Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Simon Cornes

Latest issue of SAM

Recommended Posts

Mick4350    127

Thanks for that. Only have to wait for a couple of months before it hits the shelves down under.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mick4350    127

Finally received my copy of the October edition of Scale Aircraft Modelling and noticed quite a number of stupid errors mainly concerning kit sizes where they are either 1/48 or 1/72 scale and have an incorrect size scale that conflicts within the header of the article, for example on page 66 a HobbyBoss 1/48 TBM-3 Avenger that is listed as 1/72 and this type of error is repeated at least on two other reviews in the magazine.

 

And while I read the review on the Mercury Atlas, the header description begins with MiG-29A Fulcrum at the top of the article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Patrick Martin    139

It called poor editing and it usually happens when somebody runs of out time because of not thinking ahead enough.

 

Pat

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stevehnz    2,866

I've just picked up the Oct issue, the latest in NZ. The cover promised me scale drawings & profiles for the F/RF-84F, I found the profiles, still looking for the scale drawings.:unsure: I thought maybe they were a loose fold out & had slipped out of the copy I first looked at, if so, they must of slipped out of all the other 4 on the shelf. :( I bought it anyway, but slightly annoyed.

Steve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Simon Cornes    389

In the latest issue you get a review of an Airfix Whitley part way through something else!! Never a dull moment! I suppose its easy for us to knock magazines. Back in the days of 'hot metal' I suppose they had proof readers then but now with effectively desk top publishing it seems as though everyone makes mistakes from time to time! Nice pictures though!! I must say that I'm not very fond of the trips into warship modelling or vehicles although I can see the point of the german lorry this month

 

Simon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Latinbear    384
1 hour ago, Simon Cornes said:

In the latest issue you get a review of an Airfix Whitley part way through something else!! Never a dull moment! I suppose its easy for us to knock magazines. Back in the days of 'hot metal' I suppose they had proof readers then but now with effectively desk top publishing it seems as though everyone makes mistakes from time to time! Nice pictures though!! I must say that I'm not very fond of the trips into warship modelling or vehicles although I can see the point of the german lorry this month

 

Simon

 

I'm puzzled. According to my issue the article on the X-15 concludes on page 63. Over the page (64) is the review section with a review of the Airfix Whitley, adverts on page 65 and the conclusion of the Whitley review taking up the top quarter of page 66. Underneath this is a review of the Eduard's 1/72nd Butcher Bird which concludes on page 68 (ads on page 67).

 

My issue seems to be logically laid out and in the style that it has been for ages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flankerman    3,328
1 hour ago, Simon Cornes said:

In the latest issue you get a review of an Airfix Whitley part way through something else!!

 

 

I noticed that - and it took me about 10 minutes of re-reading it to realise the error..... It's in the review of the Armory 1/144 scale Bf-109A/B kit....and It says at the end......

 

"- we just need a K to this standard!      cracking. Happily no filing was necessary and the whole fitted nicely. I went for the Dark Earth and Dark Green over Night finish of the 102 Squadron machine"

 

What ??? - it was the colour scheme that first alerted me - no Bf-109 had that scheme.

 

Then I remembered there was an article in the November issue (pages 64 & 66) on building the Airfix Whitley - and the whole final 1/4 page of text (from the word 'cracking' onwards) had been copied into the December Bf-109 article :doh:

 

Must be a cut-and-paste / template error ???? - not clearing out the text from a previous file?

 

Come on Gary - stay awake !!!!!!

 

Ken

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flankerman    3,328

Latinbear - check the November issue - Whitley article, page 66 - with the December issue Bf-109 review on page 66.

 

Ken

 

PS - I guess the confusion arises from using the phrase 'latest issue' - my latest issue is the December issue, not November

Edited by Flankerman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Latinbear    384

I think we're talking cross purposes. I was looking at the November issue which is the latest one I have.

 

I'm guessing Simon's post refers to the December issue that I hadn't realised is out.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Latinbear    384

Ken - I think was typing my post when yours came through referencing the November/December issue.

 

I'll have a look when the postman delivers the December issue but based on your comments that's pretty poor and it shouldn't be beyond the editor to ensure that sort of thing doesn't happen.

 

 

1 minute ago, Flankerman said:

.... and we're posting at cross purposes !!!

 

Ken

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Simon Cornes    389

Yes guys, sorry for confusing the issue - it was the December one of course. I didn't have it with me when I added to the thread.

I think we tend to think of a magazine as involving loads of people as in a Fleet Street broadsheet but in reality it is probably 2 or 3 guys in a room putting together other people's work and hoping it all fits. They obviously need a proof reader (what is one of those?) but I expect Mr Hatcher is burning the midnight oil when he's getting to Guideline's deadline date and time! Can't be easy otherwise we'd all do it!!

 

Simon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Simon Cornes    389
1 hour ago, Dave Fleming said:

I just can't beleive they are putting trucks and ships in it

 

But Gary says that readers have 'welcomed' the move. Surely Alan Hall is spinning in his grave?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mick4350    127
On ‎9‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 7:03 AM, stevehnz said:

I've just picked up the Oct issue, the latest in NZ. The cover promised me scale drawings & profiles for the F/RF-84F, I found the profiles, still looking for the scale drawings.:unsure: I thought maybe they were a loose fold out & had slipped out of the copy I first looked at, if so, they must of slipped out of all the other 4 on the shelf. :( I bought it anyway, but slightly annoyed.

Steve.

 

How much do they charge you for this magazine across the ditch ? I did a page count and the scale drawings certainly aren't there despite the statement of the magazine's cover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stevehnz    2,866

Hi Mick, I think I paid NZ$13.20 for it, quite a lot cheaper than it was some years ago, strictly read in mag shop then & maybe buy 1 or 2 a year. Was poor then. :(;)

Steve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seahawk    1,166
On 14 December 2016 at 11:14 PM, Simon Cornes said:

 

But Gary says that readers have 'welcomed' the move. 

Hmm.  Wonder what statistics back that up ie how many readers have expressed a view pro or con.    The previous editor always asserted that most of the readership was ecstatic about the changes he brought in.

 

Wonder if the inclusion of trucks and ships is a tanks-on-lawn thing    eg retaliation for Military Modelling including aircraft articles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LotusArenco    483

I welcome the inclusion of ship models, but am still in two minds about it. Being an occasional ship modeller (often seems we’re the ginger headed step-children of the modelling community), the lack of dedicated ship modelling magazines is noticeable (apart from the radio control ones).

 

Mind you, this is probably just a passing fad. I’d be worried that the magazine becomes ‘watered down’ somewhat.

I’ll forgive the occasional ship/truck article and editing cock ups as long as it’s printed on decent paper. I’ve given up on, and no longer buy, those magazines that seem to print on what looks like toilet paper. (‘Hey, look at the fine 1/72 cockpit detail and pilots’ moustache on this tiny two inch photo printed on the cheapest tat we could find’)

 

Pet peeve time:;)

For any model magazine editors/contributors reading this: I can’t be the only reader fed up with the constant tired old clichés about Revell boxes*, Matchbox trench lines, rubber tires, ‘I started with the cockpit’, and ‘the engine/cockpit/Elsan toilet is a kit in itself’. Additionally anybody that uses the phrase ‘Does what it says on the tin’ should be taken outside and beaten with a cold saveloy.

 

Mart

 

 

*probably to make Revells factory workers life a little easier by having a cartoning machine. If you hate them that much, buy a metal/plastic biscuit tin, eat contents, then use the empty tin to store the kit you can’t be bothered to finish! Works for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul Bradley    1,434
15 minutes ago, LotusArenco said:

 

Pet peeve time:;)

For any model magazine editors/contributors reading this: I can’t be the only reader fed up with the constant tired old clichés about Revell boxes*, Matchbox trench lines, rubber tires, ‘I started with the cockpit’, and ‘the engine/cockpit/Elsan toilet is a kit in itself’. Additionally anybody that uses the phrase ‘Does what it says on the tin’ should be taken outside and beaten with a cold saveloy.

 

 

Ah, but those phrases tick all the boxes....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flankerman    3,328

"See through effect"

 

"to prevent tail sitting"

 

"release agent"

 

"cockpit combing" (instead of coaming).

 

Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mike    10,644

<furiously taking notes for that not-quite-so-irritating effect>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Red Dot    680

And don't forget to include "and then I did...."

 

There is one reviewer who does this constantly and not only does it show a poor command of English, it highlights that the editor doesn't correct or edit phrases, or coach his reviewers to vary sentences.

 

Sadly, the magazine seems to be going for the quantity not quality approach. Foreign magazines don't have stupid layout errors in them and SAM didn't in the good old days either. Perhaps a lesson needs to be learnt by reading the comments on this forum or perhaps heads/egos are being buried in the sand?

 

andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56134    19

Thanks for the feedback chaps. No one's mentioned the font size of late? RE the cock-ups yes they do creep in, usually as a result of proofing pdfs at hyper-speed on a computer screen while someone is breathing heavily down the phone waiting to print it at the last minute. I do find proofing from a hard copy much safer than a PC but there is rarely time to do so with late pages because of the printing schedules we work to. V.poor. Will try harder.

RE the Bulldog canopy it's an easy oversight if you're building from the box - look at the amount of Airfix Provosts out there with the canopy framing on the outside. I personally had no idea that was an error too until Adrian Balch sent me a picture. Easy to be an expert when you know.

As for the ships I have discussed this in the Editorials. It has been surprisingly popular despite my own reservations - but I have also tried to ensure we don't let the content suffer as a result. It's 4 pages every 3 - 4 months and that's as far as it will go. We try to save that much space each issue by making better use of the pages we have.

Apologies as well for the missing plans. That should have been deleted from the cover that issue. My old adversary Captain Cut 'n' Paste strikes again...

Harrogate Model Club is out in force at Bolton in January so if anyone wants to come and berate us in person we'll be glad to discuss any further issues you may have. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eric Mc    1,287

I think it is very honourable to receive a direct response from the magazine. It shows that they DO read these forums.

 

I'm not that interested in the ship models, I have to admit but the vehicle models are worthwhile as at least vehicles can and do often appear beside aircraft in dioramas etc. I also appreciated the recent review of the Horizon Atlas and Mercury kits - and I would like to see a bit more "real space" kit reviews as I do think that avitaion and space technology are very closely linked (as they are in the real world).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×