Subject: SMML29/07/98VOL255 Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 20:10:21 +1000 (EST) shipmodels@wr.com.au --------------------------------- Thanks for having SMML at your home, why not stop by our home at: http://warship.simplenet.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Re: HMCS Sackville 2: Re: Water 3: Re: Realistic waves 4: Torpedo Boats 39&40 (RN-188?) 5: Airfix/Revell 1/72 Flower Class Corvette 6: DD1 Bainbridge Paint scheme 7: British Escort Ships Part-1 8: Flower class corvettes INFO 9: CBM's 10: ship pictures 11: RE: Suggested PE for Upgrade 12: Shades of grey 13: USS IOWA (BB-61) 14: British Escort Ships Part-2 15: USS Forrestal 16: Flower Class Corvettes 17: FLOWER CLASS CORVETTES 18: Blue Water Navy ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: ironship@usit.net (Jon Warneke) Subject: Re: SMML28/7/98Vol254 >> The book you're referring to is the Anatomy Of The Ship series : The Flower Class Corvette Agassiz by John Mckay & John Harland, published by Conway Maritime Press Ltd in 1993 (ISBN 0-85177-614-0). It focusses on the HMCS Agassiz in its pre-1943 refit i.e. with the two masts and the short forecastle. As such she is a typical example of the Canadian corvettes and not of the RN corvettes. Also noteworthy is the fact that she had a square stern instead of a round one, for the minesweeping gear. There are some foto's of Sackville in the book though. Sadly enough the book (as many of this fine serie) is now out of print.) << Thanks for the correction on the spelling. I knew I had it wrong. The Canadians did redesign the basic Flower design, according to Ken Macpherson, due to reports of service from the RN, as well as to accomodate it's building in Canada. The major differences were: 1. to move the galley from the aft section of the superstructure to just behind the bridge 2.move the 2 pounder tub from amidships to the area formerly occupied by the galley 3. square off the stern to provide for minesweeping gear 4. what were called "habitability improvements" The first group of about 30-40 units were built as short Forecastle units with the forecastle ending about 20 feet before the bridge structure, which were termed by Macpherson as the 1939-40 Program. In 1941, these units were taken into refit, and the forecastle extended past the bridge to approximately the midpoint of the ship (as the Matchbox/Revell kit reflects), and these have been termed the 1941 Improved program. Later, another group of Flowers were authorized with an increased flair to the bow and the lengthened forecastle, and these have been termed the 1942 Revised program. All of these ships had the same basic changes from the RN units. These ships were loaned to the USN as PG's, and some were refitted with US weapons, and some were also turned over to the RN, which would account for the square stern on the Agassiz, which I believe was a Canadian built ship. >> I am building the corvette (Revell-livery) now, but haven't decided yet which one to built, I have ordered some resin detailling kits by Sirmar at Midway Models, but have still to receive them. In the Revell-boxed kit, they give options for two ships: The USS Saucy (PG-65) and the HMCS Snowberry (K166), but there are also decals for the HMS Bluebell (K80), and extra parts for probably this ship (Different << If I remember correctly, this kit has the rounded stern of the RN ships, so this would need to be one of the modifications needed to do Saucy, but Snowberry was an RN built unit which came from the UK (the RN and RCN mixed ships regularly). Getting back to Sackville. She was one of the original 1939 ships which was modified into the improved class with the extended forecastle on the US Gulf Coast in 1942 (Pascagoula, MS, I think), and served throughout the remainder of the war in this configuration. After the war she was turned into an oceanographic ship for the RCN, and after retirement, was refitted to the 1942 look for her display status. Jon Warneke Iron Shipwrights "Yeah, I want Cheesy Poofs!" ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: Water >> Just one more item to add to the judging criteria at the next IPMS meet for ship dioramas....eh Rusty?? Imagine.... two absolutely perfect dioramas of ships cruising on the sea and the one winning on being 39.5 degrees EXACTLY and the other finishing in second place because it was only 39.43759 degrees!! OH MY GOD!!! (this is not to be taken seriously folks!!!) << If that ever happens I quit, because having seen everything. But on a serious note, unrealistic water and wave patterns contribute to the demise of a lot of ship dioramas. In short, if it looks real, that will help more than anything else in the eyes of diorama judges. So all things being equal (which is almost impossible) the winner would be the most realistic water. If the modeler would just use an aerial photo of the ship he's modeling, you can't miss. Just copy what's in the photo. I pioneered the use of Sculpey making large scale waves. It looks so real that the first remark from most folks when they see my models are "great water". Forget the model. Great water! Rusty White Flagship Models Inc. