Never-Were Models

RCGroups user Patmat2350 pontificates on "never-were" scale boat models...


How About a "Never-Were" Scale Class?

The recent discussion about the Toledo Show and "what is a scale model" got me thinking about the whole class of "never were" models... and how I'd love to see this as a class in itself at shows. Such a class would reward craftsmanship (of course), but also creativity and maybe some level of plausibility.

I can still see heated debates over various details of such a class:

Plausibility ( "Could have been" vs. "That's just ridiculous!")

Could have been: So you want to build a USS Montana? She was never built, only proposed. As proposed, she was just a bigger/badder Iowa... now with FOUR main turrets. But she would have been built at a time when she might have been modernized on the ways... ideas included missile boat conversion or a helo boat. But she could easily be built in a way that would be entirely expected in 1945, as Andy Paris did (below).

Ridiculous (but still capable of being modeled with a high degree of craftsmanship): Oh, maybe a flying Yamato? Counterpoint: Any Star Wars type models... REALLY never-was, but you can look at them and think they're reasonable...

Degree of crazy-imaginative-figmentation:

On one end of the scale: A tugboat that never-was, but which is entirely in keeping with tugboats of that type. Here, I'd deduct points if you put a steamer's stack on what is obviously a diesel tug (without a pretty good story...). Or, something like John Fryant's "New Big Sandy", a model of a proposed modern sternwheeler, but entirely in keeping with the type.

On the crazy end: Total figments, or cartoonish caricatures. Like the Jules Vernish locomotive below... anything steampunk... or the pudgy Yamato). But remember, there's some basis of realism in caricature... it's basically an exaggeration of features and characteristics that are really there, artfully and pointedly presented... not just some crazy stuff!

Maybe just call it the "Fantasy and SciFi" class?

Last edited by patmat2350; Feb 18, 2018 at 10:51 AM..
Thread Tools
Feb 18, 2018, 10:25 AM
Registered User
Great idea....if nothing else they are great models no matter what, fun to see...cplfuzz
Feb 18, 2018, 10:52 AM
Registered User
CaptCB's Avatar


Don't we have enough ISSUES, with how to classify our "builds" currently?

As we have: 1, "scale" or "museum scale" (Pat's CUSTOM, high $$$ builds), 2, "stand-off scale" (Tim B's & other models) 3, "prototypical" (what I like to build, scale, but not a copy of any one exact boat) 4, "freelanced", ( scale, sorta-kinda ??)

Isn't this enough? Everyone fights about "what IS what", at shows now.

I will buy: "Fantasy"
Feb 18, 2018, 11:04 AM
Registered User
I do not see any problem in the judging of “WHAT IF” or “FUTURE DESIGN” models in the various judged classes. The real rub is it what class should the model be placed in. From there the judging of the model would follow the point scale of workmanship; cleanliness of the build, and attention to detail should be the same as a model of a real subject.

The real sticking point and subject of heated discussions, is that vary rarely at the judged shows today, do the participants have access to the judging criteria before the model is entered to see how the model stacks up against the writhen rules and scoring.

This is where a model of a real subject has an advantage over a dreamed up or future subject. Because there is photographic proof of what the real subject looks like to compare to the modeled subject, the attention to the detail will usually go to the real subject.
In this case, if there were enough entrants in the “WHAT IF” or “FUTURE CLASS” then a separate class of judging could be set up for them.

This is all really a mute point in that many proof of theory models or concept of design models have a great deal of time spent on both engineering as well as attention to detail. Again I think that the idea of promoting the judging of models does, in some ways, inhibit modelers who would otherwise take part in the modeling community at various functions and discussions. This to my way of thinking is conducive to dividing than the joining of modelers.
Feb 18, 2018, 12:02 PM
Registered User
Here are a few from the model show at the Museum of Flight in Seattle yesterday. Just another direction for fantasy. No comments made. jerryj98501
Feb 18, 2018, 12:41 PM
Sea Dragon-Lover
Umi_Ryuzuki's Avatar
I built up this one for a kit maker a few years ago.
Take any profile, and cut the length by 50% while leaving the height untouched.

Feb 18, 2018, 12:56 PM
Po' boys does w/ Po'boys ways
haxawsnavy's Avatar
Fantasy as in the Beatles Yellow Submarine,? or movie boats/cars etc,? Tim aka Cap'n Hax
Feb 18, 2018, 02:04 PM
Where's Pamela?
patmat2350's Avatar
Thread OP
All the above.

You could make an accurate scale model of some James Bond movie boat (as has been discussed here before)... or a well crafted version of the Yellow Submarine... would be quite cool!
Feb 18, 2018, 02:41 PM
Registered User
mike woodyard's Avatar
The question of what class these "fantasy" models would fall under kinda reminds me of the debate about does 3D printed parts fall under the class of scratch built. So many variables with models how many different classes does there have to be. Endless possibilities.
Feb 18, 2018, 03:27 PM
Registered User
royalcasa's Avatar
James Bond white lotus car/sub
Feb 18, 2018, 05:01 PM
Registered User
The "pudgy Yamato" is a Fujumi plastic model.

Hasegawa produced a series of "Egg planes", then later Fujimi decided to produce a series of "Egg ships".

Unfortunately I couldn't find an English language version of Fujimis website, however a web search for "Fujimi egg ship" will bring up a series of images of the models, and there are links to You Tube videos of egg ships being unboxed, and built.

Hasegawa does have an English language website, and you can see their "egg plane" kits here.
Feb 18, 2018, 06:46 PM
Where's Pamela?
patmat2350's Avatar
Thread OP
Feb 18, 2018, 07:29 PM
Brought to you by letter Arr!
mariner02's Avatar
I've often considered building a South Dakota-class battleship; the first class which were broken up on the ways after the 1922 Washington Treaty. They were far enough along that their design was settled but none of them saw the water. Would be neat with that weird trunked funnel...
Feb 18, 2018, 10:07 PM
CG Bob's Avatar
Originally Posted by patmat2350
> Degree of crazy-imaginative-figmentation:
On one end of the scale: A tugboat that never-was, but which is entirely in keeping with tugboats of that type. Here, I'd deduct points if you put a steamer's stack on what is obviously a diesel tug (without a pretty good story...).
Here's that good story: The transition from steam to Diesel power for most tugs occurred in the 1920's and 1930's. Diesel tugs built during that period often had tall steamer stacks. Some of the railroads still ran steam tugs up to the late 1960's or early 1970's.

Take a look in the book called "ON THE HAWSER". On page 85 is a picture of two PRR tugs in NYC with tall stacks, both are Diesel powered.

Does anybody know where I can get an Artistic License document?
Last edited by CG Bob; Feb 18, 2018 at 10:17 PM.
Feb 19, 2018, 06:00 AM
20M northeast of Hell Mi
liljimmy's Avatar
Patmat is that your PT boat sneaking up behind Andy?
Latest blog entry: Blog

Quick Reply

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Announce NEVER FORGET: Conservatives were against MLK then and they erh7771 Life, The Universe, and Politics 98 Jan 17, 2018 10:23 PM
Discussion Discontinued Airplane Models you want to see Back exactly as they were or Improved Drra HobbyKing 19 Jun 07, 2017 05:43 PM
Cool Never knew trenches were so interesting Norman Adlam Life, The Universe, and Politics 21 Apr 21, 2016 12:57 AM
Discussion Which old rockers which were big once that never made it big again--still have it? POWERGROOVES Life, The Universe, and Politics 14 Dec 14, 2009 06:15 PM
Truer words were never spoken Mr. Wiz Life, The Universe, and Politics 0 Dec 08, 2005 01:42 PM