A year or two ago a co worker, Nan Lin, (who is excellent shipmodeller) suggested that we do a joint build. I agreed that it might be fun to try and suggested that we do it at lunchtimes at work.  Our first project was the Mississippi (BB41). Last week we finished our second project – the IJN Haruna.
This article shows the finished ships but is as much about the process of joint builds and modelling at the workplace. Hopefully it will be of interest.

With modelling there is often a certain pride that comes with being responsible for the finished product. The craftsmanship is yours to display, the research and modelling decisions are yours alone (as are the mistakes).

So when I do a build with a friend – will we remain friends? I think that it depends on  temperment. It works fine with Nan and me because we’re both easy going and not perfectionists. We’re reasonably fussy but can live with imperfection. Some of my modelling friends can’t and I wouldn’t do a joint build with them.  Nor them with me. Or Nan. Or anyone.

So if the idea appeals it can be great fun and with proper management the end result is better than whatever each one could do singly. Each modeller brings certain skills to the project and if they are used to best advantage – well the results speak for themselves.  I our case it was skill vs experience. Nan has excellent hand-eye coordination and steady hands. I have more experience and we both share an artistic eye. Our view of what a model should represent is also similar. Briefly expressed – if  a picture was taken of the model in a appropriate setting (water with horizon for example) would it be look ‘real’.  This is in contrast to the pristine, sharp, immaculate craftsman models. I have utmost admiration and respect for the craftsman builds – they are wonderful to look at and require tremendous skill – but for Nan and me:  real.

It also helps if on any one project one of the modellers is Boss. Makes the decisions and the other adheres. Roles can swap - I’m boss on this one, Nan on the next – but it prevents needless argument.
Lastly both parties must be content if the result is a disaster. It’s supposed to be fun. Disasters happen.

So how does it work.  We maintain a set of jointly owned tools. It’s a basic set- xacto knife, files, paintbrushes, tweezers - not too expensive. For special tasks one can always bring something from the home toolbox.
We sit down at the beginning of each session and decide what to do and who does what. In our case Nan does the delicate stuff, I do painting and scraping. I also decide what we do and the order it is done. (I’m very good at this – I compensate my clumsiness by good engineering practice).
Modelling is often very solitary - sometimes it’s nice to have company to discuss things with. In fact this is probably the best part – the exchange of ideas – sometimes we even discuss the model we are working on.

Our first project was the Mississippi. The kit was mine but I wanted to complete the Surigao Strait battle line so any help was welcomed. We went to Nan’s house for the painting – ‘cause he had the better airbrush. Did the basic stuff and left the camoflage for Nan at the next weekend. Now here’s where my experience was needed; Nan matched the paint to the chips perfectly – whereas with weathering and scale effect the greys look much lighter in contemporary photo’s. On a 1/700 model Ocean Grey and Dull Black are hard to distinguish.

Nan did however come up with a brilliant suggestion as to the decks. I like natural wood colour on the decks but in 1944 the Mississippi’s decks were stained Deck Blue. The Deck Blue stain lightens much more quickly than painted steel (look and any photo of that period) and in places wears through. I’ve tried various mixes of paint (Teak and Deck Blue for instance) and the results were nauseating. Nan’s suggestion was tried – Spray the decks a lightened deck blue (lighten with light grey rather than white) and then using wood coloured pastel lightly brush in areas where there was heavy foot traffic.  Fantastic result – I don’t use any other techniques now. Except on IJN ships where they didn’t stain the decks.

With Nan’s dexterity and my research we were able to be very ambitious on the upperworks and rigging. We also used scrap photoetch on the 5” 25’s.  The result is that the Mississippi is the best model in either collection. (The collections are displayed jointly at work)

Next on the list was the Haruna – by Fujimi. This kit was built out of the box by Nan’s cousin Yang Lu.  Like Nan, Yang is a fine craftsman but this was his first model and left much to be desired as to detail and painting. We thought that we’d just “tart it up”.
Actually the Haruna took longer than the complete building of the Mississippi. Undoing Yang’s work was only a small part of the problem. Undoing Fujimi’s work was that biggest hurdle. The kit is NOT GOOD. It lacks detail, crispness and accuracy.

We did the best we could – some things we didn’t bother with such as the foredeck and anchor arrangements and the hull. We also didn’t do anything with the hull or stack. However we did spend lots of time on the superstructure.

In the end we were quite satisfied with the model. We achieved what we were striving for – an over built, worn out, aging battlecruiser in the twilight of it’s useful life. The inaccuracies are there but – eh – who cares. It was an effect that we were after.

The dynamics of modelling at one’s place of work is also worth writing about. It has several advantages – for me it can be a stress relief in the middle of the day. It’s also a chance for staff to work together on something not work related. Thirdly – it’s extra modelling time in a busy schedule.

How it works at my workplace is this.

We work on a model about one day a week when Nan and I are both free. The day isn’t fixed. We have a special work area (the meeting room in my office) but on occasion use the staffroom. Other staff are encouraged to come and socialise and help with the easy bits. In fact we bough another Fujimi Haruna for spare parts and the kit (minus a few spare parts) was built by other interested staff as a present for the son of a popular (female) staff member. Staff members bring in their hobbies and sit with us to work on their projects. Leonie (another popular female staff member) brings in her knitting for example.

It’s important not to exclude people – it can become a closed group. I encourage non hobby type people to have a try or just join us for talk.

From a management point of view it’s become a useful occasion to informally share information about the company. Someone’s under too much stress and his manager doesn’t know, someone else has a chronic back pain and is too stoic to complain formally etc. There’s good gossip to be had as well.
So  I recommend it – there’s very little downside and lots to recommend it.

So next we start on the Denver in November 1943. I’ve taken the kit home for airbrushing and Nan and I have started on the research. We are using the Cleveland kit as a starting point. We already know about the 40 mm Quads replacing the twins forward – but we don’t know how many boatcranes were on in Nov 1943. 0, 1 or 2 are possibilities. We suspect that there was one - with a gun director in place of the starboard crane but any help would be appreciated.