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: "Foeth" Subject: Re: Realistic waves It would seem that my 'draw a circle'diagram doesn't really give the right bowangle. I saw this drawing a few years ago and thought it was the correct way to obtain this angle, but apparently, it isn't. The right way to obtain this angle is a little too complicated to explain without math, and that's no high-school math, with all kinds of Fourrier transforms and complex integrations, even the mathematician who wrote the book finds 'tedious'. If a mathematician says it's tedious, believe him! I myself am not a mathematician, but a student of ship hydromechanics in his fourth year (that's close to being a mathematician), and this wave theory is quite difficult, even with all the math I've had so far. And secondly, I'm having my vacation right now, so I'm not willing to study the subject thoroughly. I'm sorry if any of you actually started to draw those circle's. I have and it's not working. But, that angle stands. Don't kill somebody if his angle is 39.45 degrees. The actual angle (approx. 39.56, that is not an exact figure) might show some differentiation is real life too (that is frustrating, but real life is so much more complex than this 'elementary math'). If your angle is 39-39.5 degrees, it's perfect enough. Secondly, don't laugh at somebody who has a torpedo-boat at full speed with a smaller angle: remember what I said on planing ships: different (smaller) angle. Anything over 40 degrees is not so realistic, though. Point two: This wave-system with that 39.5 degree angle is a direct result of speed. That means that it can be barely visible with some slow ships. I also said the angle was not dependent on hull form. BUT, the wave-heights, and such are. there are more waves coming from your ship depending on hull-shape, so there could be a lot of different situations between the lines spanning that angle. The only way to make a really realistic wavesystem, is copying it from pictures, or running advanced fluid dynamics programs (which neglect a lot of reallife effects, which are too difficult too compute with current computer technology. There is no "exact" science. Ask a scientist to calculate what's really happening inside the propellor wake (Or inside your coffecup, while stirring the milk), and he'll start screaming. We do not know exactly), but then your losing sight of your hobby, I think. I just wrote the article to warn people who give a tanker a 80 degree bow wave, "because it has to push more water in front of it, because it's large." That's what I read in an article at Navismagazine. No, that doesn't make that article bad. It is quite unfair to blame someone for not knowing that. It is fair to hit someone who is criticising your model on this particular subject. I know how it feels when somebody is telling you your model has "a very serious basic flow, too late to correct it now, I'm afraid". It hurts. By the way, I have never build a ship-diorama myself. Only shelf-ships. (I am not ashamed) But if anyone has a basic ship question (what's: cavitation, metacentric height, stability, cemented steel, etc), I could try to explain it as far as I understand it myself (only a student, you see). Evert-Jan "I hate to bring this up" Foeth ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: Ron or Julie Hillsden Subject: Torpedo Boats 39&40 (RN-188?) The talk of CMBs reminded me of a project I have in the back of my mind for future construction. I would like to make either Torpedo Boat 39 or 40. These were made by Yarrow at Popular, length: 100 feet, beam 12.5', draught 4.5', 40 ton and 500 HP. They could get up to 20 knots,1 TT, 2 1" Nordenfelt MG and crew of 15. The boats were sold to Chile, but when the Russians got a bit frisky (dispute over Afghanistan border) Britain towed them to the Pacific Station (Esquimalt BC) behind HMS SATELLITE (corvette) in 1885. They didn't do much and were sold for scrap at Victoria 1905. Does anyone have photos or drawings of these or any Yarrow TB? I haven't found much which will be of assistance in producing a good model. Ron in Victoria BC Canada ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: Ron or Julie Hillsden Subject: Airfix/Revell 1/72 Flower Class Corvette I think most of the people who read this list will be really disappointed in the quality of this kit. I built one, but all I used was the hull, funnel, cowl vents, some of the superstructure and a few of the detail parts. It was by and far the biggest kit-bash I ever attempted. The good side to this is there are always unassembled or partially assembled models at swap meets. People give up. Open the box and have a good look. If you are prepared to replace all the pieces whic are just wrong or out of scale, it is a good project. Two bright spots: The model is an excellent radio control sailor if you are interested in converting it. There is also an excellent photo-etch set for it. Saw it once, it came from Britian, that's all I know. This is just a warning to those who think this kit will give them a finished model they will be proud to display in a glass case. Maybe with the photetch frets and a lot of scratch work, but not if you shake the box. Ron in Victoria B C Canada. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: Duane Fowler Subject: DD1 Bainbridge Paint scheme Well, I'm taking a break from the monster (Y-----) and am building the BWN DD1, USS Bainbridge. It's actually a fun little resin kit. I need some help on the paint scheme, though. The instructions say to paint it either grey or green, with everything above the deck level brown. Does anyone have any mor information on this pre WW1 destroyer and the paint scheme used? Thanks, Duane (Yamatoholic) Fowler ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: "Douglas Martin" Subject: British Escort Ships Part-1 I have the old WW2 factfile softback books by McDonald and Janes, one of which is 'British Escort Ships', 1974. (£1.20, ho hum....) CONVOLVULUS -K45 GARDENIA -K99 MARIGOLD -K87 PENTSTEMON -K61 RHODODENDRON - K78 SAMPHIRE - K128 VETCH - K132 All the above are from the RN 1st group, there was a later 'Modified' batch. Modifications effected as a result of war experience, details to follow later this pm. Douglas (Scotland) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: "graham walker" Subject: Flower class corvettes INFO Les I speak quite regular to a son of Captain Walkers group, If you email me I will pass on his email to you. I am quiet sure he would know all about the ships. By the way I note that at long last our country has at last put up a memorial to Captain Walker in Liverpool. Best wishes Graham Walker ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: "graham walker" Subject: CBM's If I am right there was one of these restored out side Thorneycroft's ship yard. best wishes Graham ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: "graham walker" Subject: ship pictures Colin may local art dealer told me about it coming out but has not got one in, If you are interested I have a beaut print of a picture of HMS Belfast in about 1945. I put information about it in the Cruiser magazine a few months ago. A few weeks ago I got one with HMS Ark Royal IV with her air group on board and for my last birthday my wife got me a print of HMS Ark Royal when she was entering Portsmouth for the last time on her decommissioning. blessed be Graham ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: "Katz, Gene S" Subject: RE: Suggested PE for Upgrade Hi, Any suggestions as to PE manufacturers/vendors and which frets for 1/350 Flower Class (Commander Series) and 1/700 Guilio Ceseare (Waveline). I have these kits and want to upgrade them via PE/resin goodies. Also, any suggestions for telling the wife? By the way, has anyone ever built the card/paper model of the 1/400 Muzio Attendolo, WW2 Italian CA or CL? Gene S. Katz ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: Keith Butterley Subject: Shades of grey Hi all, Just got caught up on 4 weeks of SMML. Sounds like things got a little testy over the clarity of instructions issue. It seems to me back in the 60s when I was building Airfix 1/600, there instructions alway told you exactly what each part was, and had exploded :-) views of where it all went. Maybe somebody who is as grey as I am can remember if this is true or not, or maybe I just have a foggy head of "those were the good old days" syndrome. I would sure like to see at least a couple of different angles for the rigging schemes. I know it is impossible to show every line, but something more than just a silhouette view would certainly be nice. Anyways speaking of grey, it seems I recall back about a month ago that somebody mentioned that Kriegsmarine ships had two shades of grey only slightly varying between the hull and superstructure. As I am finally getting ready to paint the Deutchland I would like to know what shade of Testors should I be using and how much and what should I be tinting it with to obtain the above stated differences? What was lighter hull or superstructure? Also since this is a prewar depiction I would imagine I can just go ahead and use some form of wood coloring for the deck? In Janes Battleships of the 20th Century it looks like the deck is buff and the superstructure color is more of a dark tan can anybody comment on this. And why was the slight difference in the grey used, I know it apparently went back to the Kaisers Navy could somebody give me the history on that if possible or was it a case of just because? Unfortunately I did not make it to the Nats despite all the noise I made before I left on our trip south. I ran afoul of Part III Section V Paragraph II Line 4 of the Marriage as a Career Handbook: THE WIFE HAS THE RIGHT TO CHANGE HER MIND AT ANY TIME INCLUDING UP TO THE MOMENT YOU SEE THE EXIT SIGN OFF THE FREEWAY. Divorce will be final in two weeks :-) Keith Butterley Ready aye ready ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: RVanda1839@aol.com Subject: USS IOWA (BB-61) Some of you may have seen this site but I thought I would mention it because it has a very good article on building Tamiya's 1/350 New Jersey as the Iowa. The article has plenty of pictures and points out some interesting points between the model and the actual ship. This is of interest to me because I have this model and just this weekend purchased the GMM PE for it. Now I just have to find the time and space to work. The site is: http://www.ussiowa.org. I found it through the links on the Warship homepage. Check it out. Rich ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: "Douglas Martin" Subject: British Escort Ships Part-2 Cont: I have the old WW2 factfile softback books by McDonald and Janes, one of which is 'British Escort Ships', 1974. (£1.20, ho hum....) CONVOLVULUS -K45 GARDENIA -K99 MARIGOLD -K87 PENTSTEMON -K61 RHODODENDRON - K78 SAMPHIRE - K128 VETCH - K132 All the above are from the RN 1st group, there was a later 'Modified' batch. Modifications effected as a result of war experience, a) Extending the forecastle to abaft the bridge, to provide extra accommodation. b) Installing SB.RDF on the bridge. c) Addition of 2 *20mm in the bridge wings, single mounts. d) Fitting the DG coil externally. e) Re-stepping the foremast abaft the bridge and taking out the mainmast to improve the AA arc of the aft weapon. a) to d) in whole or part during 1940 in corvettes under construction. Verbena was the first unit to be completed with the long forecastle, and only about 50 of the earlier units had the short version. 30 units had a temp minesweeping capability, all removed in 43/44. 1942-43 mods, raise the height of the forward 4" gun platform, add a Hedgehog forward of the bridge, raise the bridge by one deck, bridge 20mm replaced by 6pdrs in some, add 2-4 20mm in the waist, move the 2pdr to the aft end of the superstructure, re-step a short mainmast. Gardenia, June 1940, M99 (pictured), as completed, short f/castle, 2 masts, external DG, and UP projectors in place of the aft AA gun. Flag M superior allocated to corvettes, changed to 'K' in mid 1940. Non standard mods, esp AA in Mediterranean corvettes. No pics of the other ships above, but mods to ships were not all carried out equally, some been partly done - oh dear! That's all folks! Douglas (also got the books 'Canada's Flowers' and 'Victory in the St Lawrence') ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: "Ralph E. Batykefer, Jr." Subject: USS Forrestal I'm looking for someone in the Washinton, D.C. area that owns a USS Forrestal 1962-63 cruise book. I know it is a long shot, but I wanted to try. Ralph Batykefer ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: HGYL@aol.com Subject: Flower Class Corvettes Les Pickstock asks some questions about the Flowers. First of all, it must be remembered that these ships were constantly being modified throughout the war and quite possibly many of them never went to sea twice in the same configuration as weapons and equipment were continuosly upgraded, camouflage schemes were changed and so on. All of the early ships were completed with a short focsle but were later rebuilt with the extended focsle as the need for more equipment and ever increasing numbers of men to operate the equipment demanded more space. Later ships were completed with the longer focsle while the last ships had a modified hull design with increased sheer and flare which improved