KP/Kopro

[Old Wombat]

But what was the point?

It was because the Japanese used (& use) the metric system &, for them (& anyone else using metric), these scales were easier to convert & manufacture.

Note the issues with the first batch of L1A1 SLR's, which were a complete mess, because the conversion from the metric FN FAL was ... muddled.

FN had used the Metric Inch (25.4mm) to convert the manufacturers' drawings but the British had used the Imperial Inch (25.399977mm) to manufacture the tooling for the rifles, those tiny differences in tolerances led to a weapon that jammed & exploded when used. The issue was quickly discovered & rectified but at quite a cost in re-drawing the plans (for Imperial measurements) & re-tooling. Oddly, this isn't mentioned in any sources on the rifle I can find at the moment & I can't recall which one I saw it in many years ago.

[jcf]

1/25 (v. 1/24), 1/20 (v. 1/18)

1/25th has bupkis to do with being "metric" it's been an American model car scale since the
'50s - '60s.

Nor do 1/18 and 1/20 have any connection, 1/20th was around long before the 1/18th
diecast boom, I don't recall ever seeing anything in 1/18th before the "large" diecasts
hit the market. Again it has nothing to do with metric versus "Imperial" or any attempted
Japanese "metrification", Heller used metric scales for many years.

The vast majority of the common scales, metric and "Imperial", are standard architectural
scales.

[Weaver]

I'm also dubious of the idea that scales can be metric or imperial: they're just proportions with no units.

If the dimension of the real thing is 6547mm then I don't see how it's any easier to divide it by 75 than it is by 72 or 76.

For every real world thing that's made to a nice round number of millimetres, there's another one that's made to an oddball number for some technical/oprational reason, and yet another thing that's made to a nice round number of inches.

[frank2056]

At least scales are dimensionless ratios. Let's not get into the railway "scales" or even worse, wargamming "scales" - they make no sense.

[The Wooksta!]

Apparently the Seafire Ib and the Tempest V are out and available on super-hobby.co.uk.  There are sprue shots of the former and it comes with a new sprue for the navalised fuselage and hook.  If you have a KP Spitfire Vc, you get a spare b wing, so you could probably cobble together another Spit from spares.

[rickshaw]

I built some 1/75 armour when I was a kid, was it Fujimi ? My other memory of "scale differences" was comparing the size of an Airfix Sherman in 1/76, if that was what OO/HO was to a Hasegawa one in 1/72. The Hasegawa kit was massive in comparison, at least to a kid 

Hasegawa's Easy Eight model was notoriously overscale for 1/72.  When I was a wargamer we always used to joke about the size of the GIs that were used to crew them.  Rather like Airfix and their British Paratroopers being 7 feet tall...

[NARSES2]

Apparently the Seafire Ib and the Tempest V are out and available on super-hobby.co.uk.  There are sprue shots of the former and it comes with a new sprue for the navalised fuselage and hook.  If you have a KP Spitfire Vc, you get a spare b wing, so you could probably cobble together another Spit from spares.

My Seafire arrived this morning Lee. Looks quite nice. As you say, loads of unused parts on the sprues including those unused fuselage halves. If you'd like them ?

They also have coloured instructions

Not seen the Tempests yet, at least not on Hannants.

[The Wooksta!]

Spares donation?  I'm positive I can find a home for them.

I'm not going to bother with the AZ/KP Tempests, at least the Vs.  I've enough Heller/Smer ones tucked away and I don't like the mk V that much anyway.  It's the F.II I like and I have enough of those too.

[Hobbes]

I'm also dubious of the idea that scales can be metric or imperial: they're just proportions with no units.

If the dimension of the real thing is 6547mm then I don't see how it's any easier to divide it by 75 than it is by 72 or 76.

Imperial scales are usually multiples of 12 which makes it easy to convert between ft and in: at 1/72, 1" on your model is 6' on the original. That goes for 1/24, 48, 72 and 144.
For metric, 1/10 and 1/100 would be ideal.

[Weaver]

I'm also dubious of the idea that scales can be metric or imperial: they're just proportions with no units.

If the dimension of the real thing is 6547mm then I don't see how it's any easier to divide it by 75 than it is by 72 or 76.

Imperial scales are usually multiples of 12 which makes it easy to convert between ft and in: at 1/72, 1" on your model is 6' on the original. That goes for 1/24, 48, 72 and 144.
For metric, 1/10 and 1/100 would be ideal.

Yes, but using a metric scale to make a model of a metric subject, or an Imperial scale to make a model of an Imperial subject, is still only an advantage if the dimensions of the subject are nice round numbers. If the real thing is exactly 18' long, then congratulations, your model can be exactly 3" long. However, if the real thing is 17' 7 5/8" long, then you're going to be doing the maths whether your model is measured in inches or millimetres, and commiserations might be more in order...

Also, note that there are only two 'ideal' scales in metric, 1/10th and 1/100th, which let you take advantage of easy division by 10. One of them is rather too big for most subjects while the other is fine for some but too small for others. To end up with models of practical size, you also need something like 1/25th, 1/50th and 1/75th, but none of those make for the nice, easy maths that multiples of 10 do.

This points to a wider problem with metric: it's fine for many things, easier in some respects and mandatory for anything that's going into a computer, but it's not very good for 'human scale' stuff that often needs to be guesstimated using imprecise means and mental arithmetic. An inch is roughly the length of the last digit on your hand. A foot is roughly, well, a foot. 12 has 4 factors: 2, 3, 4 and 6, which makes it easy to divide 12 things up into equal portions. 10 has only two factors: 2 and 5, so you're into fractions of a thing or unequal portions much faster.

[The Rat]

Imperial scales are usually multiples of 12 which makes it easy to convert between ft and in: at 1/72, 1" on your model is 6' on the original. That goes for 1/24, 48, 72 and 144.
For metric, 1/10 and 1/100 would be ideal.

And 1/50th would be so close to 1/48th that you could probably combine them in a diorama and few would notice.

[NARSES2]

Imperial scales are usually multiples of 12 which makes it easy to convert between ft and in: at 1/72, 1" on your model is 6' on the original. That goes for 1/24, 48, 72 and 144.
For metric, 1/10 and 1/100 would be ideal.

And 1/50th would be so close to 1/48th that you could probably combine them in a diorama and few would notice.

That can be quite useful in a boxed diorama where you are trying to show perspective. See it done a few times, often in museums, sometimes successfully, sometimes not.

[NARSES2]

Spares donation?  I'm positive I can find a home for them.

I'm not going to bother with the AZ/KP Tempests, at least the Vs.  I've enough Heller/Smer ones tucked away and I don't like the mk V that much anyway.  It's the F.II I like and I have enough of those too.

The F.II is the one I'm after as well, although I'll probably get a Mk VI. I'll wait for the Airfix kit for some Mk V's. I've always liked both the Typhoon and Tempest.

As for the spares ? I'll put them with the rest I have for you (Skua bits etc) and bring them up with me once my family settle down to whatever is the new normal. Either that or Telford if earlier and it's on.

[The Wooksta!]

TBH, I'm toying with the idea of a day trip down to London at some point in the near future.

[NARSES2]

TBH, I'm toying with the idea of a day trip down to London at some point in the near future.

OK mate, let me know. Being retired I'm reasonably flexible, although my limbs may no longer be