 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Models / June 2008Definition of OOB
What is the accepted definition of "Out Of the Box"? Take this totally hypothetical situation A kit has five different marking options. It is possible to combine the aircraft specific markings from Option A with the national insignia and a combination of kill markings intended for all the other options and a pilot's name decals from Option D to represent the aircraft shown in Option A at a later stage in its career. Given that only decals provided with the kit have been used to provide a marking scheme not specifically provided in the kit, would you consider that to be an OOB model? Oh... and about that hypothetical situation. By pure coincidence, it is not beyond the realms of possibilty that it could apply to the Eduard 1/48 F6F-3...  SignatureEnzo I wear the cheese. It does not wear me. By IMPS USA rules, you can use whatever decals you want, aftermarket, kit, and any combination and it's still OOTB. Dave > What is the accepted definition of "Out Of the Box"? > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > not beyond the realms of possibilty that it could apply to the Eduard 1/48 > F6F-3... : What is the accepted definition of "Out Of the Box"? If you want to know the IPMS/USA definition, I suggest: http://www.ipmsusa2008.org/ Click "Contest Info" -> Rules Bruce Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I like bad!" Bruce Burden Austin, TX. - Thuganlitha The Power and the Prophet Robert Don Hughes > : What is the accepted definition of "Out Of the Box"? > : [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > The Power and the Prophet > Robert Don Hughes Seems to me the "rigging" question was left a little fuzzy. To me, if the instructions show to add rigging, then even though the rigging thread is not included, it is okay. However, further clarification of the rules would be nice. The question might be, "can I show ADDITIONAL rigging, even if that rigging is not shown on instructions" There are a number of kits out there that depict rigging for biplanes, but do not include the rigging thread. But the rigging shown is not always complete. What do you folks think? Is adding rigging not shown on instructions okay? : Seems to me the "rigging" question was left a little fuzzy. To me, if : the instructions show to add rigging, then even though the rigging : thread is not included, it is okay. However, further clarification of : the rules would be nice. The question might be, "can I show : ADDITIONAL rigging, even if that rigging is not shown on instructions" It would appear, given the IPMS/USA 2008 national contest rules, that, yes, you can add rigging. (Section III.1.B) However, PE turnbuckles are still right out! :-) It will be interesting to see how these rules play out, but as I am not an aircraft judge, I don't expect to have much of an opportunity to deal with them. Previously, OOB rules were about 2/3 of the entire IPMS/USA national contest rules, and of those rules, 90% of them pertained to aircraft. I hated them. Bruce Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I like bad!" Bruce Burden Austin, TX. - Thuganlitha The Power and the Prophet Robert Don Hughes Don Stauffer in Minnesota <stauffer@usfamily.net> wrote in news:f9ea66e9- 7294-408a-aaf5-52fa47e847ca@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com: >> : What is the accepted definition of "Out Of the Box"? >> : [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > always complete. What do you folks think? Is adding rigging not shown > on instructions okay? Which opens up the question of the AccMin Avenger - the instructions suggest that advanced modellers may want to cut out and drop the flaps; they even supply a template for the piece needed to fill the resulting hole in the wing, AND the flaps have rib detail moulded on the inside. What does that do the OOB rule? RobG (the Aussie one) > Don Stauffer in Minnesota <stauffer@usfamily.net> wrote in news:f9ea66e9- > 7294-408a-aaf5-52fa47e847ca@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > RobG > (the Aussie one) OOB. It's in the instructions and if a template is inluded and ribbing detail is molded in then it's included. Frank : Which opens up the question of the AccMin Avenger - the instructions : suggest that advanced modellers may want to cut out and drop the flaps; : they even supply a template for the piece needed to fill the resulting hole : in the wing, AND the flaps have rib detail moulded on the inside. What does : that do the OOB rule? This one would seem to be an OOB disqualification for the 2008 IPMS/USA national contest, because the rules say: "no major surgery", AND list seperating a canopy as an examply of "major surgery". Under the rules I am more familiar with, if it was mentioned in the instructions, it was NOT an OOB disqualification, so