Subject: SMML18/12/97VOL033 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- INDEX 1: Maths & Scale (&Hulls!) - Again 2: List of available kits, again 3: HMS Barham ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: Sue & Ben Subject: Maths & Scale (&Hulls!) - Again Hi Greg, I have learned I shouldn't try to write a coherent posting before 10 in the morning. In light of this let me quote from my own elucubrations. >> . . . ] After this is set you then apply the second course using .010 stock [ . . . << Doh! That should read .015" (good thing I read my post). I also forgot to mention that the stock thickness to use for the keel and bulkheads is either .060" or .080" to give you plenty of stiffness. And for the deck Evergreen stock #2025 is a prescibed sheet (2' x .020", .025" between lines) that's very useful. There's also #2020 which is similar but with .020" between lines. >> I assume you've checked TFW already. I'll ask around and get back to you. << Ooops, typo! That should be TFD (The Floating Drydock). Okay, onto fresh stuff. >> I was wondering about how to transfer hull lines to frames? Do you copy the line to a piece of paper, fold it in half, cut it out so you have equal contours port and starboard, then place it to your material, trace and cut? << Some may wish to argue with me on this but I much prefer working with half profiles. That way it's easier to compensate for the thinkness of the keel and the 'stiffness deck' (if you choose to use one). Let's assume you're using .080 for the keel, first trace your half profile on paper. Then remove .055" from the vertical straight section to account for your keel and planking ([1/2 of .080]+[1/2 of .030]). You can drop .005 from your planking thickness calculations to make up for loss during sanding. Now you can tack your paper profile to your sheet stock and cut away. And remember: "Measure twice, cut once". ;-) Cheers Ben ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: Gene Larson Subject: List of available kits, again Joe Poutre wrote: >> I think your confusing Paulo's page with the list of model reviews. Paulo has web site called Navis with images of models, some reviews, articles and links. Within that site is a page called Rajendra's List. << You are right. That is a very useful list. Now, to beat an almost dead horse - I have two problems. There are still significant models missing such as Bluejacket and the large GRP hulls and kits from the US and UK. Secondly, if I am looking for ie. all available crusier models to choose which to look into more and which to buy, it isn't easy. There is no brief listing. Also, it is not obvious that Rajendra's List is the one to go to, and how significant it is. However, the Navis listing is great! Gene Larson Nautical Research Guild, Inc Alexandria, Virginia mailto:genenrg@Naut-Res-Guild.org http://www.Naut-Res-Guild.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: Michael Eisenstadt Subject: HMS Barham Gentlemen: I'm building the Waveline 1/700 scale resin kit of the HMS Barham and have done some research on her, and would like to share my findings with you. Regarding the issue of the presence of a sternwalk on the HMS Barham at the time of her sinking and whether her final camo scheme was identical port and starboard. If you look carefully at photos derived from the film clip of the Barham rolling over you can make out a bit of the port side of the ship, from which it appears that A and B turrets wore the same camo pattern on the port side as the starboard side. The photos are not clear and it is not possible to be certain about any particular conclusion, but the photos give reason to think that the port and starboard patterns may have been identical. I would note that a number of other capital ships operating in the Mediterranean at about the same time wearing a two tone AP507A and AP507C scheme (HMS Illustrious and HMS Eagle for instance) appear to have worn identical patterns port and starboard. Moreover, see the photo of the Barham in Cdr. E. Keble Chatterton, "The Royal Navy and Allies: From October 1944 to September 1945," (Hutchison and Co.: London, 1947) (this is volume 5 of the set). One of the black and white photo plates in this volume shows the Barham with another QE class BB, as seen from the starboard quarter. Barham is wearing a variation of her final camo scheme as shown in the Imperial War Museum photo of the Barham published in Ensign Number 4, "Queen Elizabeth Class Battleships." Compare the dark panels toward the stern and amidships and you will notice that in the photo in the Ensign monograph the camo scheme has apparently been simplified--in that what appears as a single dark panel in this photo appears as separate panels in the Chatterton photo. Moreover, from the photo in the Chatterton book, it seems pretty clear that the sternwalk wass fitted toward the final phase of her career (though it is unclear if it was still fitted when Barham was sunk). By the way, to create a second discussion on SMML about the color of turret tops, the photos of Barham sinking show her turret tops to be a very dark color. Anybody have any idea as to what color British warships wore on their turret crowns when they were painted a different color from the overall scheme? Yours truly, Michael Eisenstadt ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume