Track-Link - Forums

Home Articles Reviews Gallery Contests Forums

Search

Login

Forums

Introduction

Posting guidelines

Forum key

New Messages

Forum List

News Forums
General	Oct 13
Industry	Oct 13
Shows & Clubs	Oct 12

Site Forums
Articles	May 16
Build Logs	Oct 13
Reviews	Sep 22
Gallery	Oct 13
Contests	Oct 6

Modelling Forums
Kits	Oct 13
Construction	Oct 13
Painting	Oct 10
Figures	Oct 10
Dioramas	Aug 29
1-48th Scale	Oct 1
Small Scale	Sep 23

Research Forums
WW2	Oct 13
Post WW2	Oct 12
Pre WW2	Sep 6

Classifieds Ads
Buy & Sell	Oct 13
Commercial	Oct 10

Forums - News / General

For General modelling or hobby-related topics that are not covered by any other specific forum. Please keep to topics concerning the hobby.

Topics	2990
Messages	22338

Subject:

Re: What is acceptable reference?

Date:

Apr 27, 2006

From:

Steve Frost

I'd like to think the Cornelius Ryan approach is pretty reliable. He made sure to get several independent accounts of the same event before he incorporated them into his research and books. Extrapolating that to our hobby, maybe getting more than one independent source to confirm or deny "something" about a vehicle is considered acceptable. Conflicting reference is one reason I slacked off on the "uber acuracy" aspect and just decided to build and have fun...

What do IPMS, AMPS or other kitbuilding orgs use to determine "acceptable" refernce? Who's to say their method is right or wrong?

Thread Listing

What is acceptable reference? - Paul A. Owen - Apr 25, 2006

. . . Re: Pz. IV C plans test - Paul A. Owen - Apr 25, 2006

. . . LOL - John F. Steinman - Apr 25, 2006

. . . . . . Re: What is the Standard - Paul A. Owen - Apr 25, 2006

. . . . . . . . . Re: What is the Standard - John F. Steinman - Apr 25, 2006

. . . . . . . . . . . . not interchangable? - Steve C - Apr 25, 2006

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: not interchangable? - John F. Steinman - Apr 25, 2006

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: not interchangable? - Paul A. Owen - Apr 25, 2006

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . poor quality control :-) - Steve C - Apr 25, 2006

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: poor quality control :-) - Paul A. Owen - Apr 25, 2006

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: not interchangable? - Steve C - Apr 25, 2006

. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: What is the Standard - Bill Goodrich - Apr 25, 2006

. . . Re: What is acceptable reference? - Gerald Owens - Apr 25, 2006

. . . Tiger 1 examples... - David Byrden - Apr 26, 2006

. . . . . . Re: Tiger 1 examples... - frank forster - Apr 26, 2006

. . . . . . . . . Re: Tiger 1 examples... - John Yergin - Apr 26, 2006

. . . . . . . . . Re: Back to the point... - Paul A. Owen - Apr 26, 2006

. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Back to the point... - frank forster - Apr 26, 2006

. . . . . . Potential After-market Kits. - Paul A. Owen - Apr 26, 2006

. . . Best guess - Kip Rudge - Apr 26, 2006

. . . Re: What is acceptable reference? - John F. Steinman - Apr 26, 2006

. . . . . . Re: What is acceptable reference? - Paul A. Owen - Apr 26, 2006

. . . . . . . . . Re: What is acceptable reference? - John F. Steinman - Apr 26, 2006

. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: scale - Paul A. Owen - Apr 26, 2006

. . . . . . . . . . . . One more thing related to the above - John Steinman - Apr 26, 2006

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: One more thing related to the above - Paul A. Owen - Apr 26, 2006

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tolerances, etc... - christopher benjamin - Apr 26, 2006

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: One more thing related to the above - John F. Steinman - Apr 27, 2006

. . . Re: What is acceptable reference? - Steve Frost - Apr 27, 2006

. . . When you get right down to it...only the original mfgr's drawings are correct! - Scott A. Bregi - Apr 27, 2006

Home Articles Reviews Gallery Contests Forums

Contact Track-Link