10000

todo

 

We use cookies to give you a great and free experience on our website. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

You can change your Cookie settings at any time. (Essential cookies are for: preferences, security, performance analytics and contextual advertising)

Privacy policy »     Continue