Jump to content

As a result of the close-down of the UK by the British Government last night, we have made all the Buy/Sell areas read-only until we open back up again, so please have a look at the announcement linked here.

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. :)


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

21 Good

About 56134

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

140 profile views
  1. '....publishing convention is that figures are expressed in words for less than ten, and digits for more than' My own preference is to remove as many actual digits as possible from paragraphs including a lot of technical data. Thus for instance in a hypothetical sentence where '37 Spitfire Mk. IIs of 303 Squadron encountered 24 Bf 110G-4s of 7/N.JG.III escorting 8 Do 217s of KG 53 and 15 - 20 Ju 88A-4s of 9/KG. 27' I would write any numbers that were not directly applicabl;e to aircraft type or unit as complete words. Otherwise - for the same reasons of cutting down too many confusing digits in a paragraph of technical information - my own preference has been to use digits only for numbers greater than 100. I like to think publishing convention could allow some flexibilty if it is in the interests of clarity
  2. Having looked into this issue several years ago I have completely forgotten any conclusions I reached at the time. I wonder if anyone would care to comment on the matter - upper surface camouflagd or all-over green. I know there is a body of opinion on both sides. There is a picture at http://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/aircrafts-2/hs123/hs-123-1939-poland/ Any opinions?
  3. Hello everyone. For the benefit of those of you commenting who have not seen the announcement in the latest issue of SAM here is the text in full: 'Great news for subscribers to Scale Aircraft Modelling from the start of our 39th volume, with the March 2017 issue. We will be adding eight additional pages of editorial material to the subscribers mailed copies at no additional cost, so there has never been a better time to take out, or renew a subscription to the most essential scale model aircraft title around. This means that for the price of only £49.50 for fifteen issues, or £94 for thirty issues you not only get the regular magazine delivered to your door, but a full eight extra pages of features and reviews. This works out at almost a 1/3 off the full retail price as well as the benefits of postal delivery and the bonus material Subscriber offers are nothing new – a free CD you don’t really need, a free pen, a free plastic wallet with a logo printed on it… Our Editorial team have put their heads together and come to the conclusion that the best offer we can make is to give you more of what you buy the magazine for in the first place. It’s not rocket science – and it won’t be either as despite rumours to the contrary Mr Hatcher is planning on keeping the content rooted in traditional aviation, barring the occasional flight of fancy from Mr Tony Grand, or the odd ICBM. The eight page extra will be bound seamlessly into magazines prepared for the subscription database and will to all intents and purposes simply follow on from the rest of the content. The Editor advises us this will consist entirely of additional sourced articles and reviews and will not draw on the existing content. News stand issues will retain all the regular items and favourites that have made SAM the number one choice. It’s up to you – if you want more for less then take out a subscription today. As a gesture to all readers, and just to show what we can actually offer, we will be binding in the extra eight pages to all copies of the March 2017 issue, newsstand and subscribers. Thereafter the extra value will be available to subscribers only. But that’s not all! Further offers will become available to subscribers in the coming months so watch this space.' Naturally you may draw your own conclusions as to whether this leaves the cup half full or half empty...
  4. hahaha my usage of 'amount' stems from the inconclusive number referred to. The word implies a large but unquantifiable mass rather than an orderd quantity. Or so it said on a thing what I found on the Internet. RE ships - I know, I know. They say come and I cometh. They say go and I goeth. They say inserteth ships and I inserteth them, while trying to make the measure as palatable as possible. I plead the Nuremberg defence Stevehnz - please drop me an email at blisterwhelk@outlook.com
  5. 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.
  6. Thanks as ever for the feedback. Naturally we are aware of the Internet as a rival and most of the Editorial decisions taken nowadays are made with this in mind. I note with some irony that a previous thread suggested smaller fonts were being used to fit in more advertising. In fact they are being used to fit in more information, and were a reaction against a trend elsewhere to use larger fonts to eke out editorial material over a wider space. Here our aim is to find a balance and make the best use of page space in order to keep giving readers something for their money. It is a work in progress and while we do try to take all comments and criticism on board naturally we can’t expect to please everyone. I make no apologies for the photo – but if one’s cup were half full it might be more apparent that the contents listing has been reduced from a wasteful two pages to one and the space saved has been used for editorial content, not advertising. As for the stately home, Treptower Park has always been a favourite. Right out of Jane Austen and very evocative despite the ghosts
  7. Noted chaps. As Editor I am, of course, responsible for the finished pages. The designers just do what we tell them - or as often as not simply don't do what we don't tell them. My own reasons for buying a magazine are that I want something to read, and my priorities as a customer are those elements that I cannot get for free online - chiefly the words and stories. The Internet is a new factor affecting the industry and magazines have changed accordingly. We are no longer the only place to go to look at large pictures of beautiful models... I have to agree on the subject of coloured type and backgrounds and this has been addressed. I personally have no problem with the font sizes - despite age and decrepitude I have yet to find a font that my reading glasses can't tackle - but shall of course take all comments on board.
  • Create New...