stretched sprue rigging and antennas were perfectly permissible. Mow, the Mead A/C judge may not feel compelled to follow the rules posted on the IPMS/USA 2008 national website, but I do not know the man personally, so my thoughts are worth exactly what you payed for them. :-) If you want to rules lawyer things, I once built the Alan BA-20 A/C. Horrid kit - there is a gap at the rear of the body where it (does not) meet the floor pan of several mm's. In theory, this could have been an OOB disqualification, as I used plastic strip (not from the kit!) to fill the gap, but I did not let it worry me. Filling seams is a part of the basic requirement of model building, after all. :-) In retrospect, I suppose I could have used sprue from the kit to fill the gap, but in the end, who would ever know? Bruce Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I like bad!" Bruce Burden Austin, TX. - Thuganlitha The Power and the Prophet Robert Don Hughes > What is the accepted definition of "Out Of the Box"? > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > is not beyond the realms of possibilty that it could apply to the > Eduard 1/48 F6F-3... Works for me - I'd allow it as OOB in our local show. But the anally- retentive (the 'professional' pot-hunters) may not. IMO, if it's in the box, and it's put on to the model, it's OOB. RobG (the Aussie one) >Works for me - I'd allow it as OOB in our local show. But the anally- >retentive (the 'professional' pot-hunters) may not. IMO, if it's in the >box, and it's put on to the model, it's OOB. ...Here's another hypothetical OOB situation that I've seen happen: Two versions of the same kit, same manufacturer, same box, but one has parts that didn't get injected right and/or cooled improperly and warped to a point where the usual double-boiler tricks won't help. I've seen judges almost get into fist fights with one another over whether taking good parts from an identical kit to replace those in another violates OOB - the argument against claimed that part of the skill of making an OOB kit work is to fix such problems without having to resort to *any* parts not originally included with the kit. ...Another HOOB scenario: two kits, same molds, possibly same box art. However, the decals for one kit are updated and more accurate than the other and/or are simply better quality decals. At the same time, the clear parts in the later pressing are actually clearer than the earlier pressing, and the change in plastic formula allowed for the rivet details to be sharper. Does exchanging parts like this also violated the OOB rules? OM Signature]=====================================[ ] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [ ] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [ ] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [ ]=====================================[ : Two versions of the same kit, same manufacturer, same box, but one has : parts that didn't get injected right and/or cooled improperly and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] : skill of making an OOB kit work is to fix such problems without having : to resort to *any* parts not originally included with the kit. "Common sense - the most uncommon of the senses." - unknown Bruce Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I like bad!" Bruce Burden Austin, TX. - Thuganlitha The Power and the Prophet Robert Don Hughes >: Two versions of the same kit, same manufacturer, same box, but one has >: parts that didn't get injected right and/or cooled improperly and [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Bruce that's a stupid argument. makers had ways to replace bad/missing parts, so why not use a spare set if you can't get replacements from the maker? didn't those clowns ever get missing stuff? who never lied to get a replaced part we f.cked up? > In article <g2sn5r11bp@enews2.newsguy.com>, brucegb@realtime.net (Bruce > Burden) wrote: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > didn't those clowns ever get missing stuff? who never lied to get a > replaced part we f.cked up? Why couldn't you just say, whatever is listed in the instructions? If the instructions call thread for rigging which you have to supply it's still part of the kit, is it not? Scratchbuilding a cockpit might be a bit much, or even boxing in wheel wells. Why is this so complicated? Frank >> In article <g2sn5r11bp@enews2.newsguy.com>, brucegb@realtime.net (Bruce >> Burden) wrote: [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Frank As an afterthought if you do a Hase jet and you have to add ordnance from the Hase ordnance sets but the instruvtions clearly say that you have to add specific items from thie ordnance kits... It would seem any Hase kit that comes sans ordnance would be automatically out as anything but a stripped aircraft, and what is the interest in a