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. :)

Sign in to follow this  
Whofan

February 2018 Scale Aviation Modelling

Recommended Posts

Reading the latest print February 2018 issue of Scale Aircraft Modelling and got to page 64 and started reading the build review of a Revel He 219, to be slightly confused by references to a build of an ICM  Do 17, especially as the pictures were of an He 219.

 

The whole 2 page review is definitely of the Do 17, not the He 219.

 

Hopefully next month it will be corrected ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be quite a few errors occurring of late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The standards of editing in the modelling press continue to plummet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SAMI seems to be the worst culprit in this respect. I notice this too. Absolutely nobody must read the magazine before it goes to press.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Proof reading is harder than it looks - actually a complete change out like that is the hardest to catch; I read the article several time s, looking carefully at the pictures to try to identify a particular item, before realising what was going on. Doh ! 

 

On one project I worked on, a major document had a complete section from another project inadvertently dropped in.  It took several weeks before anyone queried the discrepancy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Feb issue of SAM is also missing the end of the J-22 article. It just cuts off mid-sentence!

 

Jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The March 2018 issue has an article on a very nice build of the new 1/72 Airfix Walrus. Having done a fair bit I know proof reading is a hard job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/01/2018 at 7:49 PM, John B (Sc) said:

Proof reading is harder than it looks - actually a complete change out like that is the hardest to catch; I read the article several time s, looking carefully at the pictures to try to identify a particular item, before realising what was going on. Doh ! 

 

On one project I worked on, a major document had a complete section from another project inadvertently dropped in.  It took several weeks before anyone queried the discrepancy.

 

In my day job I do a lot of technical report writing as well as tendering and can well relate to your observations.

 

Spotting spelling mistakes and formatting etc is very easy because it looks wrong. When someone has swapped an entire high quality piece out for another it's much harder as the brain isn't looking at context, only for errors on a small level.

 

To catch the big stuff it needs people sat round a table doing a conscious cross-referencing check item by item with someone taking notes for a document of any mentionable size and scope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/01/2018 at 7:49 PM, John B (Sc) said:

Proof reading is harder than it looks - actually a complete change out like that is the hardest to catch; I read the article several time s, looking carefully at the pictures to try to identify a particular item, before realising what was going on. Doh ! 

 

On one project I worked on, a major document had a complete section from another project inadvertently dropped in.  It took several weeks before anyone queried the discrepancy.

Proof-reading is hard work but some magazines won't pay a fair rate for it to be done. In this case it seems the editor has dropped the ball. Proof reading is usually only the text. It used to come on long rolls with wide margins that you noted corrections in, these were galley proofs (hence galley slave) nowadays called uncorrected proofs and mostly electronic. If a technical proof referred to pictures they were included as the reader then checks cross reference (and the price goes up). Seems like the text has been 'proofed' by a document program and then the editor has stuffed the wrong photos in.

Frankly it's shoddy work and done in the cause of greed. Overwork is no excuse as that's down to greed too. However as long as enough people buy these magazines full of advertorial content and different versions of advertisements they'll still be produced.

A couple of years ago I went through a years worth of one magazine and found 20ish pages of useful stuff, that is the kit is great except here, here, and here and this is what you can do about it. Subscription cancelled and I've brought exactly two copies since.

Final bit: I worked a lot in distribution and most industries have trade magazines full of advertising and advertorial content They are free and paid for by selling the space. Too many model magazines are getting the same way and then having the cheek to charge you for it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The March 2018 SAMI article on the Airfix  Walrus  is in 1/48th  scale not 1/72nd. A nice article spoilt by lack of proof reading !! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like we could do with some proof reading on this thread........

 

The thread title says 'February 2018 Scale AVIATION Modelling' - when the first post mentions Scale AIRCRAFT Modelling

 

Then we have posts about SAMI - but that gets used in subsequent posts for both Scale Aircraft Modelling AND Scale Aviation Modeller.

 

The article on the Airfix Walrus is in the latter.

 

Then there's a reference to SAM.

 

Can I propose that we use the word SAM for Scale Aircraft Modelling (Guideline publications) and SAvMI for Scale Aviation Modeller (confusingly by SAM publications) !!!

 

OR.....

 

SAM for SAM publications Scale Aviation Modeller and SACM for Guideline Publication Scale AirCraft Modelling

 

OR.....

 

SAVM and SACM

 

My brian hurts now......:whistle:

 

Let he who is without sin.......

 

Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/4/2018 at 8:24 PM, SleeperService said:

(hence galley slave)

 

Umm... No. The usage is a little bit older than movable type.

 

49 minutes ago, Flankerman said:

 SAvMI for Scale Aviation Modeller

 

Pronounced Save Me, p'raps? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/27/2018 at 11:20 AM, Whofan said:

The whole 2 page review is definitely of the Do 17, not the He 219.

