Soviet GB Suggested Rules

[NARSES2]

Right gentlemen the first Group Build of 2017 and the final one of the 2016/17 season will be the Soviet G.B. Please find below the suggested rules for this G.B., can you have a look at them and make any suggestions for improving them that you can think of.

Many thanks

Chris

UPDATED VERSION WITH ALL RULES CLARIFICATIONS DISCUSSED IN THIS THREAD
edited by Weaver 14:29GMT 28jan17

1.  Group Build runs from 00.01 Saturday 28th January 2017 to 24:00 Sunday 30th April 2017.


2.  You can enter any kit/figure/story in this GB which relates to the former Soviet Union of Socialist Republics, i.e Russia in it's Soviet era. The model must either represent a piece of hardware created in the USSR and used by anyone, or a piece of hardware created anywhere, but used by the USSR. You can use your fertile imaginations to dream up alternative histories, but the link between the model and Soviet Russia must be clear and explained.

By way of example:

   a) A MiG-21 flown by the RAF is okay (whether the UK has 'gone communist' or not) because it's Soviet
       Russian hardware.

   b) A Hunter flown by the Soviet Air Force is okay (whether the UK has 'gone communist' or not), because it's
       in Soviet Russian service.

   c) A Hunter flown by the RAF in an alternative universe where the UK has 'gone communist' is NOT okay,
       because it's neither Soviet Russian hardware, nor in Soviet Russian service.

   d) An L-39 Albatross flown by communist Czechoslovakia is NOT okay, because it's neither Soviet Russian
       hardware, nor in Soviet Russian service.

Non-Russian copies of Soviet hardware are allowed if they are straight, or near-straight copies of a Soviet original, or are significantly modified from their Soviet original IF the Soviet origin of the source design is still CLEARLY apparent. However Non-Russian designs which are merely inspired by Soviet hardware, but which share no (or only a few) drawings with the original are NOT allowed.  So to use Chinese examples, the regular J-7 is allowed, as is the J-7FS (MiG-21 with chin intake and double-delta wings), but the J-8 is not allowed.

If you're not sure whether your build is eligible or not, please ask the moderators before starting work.


3.  You may build as many entries as you like (good luck!).  The posting of in-progress pictures is encouraged as always.  Back stories - however long or short - win extra points.  Well OK they don't but they're always nice to see.


4.  "Preparation" work is allowed prior to the start of the GB - this includes the cutting out and cleaning up of parts, even printing your own decals (!), but anything involving paint or glue is not allowed.


5.  Part-started models will be considered by the moderators. You should explain what you have done or post pics (even better) and they will convene and pass judgment, their decision being final - we are relying on the honour of our membership to uphold this rule.


6. No rule 6 - is there ever a rule 6 ?


7. Moderators - JasonW and Weaver.

[sandiego89]

Rules look most glorious Comrade!

-Dave

update as below- I prefer a tighter theme: nothing screams Soviet like a big red star- ie no hypothetical states, no fictional, no future/altered alliances, no time warp etc. 

[Knightflyer]

So ......

To test the boundaries so to speak.... If I was to do a Mid Life Update to my Hawker Siddeley/Tupolev Chancellor (M)R.Mk.1 

http://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php/topic,38715.0.html

as operated by the 'non-aligned' United Kingdom would that be acceptable under Rule 2?

It's not a big deal if it's not acceptable, but if it is okay it'll be a great excuse to tackle my next 'RAF' Bear 

thanks

[NARSES2]

One for the moderators to consider

[jcf]

Latverian People's Republic governed by the Head of the Latverian Workers Soviet, Comrade Doom.

[Spey_Phantom]

got plenty of Soviet/Russian equipement in the stash, so i might have a look at what i can build
maybe its time to revive my Soviet COIN Tucano idea 

[sandiego89]

Personally I much more enjoy a little bit of a tighter theme, thus I am not a big fan of hypothetical pact states, or even client states so much- surely the big red star gives plenty of options for land, air, sea, space without having to create a whopper of a back story....but of course just my opinion

[kitbasher]

Personally I much more enjoy a little bit of a tighter theme, thus I am not a big fan of hypothetical pact states, or even client states so much- surely the big red star gives plenty of options for land, air, sea, space without having to create a whopper of a back story....but of course just my opinion

I'd go with that.  Keep to real world states but whif scenarious.

Anyone for a Tu-4 Bull serving in the RAF instead of the Washington B.1?

[PR19_Kit]

Personally I much more enjoy a little bit of a tighter theme, thus I am not a big fan of hypothetical pact states, or even client states so much- surely the big red star gives plenty of options for land, air, sea, space without having to create a whopper of a back story....but of course just my opinion

I'd go with that.  Keep to real world states but whif scenarious.

Anyone for a Tu-4 Bull serving in the RAF instead of the Washington B.1?

How could you tell the difference? 

[chrisonord]

Hmm?
Could I, build one of my Russian/ex Soviet vehicles or aircraft that was a prototype   in real world but in my alternative world be a production aircraft snapped up by a group of very naughty boys and girls and pressed into service in a certain South American country?
Cheers,
Chris

[strobez]

So... if I understand this right, I can go ahead and build my Yak-38 and it doesn't matter that it was in the service of the fictional Anti-Government Forces in the Kingdom of Asran's civil war, right?

You can't really get much more Soviet than a Yak-38, regardless of what the colour-scheme and decals used are... Amirite?

[rickshaw]

Personally I much more enjoy a little bit of a tighter theme, thus I am not a big fan of hypothetical pact states, or even client states so much- surely the big red star gives plenty of options for land, air, sea, space without having to create a whopper of a back story....but of course just my opinion

I'd go with that.  Keep to real world states but whif scenarious.

Anyone for a Tu-4 Bull serving in the RAF instead of the Washington B.1?

How could you tell the difference? 

The registration plates would be in Cyrillic? 

[kitbasher]

Anyone for a Tu-4 Bull serving in the RAF instead of the Washington B.1?

How could you tell the difference? 

As Wooksta might say, it's to mess with the JMN's heads.

[zenrat]

Personally I much more enjoy a little bit of a tighter theme, thus I am not a big fan of hypothetical pact states, or even client states so much- surely the big red star gives plenty of options for land, air, sea, space without having to create a whopper of a back story....but of course just my opinion

I second Dave.  Red stars only is the way to go IMO.

[Gondor]

The registration plates would be in Cyrillic? 

I prefer to use Enamels   

Gondor