disarmed warbird? Frank : It would seem any Hase kit that comes sans ordnance would be automatically out : as anything but a stripped aircraft, and what is the interest in a disarmed : warbird? I think you are reaching. A/C returning from a mission are not going to be loaded with ordnance. Neither is an A/C that is wearing a commemorative paint scheme, or one that is selected to make a public appearance. That modellers feel compelled to load A/C down with ordnance at every possible hard point is the same symptom that drives modellers to put flat tires on their A/C. Bruce Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I like bad!" Bruce Burden Austin, TX. - Thuganlitha The Power and the Prophet Robert Don Hughes >: It would seem any Hase kit that comes sans ordnance would be >: automatically out as anything but a stripped aircraft, and what is the [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Bruce Well some people do overdo it. But still a bombed up aircraft is not atypical. Frank : that's a stupid argument. makers had ways to replace bad/missing parts, so why : not use a spare set if you can't get replacements from the maker? More to the point, who cares? Different kit, same part. : didn't those clowns ever get missing stuff? who never lied to get a replaced : part we f.cked up? Before Monogram merged with Revell, I had a gust of wind flip my instructions, which dumped the bottle of Pro-Weld, which promptly found my Monogram PBY pilots seat. And reduced it to a formless blob. Called Monogram to get a replacement, told them what happened, had the parts sent out the next day free of charge. Monogram always did have good CS! Bruce Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I like bad!" Bruce Burden Austin, TX. - Thuganlitha The Power and the Prophet Robert Don Hughes >: that's a stupid argument. makers had ways to replace bad/missing parts, so > why [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Bruce yeah, i played the honestry scam a few times. > What is the accepted definition of "Out Of the Box"? > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > I wear the cheese. It does not wear me. === OOB or out of the box. This could mean one of two things. You build the kit with only, repeat ONLY the parts that come in the box. Or you build the kit out of the box, like atop your workbench, or you build a kit out of the box - card stock. Sorry, this concept has been messing with my two remaining brain cells for some time now. Ray === on 6/12/2008 4:02 PM Ray S. & Nayda Katzaman said the following: > >> What is the accepted definition of "Out Of the Box"? [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > Ray== OOB means to me, only those items that were in the box were used. No PE or resin aftermarket items, and no scratchbuilt items Of course, paint and glue aren't in the box to begin with. SignatureBill In Hamptonburgh, NY To email, remove the double zeroes after @ > What is the accepted definition of "Out Of the Box"? > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > I wear the cheese. It does not wear me. I am getting upset about the tone of this thread. It seems like several members are very intolerant of others views. If others have opposing views, they call the views stupid, or some other such derogative term. Let's be more tolerant, guys! Not being able to use good parts from an identical kit to replace defective or missing parts is about as stupid as it gets. However, several years ago, there was a guy who had a 1/48 Consolidated B-32 Dominator at an IPMS thing. It was listed as being a 'conversion', tho it used, IIRC, 1/48 B-24 & B-29 parts along with 1/72 B-36 parts & Lord knows what else. Not that it matters much, but IMO, that's hardly a 'conversion', it's either scratchbuilt or kitbashed, but it ain't a conversion. > What is the accepted definition of "Out Of the Box"? > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > I wear the cheese. It does not wear me. : Not being able to use good parts from an identical kit to : replace defective or missing parts is about as stupid as it gets. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] : IMO, that's hardly a 'conversion', it's either scratchbuilt or : kitbashed, but it ain't a conversion. "Conversions" are one of the most abused categories at IPMS/USA shows. The last rules revision I saw explicitely noted that "using two (or more) kits does not qualify as a "conversion". Conversions are expected to contain a lot of scratch building, just not the entire model. However, I suspect that the whole resin "conversion" industry has warped pee brains as to the intent of the "conversion" category. Bruce Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I like bad!" Bruce Burden Austin, TX. - Thuganlitha The Power and the Prophet Robert Don Hughes |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.