 

Hopefully next month it will be corrected ;)

 

 ....shame that. But how can it be corrected without reprinting in full both articles ? I'm sure that there won't be space to do that. That said there is a massive amount of stuff to read in SAM nowadays, so the comments in post #10 seem a little unfair 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Flankerman said:

Looks like we could do with some proof reading on this thread........

 

The thread title says 'February 2018 Scale AVIATION Modelling' - when the first post mentions Scale AIRCRAFT Modelling

 

Then we have posts about SAMI - but that gets used in subsequent posts for both Scale Aircraft Modelling AND Scale Aviation Modeller.

 

The article on the Airfix Walrus is in the latter.

 

Then there's a reference to SAM.

 

Can I propose that we use the word SAM for Scale Aircraft Modelling (Guideline publications) and SAvMI for Scale Aviation Modeller (confusingly by SAM publications) !!!

 

OR.....

 

SAM for SAM publications Scale Aviation Modeller and SACM for Guideline Publication Scale AirCraft Modelling

 

OR.....

 

SAVM and SACM

 

My brian hurts now......:whistle:

 

Let he who is without sin.......

 

Ken

Scale Aircraft Modelling = SAM

Scale Aviation Modeller = SCAM

simples, except we couldn't have that, with its negative connotations, could we?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe everyone should email the magazines editor, Mr Gary Hatcher at blisterwhelk@outlook.com to complain of the magazines frequent errors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Paul Bradley said:

Oh, the irony....

Indeed but perhaps it is intended in a post-ironic sense .... or maybe not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 06/03/2018 at 2:29 AM, Mick4350 said:

Maybe everyone should email the magazines editor, Mr Gary Hatcher at blisterwhelk@outlook.com to complain of the magazines frequent errors.

 

Hmm. As a business owner I promise everyone that getting mail bombed has quite the opposite effect to the imagined effect of causing work to be done better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies said:

 

Hmm. As a business owner I promise everyone that getting mail bombed has quite the opposite effect to the imagined effect of causing work to be done better.

Simple premise.

One of the best training courses I've even been on, run by a man who had NO formal training qualifications, he just used common sense.

 

"If you push, the other person will push back"

 

Moral - DON'T pontificate, or complain for it's own sake, point out the error(s) and if possible suggest a solution.

Remember a spoon full of Honey goes a lot further than a gallon of vinegar!

 

Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 05/03/2018 at 7:04 PM, Flankerman said:

Looks like we could do with some proof reading on this thread........

 

The thread title says 'February 2018 Scale AVIATION Modelling' - when the first post mentions Scale AIRCRAFT Modelling

 

Then we have posts about SAMI - but that gets used in subsequent posts for both Scale Aircraft Modelling AND Scale Aviation Modeller.

 

The article on the Airfix Walrus is in the latter.

 

Then there's a reference to SAM.

 

Can I propose that we use the word SAM for Scale Aircraft Modelling (Guideline publications) and SAvMI for Scale Aviation Modeller (confusingly by SAM publications) !!!

 

OR.....

 

SAM for SAM publications Scale Aviation Modeller and SACM for Guideline Publication Scale AirCraft Modelling

 

OR.....

 

SAVM and SACM

 

My brian hurts now......:whistle:

 

Let he who is without sin.......

 

Ken

who's brian?........................

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Red Dot said:

who's brian?........................

 

 

A very naughty boy !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎27‎/‎01‎/‎2018 at 9:20 PM, Whofan said:

Reading the latest print February 2018 issue of Scale Aircraft Modelling and got to page 64 and started reading the build review of a Revel He 219, to be slightly confused by references to a build of an ICM  Do 17, especially as the pictures were of an He 219.

 

The whole 2 page review is definitely of the Do 17, not the He 219.

 

Hopefully next month it will be corrected ;)

And maybe you can tell us what magazine your talking about !

 

Scale Aircraft Modelling or Scale Aviation Modeller International.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mick4350 said:

And maybe you can tell us what magazine your talking about !

 

Scale Aircraft Modelling or Scale Aviation Modeller International.

Yes, it's a bit of a bugger that I got the title wrong in the first place.

 

It's Scale Airrcraft Modelling, and they did actually refer to the error in the March edition.

 

Apologies for getting it wrong, I only have myself to blame.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just received my copy via my local newsagent and not impressed with a complete article text substituted for the wrong review and the ending of an article that does not conclude properly. Upon reading of the magazines editorial, I am wondering if we should be impressed with the excuse of wanting to continue to read and purchase the magazine in the future as the omissions of late is becoming more frequent and the lack of acknowledgment by the editor in the editorial about these mistakes is disheartening.

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

Sign in to follow this  

×