seakeeping and endurance. The very last ships were so different in hull form as to be almost a seperate class. There were three different bridge designs used on the ships with original sheer and flare and four bridge designs on the ships with increased sheer and flare. Again, it is not possible to say which design of bridge a particular ship had, she quite probably had all the applicable bridge designs throughout her career depending on her weapon fit at any given point. WRT Les's specific queries. Pennant numbers: Convolvulus K45 completed with short focsle Gardenia K99 " " " Marigold K87 " " " Penstemon K61 " " " Rhododendron K78 " " " Samphire K128 increased sheer and flare Vetch K132 (I think ) " " " WRT Les's other questions, the answer regarding the first five ships is probably "yes" on both counts. The only way to be quite sure is to get hold of photgraphs of the ship in question showing her at the desired time. The Imperial War Museum publishes a list of all the photos they hold of Flowers and this is extremely useful. Incidentally, regarding the Matchbox/Revell kit, USS Saucy was built in Britain as HMS Snapdragon and HMCS Snowberry was built in Quebec (originally with a short focsle ) by Davie Ship building. Sorry to have gone on at length but the story of the Flowers is one that fascinates me. I hope that this helps Harold Lincoln ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: RVanda1839@aol.com Subject: FLOWER CLASS CORVETTES Convolvulus K45 25Jul39 26Feb41 Gardenia K99 25Jul39 24May40 Marigold K87 31Aug39 28Feb41 Pentstemon K61 31Aug39 31Jul41 Rhododendron K78 19Sep39 18Oct40 Samphire K128 12Dec39 30Jun41 Vetch ? From Man o' War 7 Flower Class Corvettes. First date is when ordered and second date is when completed. Forecastles were extended on boats building in 1941. I don't know if any of the above would have been completed that way. The book does not say nor does it list open/closed bridges. The only way is to look at the pictures--if you know what to look for. There is a picture of the Vetch but it had no pendant number and was not in the list of ships. Hope this helps. NOTE: In the May '96 issue of Scale Ship Modeler (V19/N3) is a great article on a scratchbuilt 1/48 scale HMCS Sackville (K-181). Runs 14 pages of text and photos (color and B/W). Rich ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: Mark Kwasnycia Subject: Corvettes, Furious, and Hi! >> Eric Roth, Minden, Ontario CANADA p.s. Hello to Mark Kwasnycia in Ottawa...still haven't found my ITC Graf << First off, Hi Eric! Long time no see... (figuratively) Considering you only live a couple of hours from Ottawa, it's really funny that we're communicating via Austrialia - Thanks to Greg the Listmaster! The Hood's in prep... yah I know, it's taking me forever, but WEMblie kits are like wine, they get better with age! It's great to see all the comments flying back and forth regarding Corvettes, but I must admit I'm a little confused. Several comments have been made regarding the squared off "minesweeping" stern; I've always believed that the only Canadian Corvettes that didn't have the squared off stern were the ones transferred from Britain. The story goes, (as related to me by various "old sweats") was that the Canadian shipyards all built the squared sterns because it eased the shipbuilding process, as rounded "cruiser" sterns required a greater degree of skill during construction. End result, all Canadian construction corvettes were squared, which served to easily distinguish them from the majority of their British built sisters. The other thing which caught my attention was the listing in the post in yesterday's list, regarding reference books/pictures for RN ships... What's this HMS Fearless starring in a book called "Sunk and Damaged"? I've always believed that Fearless lived out her days, to be decommisioned in (I think) 1944. Were there 2 Fearless's? (The reason I'm wondering, is that I've always had a "soft spot" for the old Battlecruiser/cum aircraft carrier, but I really don't have anything on her in my library!) I'm back to checking through books looking for Cpt. Walkers Corvettes, hopefully I'll find 'em... Mark Kwasnycia Ottawa (PS - Can't resist... Colin, how's the weather today? Hope you've managed to discover the sun this week!) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: "Morley, James (London)" Subject: Blue Water Navy Does anyone know how I can get in touch with Blue Water Navy? I am looking to get my hands on the South Dakota (or the other one - being English I refuse to attempt to spell it!!). Do they have a web page? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume