Subject SMML22/01/99VOL433 Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 01:10:34 +1100 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: IPMS partial correction 2: Re: Arleigh Burke hangars 3: Re: FLT II Burkes 4: Large Scale Weapons Systems 5: Tamiya 1/350 Hood? 6: KGV Book 7: Re: Book: Dreadnoughts in Camera = Brilliant photograhy 8: Re: Jim Shirley Productions 9: Re: Bofors 10: Decals 11: Skywave's Oi 12: How bigs da-hole? 13: Re: Not 2 hangar decks 14: Re: Large scale ordinance 15: Re: Viking 1/700 scale new York and hull red 16: Re: IJN colors 17: Re: 1/35 weapons kits 18: Resin kits 19: 40mm BOFORS 20: BB-46 USS Maryland 21: Re: Dreadnoughts in camera 22: Re: ZUIHO 23: 1/35 Weapons 24: Re: Burke Class Flight II Hanger Bay Layout 25: Snow war reports :-) 26: Colour chips 27: Re: The ATLANTA book 28: Re: DREADNOUGHT 29: Re: HMS Dreadnought and Jutland 30: Large Scale Naval Weapons Kit 31: German Catapult Ships 32: Yamato type 89 12.7mm gun -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD INDEX 1: PREPUBLICATION ANNOUNCEMENT: 2: AD Correction 3: Matchbox Corvette on Ebay 4: News about USS Pringle Website Address -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS Note from Shane A) From: "Morley, James (London)" Subject: Navis and Warship I wonder if I'm alone in being distressed at the rivalry between the Navis and Warship websites. I'm sure there are quite a few advertisers and people (like myself) who visit both regularly, and I'm sure that they, like me, have the greatest respect for Paolo's obvious modelling ability, as well as Greg and Shane's work with this list. The thing is that there is no obviously "right" or "wrong" way to do these things. Navis has so many subscribers because, quite simply, it's worth it. Yet I bet that every one of those subscribers has visited the Warship site this month, and most of them probably subscribe to SMML. You are not really in competition with each other, and you should be able to coexist peacefully (and maybe even co-operatively) together. I've seen the last few posts - will you PLEASE stop trying to wind each other up!!!!!!!!!! James "Chamberlain" Morley B) From: "Kenneth H. Goldman" Subject: Re: ELECTRONIC MODELING MAGAZINES - SMML21/01/99Vol432 Easy does it, people. I sense another flame war simmering here. Paying for information does not guarantee its value and accuracy, neither does receiving information gratis immediately make it suspect. One of the great things about the scale modeling community is the willingness of its members to share information. That is not to say a small emolument might not coax an expert to find some extra time in an otherwise booked schedule to write an article, do a build-up review, or take a few extra photographs of the real thing. (I'd love to get paid for my time modeling and writing about it.) Quite frankly, I find the group mind of SMML to be the most valuable primary research source available on line, -- and it's entirely text based! The existing electronic magazines both provide additional interesting and useful information. I don't give a rat's ass who was first. The point is, there is room for everybody on the internet without ego clashes mucking up the works. --Ken Goldman-- The above messages are just a sample of what's been sent to me in the wake of the last three day's SMMLs. When I agreed to take the reins of SMML to give Greg a rest, I knew that sooner or later this would happen. I would off course prefer that it didn't happen, but now that it has, I think it's time to re-clarify the position of SMML. SMML will be kept "relatively" FLAME FREE. I say relatively, because what constitutes a flame varies from person to person. The decision of what is a flame will be at Greg's & my discretion. If we have to send posts back to be toned down we will. If people won't tone it down they won't be posted in SMML PERIOD. No coresspondence will be entered into. Because to be quite honest, I don't really care what you may think of someone else, just keep it out of SMML FWIW, I agree with the sentiments expressed in the replies to me. I believe that what's submitted to SMML is far better than any web site, as this is a public forum where friendships are made & people on the whole are respected. Please let's remember that web publishing is not the be all & end all of the model press. AFAIC, some of the best stuff I've seen comes from club magazines and these mags are the lifeblood of the hobby. I would also like to thank all those people who have encouraged me this last month as well. Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: "Caroline Carter" Subject: IPMS partial correction Shane, although of course I think Paolo was referring to the US IPMS, Jim Baumann, of course, is a Brit (joined IPMS in September and won every maritime trophy with his entries at the U.K. Nationals...the largest in the world..) BTW I hope you're all booked for the Year 2000 World Nationals! I have dates and details if anyone wants em! BTW, we have heard he's entering a stack of newly built stuff at the Fleet Air Arm Model show on at the FAA Museum at Yeovilton on 20th February (10-5pm), so, what better excuse to come along (besides say Hi to Dave and I of course!!). This show is the second largest in our busy calendar by the way, and you get to see the whole museum as well! Cheers! Caroline C. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: "Percy, John" Subject: Re: Arleigh Burke hangars >> DDG-81 appears to have dual hangers. Can anyone make a guess as to whether or not the two bay would be connected inside (i.e. one large hanger with two separate doors), or would the two hangers not be connected (for perhaps, fire reasons). I know it's a guess, but I thought someone might know.... << >> The FLT II Burkes did indeed have two hangar decks. This was the major change from the earlier version of the Burke class vessels. I can't say for sure but I can venture an educated guess that the hangar bay is one large open hangar. It would make moving the Helicopter in and out of the bays much easier (and safer) while doubling the Burkes antisubmarine capability. My two cents worth. Rusty White << As far as I know, the missile VLS, which is on top of the hanger bay (look at Haze Grey's pictorial on the launching of the Oscar Austin at http://www.uss-salem.org/features/ddg79/) bisects the 2 hangers. Haze Grey's listing on the Arliegh Burke Flight IIA says there are 2 hangers, too. I think this arrangement is safer and easier than 1 large hanger, though. Imagine a fire: in one large hanger both helicopters are in danger. In a split one, only one is. Of course, having a magazine full of missiles in between probably isn't too safe, either. I've been on Kidd class DDGs and Ticonderoga CGs, and know that the 1 hanger concept can get crowded. Makes a great place to play basketball when the helicopters are gone, though. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: "Joseph & Mary Divar" Subject: Re: FLT II Burkes >> The FLT II Burkes did indeed have two hangar decks. This was the major change from the earlier version of the Burke class vessels. I can't say for sure but I can venture an educated guess that the hangar bay is one large open hangar. It would make moving the Helicopter in and out of the bays much easier (and safer) while doubling the Burkes antisubmarine capability. My two cents worth. << I'll go ahead and chime in. As a LAMPS MkIII Seahawk pilot I don't believe the having one large open hangar effects the movement of the aircraft. Since a fueled SH-60B weighs close to 21,000 pounds we utilize the RAST system that "pulls" the helo in and out of the hangar. The only human involvement is the LSO and the flight deck crew which spot the aircraft as it is being straightened and traversed. Not having seen any FLT IIs I won't hazard any answers. My guess though, would be two separate hangars. The Perry-class Figs are configured that way. Meaning two doors, two individually enclosed hangars. DDs and CGs have one door yet can carry two helos inside. So number of doors does not necessarily equate to number of helos to be carried. With LAMPS III, at least, that equates to how many RA tracks the ship has. Joe D. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: "mkrumrey" Subject: Large Scale Weapons Systems Greetings SMML: I too would like to see a variety of the weapons systems in a scale such as 1/35 or 1/32. The CIWS is an Awesome (literally) piece of gear and a good choice for this venture. Hope to see more. Following the vintage television thread....does anyone remember "Men of Anapolis"? A half hour show devoted to the problems and joys of being a midshipman at the Naval Academy. I remember one episode about a midshipman caught cheating. I think his older brother was the Sr. Midship and had to report him. Anyway, like Bob Steinbrunn, I have to go and do the driveway AGAIN, after the plow has hemmed me in AGAIN. More snow and sleet on the way. It's a beautiful thing. Mark Krumrey New Richmond WI -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: Felix Bustelo Subject: Tamiya 1/350 Hood? Hello SMMLers, I received an email in my webmaster account from somebody asking if I had heard anything about Tamiya releasing a 1/350 HMS Hood. I told him that the only 1/350 Tamiya rumour that I had about was an Essex class carrier and I know that Tamiya has a Hood in 1/700. Has anybody out there heard something about a Hood kit in 1/350? I would like to tell this guy one way or the other. Thanks, Felix Bustelo http:\\members.tripod.com\~Febus65\imm.htm Hi Felix, The only 1/350 HMS Hood that I know is the WEM resin kit. Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: "Satin, Michael N. (SHEP)" Subject: KGV Book Dear Fellow SMMLrs: A couple of weeks ago I saw the following posting: >> From: "Douglas Martin" Subject: RE: Online Bookstores and KGVs For anyone wanting more information on the KGV Battleships, there is a book called: King George V Class Battleships, by V.E.Tarrant, Arms And Armour Press, ISBN 1-85409-267-07, 1991. I got my copy from the Motor Book shop, London. << Since then I have been frantically searching the web for this book (including the shops listed in the Warship site), but I cannot find it. While I have other searches still underway, it finally occurred to me to check if anyone on the list had a copy or a lead on one. If anyone out there has a spare copy or knows where I could get one, I'd love to hear from you. You would be helping a fellow modeler break down that age-old excuse: "I'd build it, but I'm waiting for just a bit more documentation!" I'm in the U.S. but if I have to order from the U.K. to get this book, I'd be willing to try. Anyway, thanks to all who have answered my earlier questions about RN ships. Who knows, with all this help, one these days I might actually build something! Michael Satin -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: "Caroline Carter" Subject: Re: Book: Dreadnoughts in Camera = Brilliant photograhy Hi Lee, First off, you've got great taste in books.. this and the large "RN in Malta" books are amongst my faves! It is available from us and others in the U.K at 22.95 pounds. Re HMS Dreadnought (and you'll get a few folks answer this one..) she was under refit at Portsmouth when Jutland cracked off.. from 27th May to 8th June. Jutland of course was 31st of May! I think they probably nicknamed her "Lucky"! Cheers! Caroline White End Sign Models (the latest in a long line of amusing spellings we've seen on envelopes recently!) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: "Caroline Carter" Subject: Re: Jim Shirley Productions Hi Roberto (and others who may be interested), We do not carry items from JSP... 2 main reasons 1. When first approached, they said we would have to buy at least 5 of any one subject... now, anyone who knows the ship model market, knows that to stock qty 5 of, say, 5 to 10 pretty expensive resin kits of untested reputation and quality (as they were at that time), is a recipe for bankruptcy. 2. They would probably be too expensive for U.K. tastes (add 15% shipping, multiply by 1.08, multiply that total by 1.175, add bankers drafts expenses, together with a standard 50% trade mark-up, and you are looking at almost the same price in pounds as in dollars). Unless the quality proved outstanding (others have furnished opinions in this department, I won't!), we couldn't risk such a large sum of money at that time. I get the feeling that JS Productions, being previously involved in armour production, may have seriously over-estimated the market (and the working margins!!) here.. for anyone who is interested, David Parkin of Flightpath estimates that a typical resin armour release by Accurate or whoever, could attract sales of maybe 1-2 thousand pieces... and his margins are TWICE White Ensign's! Resin Ship kit manufacturers such as ourselves, on the other hand, are lucky to see sales of 1-200 items over the longer term. Cheers! Caroline C. WEM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: Norman Samish Subject: Re: Bofors >> single/twin 20mm Oerlikon, a twin 40mm Bofors, and while I'm day dreaming, a 5"/38 cal. gun mount with a full interior. << I have a Dumb Question: If a naval gun is called a 5"/38 cal, I assume that means it has a 5" bore, but I don't know what the "38 cal" means. If it meant 0.38 feet, that would be 4.56 inches, which isn't 5. So I'm baffled. Somebody enlighten me, please. Thanks. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: Mike.Dunn@dresdner-bank.com Subject: Decals Hi all, Does anyone know where I can get the following (UK if poss)? Either a source of RN modern decals for the ships OR a source of blank decal sheets so that I can print my own (I have a high quality inkjet printer that can handle the detail needed). Cheers, Mike -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: YHSAIO@aol.com Subject: Skywave's Oi Hello: I just got Skywave's 1/700 Oi. Nice kit, but there is a problem. The torpedo tubes are unshielded and I have no idea where Skywave gets their information. The model appears circa 1941 and I am assuming at this time almost all IJN ships had shielded deck mounted torpedo tubes. To compound matters, you have to buy Skywave detail sets to get the shielded tubes. Can any IJNophiles shed some light? All I have to say is Oi vey! Yunchi Hsaio -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: cwjerden Subject: How bigs da-hole? Hey folks, I am working on a 1/400 scale model of HMS Upholder, from the Polish Undine kit. I want to drill out the limber holes on the hull, But what size drill would be right? My next project is a 1/700 Atlanta, what drill would be right for a 1/700 scale porthole? Thanks, Charles J. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: Not 2 hangar decks Yesterday I mention that the FLT 2 Arleigh Burkes had two hangar decks. I meant 2 hangar BAYS. Sorry for the slip. Rusty White Flagship Models Inc. http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: Large scale ordinance I was going to keep this to myself but I am currently working on the masters to a 1/35 scale Bofors 40mm Quad gun mount with gun tub following up on my 1/35 scale CIWS (see the article and photos on the Warship site). I also know of at least one other model company working on a similar subject. The company that told me this may want to keep it secret for now, so I'll let them announce it when they are ready. Rusty White Flagship Models Inc. http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: Viking 1/700 scale new York and hull red >> 2. Regarding their announced USS New York, is it essentially similar to their Texas (they were sister ships) or does it represent the USS New York at a different period? Lastly regarding red paint. I seem to recall that Rusty recently mentioned that he uses Rustoleum spray for hull red. Which Rustoleum color? The red, or Primer red? << Brad, First off the Rustoleum idea wasn't mine. I suggested mixing Testors Rust and Insignia red. The New York kit is probably the same time period as the Texas. Viking had me convert the 1/350 Texas detail set to 1/700. I can only assume it's the same time frame. Check out their web site and ask them. viking@eastland.net Rusty White Flagship Models Inc. http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: John Snyder Subject: Re: IJN colors >> Does anyone in SMML-land have color matches for IJN warships ? << To which I can answer--YUP! Be patient for another month or so, and we'll have an 8-color set of IJN chips ready to go--the paints are already mixed! Just be trying to decide if your KAGERO should be in Kure gray, Maizuru gray, Sasebo gray, or Yokosuka gray. :^) The linoleum color will be included. John Snyder Snyder & Short Enterprises The Paint Guys -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: John Snyder Subject: Re: 1/35 weapons kits Bob: If you're in left field, I'm there with you. I think that such kits of the weapons you named would make very popular models. John Snyder Sacramento (where I not only haven't had to shovel 14" of snow, but I'm about to put the top down on the Miata today and....) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: Kcompany@webtv.net (Marvin Reichman) Subject: Resin kits I am sure that you have been asked this question many times but I have never worked with resin before. However, there are so many interesting subjects being produced in this medium I am asking how much more difficult it is to work with resin as opposed to styrene. Many thanks for your help Marvin O. Reichman -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: "Edward F Grune" Subject: 40mm BOFORS Hello all: I looked at the photo of Bob Santos' 40mm BOFORS in the Warship Gallery section. It sure looks nice. I'll cast my vote for someone to manufacture a kit of one of them. If someone wants to test the waters - how about a 20mm Oerlikon with a gunner and loader figures? (DML/Shanghi Dragon are you listening?) Ed Mansfield, TX (its 75F here and I've never had to shovel 14 inches of 90+ degrees off my driveway) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: "JTI - Marc Clupper" Subject: BB-46 USS Maryland Hello all. I looking for drawing, plans and renderings of the battleship USS Maryland at the time of commissioning (circa 1921). If anyone has these materials or knows where to get them, please contact me. Thanks. Marc webmaster@1250fleets.com Please visit the world of 1:1250 scale ship collecting at http:\\www.1250fleets.com and enjoy! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21) From: "Graham Walker" Subject: Re: Dreadnoughts in camera HMS Dreadnought was refitting at the time of Jutland. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22) From: John Snyder Subject: Re: ZUIHO Well, if you're a bit patient, our IJN color chip set will be out in about a month. It will have both the greens used on carriers, plus the 4 grays, and a tan used on carrier deck camo. Using that, you could mix and match using your own favorite paints. As for those projections on each side of the flight deck aft, I believe they are the LSO platforms--though I stand to be corrected. John Snyder Snyder & Short Enterprises The Paint Guys -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23) From: " F J Hueso" Subject: 1/35 Weapons Regarding the big scale weapons thread, we have ( but I don't know if they are still in bussiness) a brand named TALHOER who made the Mk. IX Oerlikon in white metal and with a RN gunner. Though it's in my "Someday..." pile, it looks nice on the box. If I can start to build it I can send you my comments, if you wish. Regards Javier Hueso Madrid (Cold and dry for many days) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24) From: louellet@uism.bu.edu Subject: Re: Burke Class Flight II Hanger Bay Layout Craig Bennett wrote: >> Twin hangars aren't uncommon in the USN. The Perry class frigates have twin hangars and are separated by walls. If you look at the US Naval and shipbuilding museum website they a link to Bath Iron Works where the real ship is building built why not ask? The ships that I have visited simply use the hangars as garages and have equipment along the walls for repair work, rescue work, or catwalk above from an another deck where sailors may have bicycles stored. << I visited Bath Iron Works twice last year, the second time to help launch the USS OSCAR AUSTIN, the first of the Burke Flight II's. Stacked on pier a few hundred yards from the OSCAR AUSTIN were two hangar modules ready to be fitted onto the SIR WINSTON CHURCHILL. If I remember correctly, they are completely independent units, enclosed all around (except for the hanger door.) There may be a hatch or two on the inside bulkheads, but I don't remember. Andrew Toppan has just posted a USS OSCAR AUSTIN launch day feature on the U.S. Naval & Shipbuilding site: http://www.uss-salem.org/ Go to the Features section and it will have a 'new' flag marking the link. As Craig noted, there are links to BIW where there should be pictures or drawings or the Flight II upgrades to the Burke class. For those who may be interested, I and about a dozen other USNSM volunteers went to BIW on November 7, 1998 to be part of the wedge driving crew. On launch day morning, the BIW workers have completed building the launching cradle under and around the building ways and many hundreds of long wedges are inserted between the upper and lower part of the cradle. When these wedges are driven in, the launching cradle is snugged tightly to the hull. (We were also told that we we actually 'lifting' the ship, releasing weight from the building ways so they can be removed easier.) I think the reality is that the wedge crews just make sure the launch cradle is snug to the hull. There were 8 wedge driving sessions of about 3 minutes each followed by a 5 minute rest period. The BIW workers did the first 4 sessions themselves, then they allowed the volunteers to assist with the final 4 rounds. There is one 3 person crew for every 15 wedges or so. Each grouping of wedges had their ends painted red or white so the crew knew where to start and stop. When the whistle blew, the 3 person crew lifted the handle of the 6 foot long, 100 pound sledge and pushed it horizontally so the heavy 'head' hit the end of a wedge. There is a steel pipe 'rail' that the heavy end rests on to help take some of the weight and to guide the blows to the wedge ends. Three wacks apiece and move on to the next wedge, continuing back and forth across the group of wedges until the whistle blew again. You wouldn't think it was tough but the sledges were very heavy and 3 minutes is a long time moving that weight around. I did 3 rounds myself. On the final round, I was down near shafts and screws. It certainly is interesting to standing *under* a ship! Larry Ouellette Quincy, Massachusetts, USA Volunteer, USS Salem (CA 139) U. S. Naval & Shipbuilding Museum http://www.uss-salem.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25) From: McKellar Subject: Snow war reports :-) >> (where in the driveway-shoveling olympics it's Bob = 0, snowplows = 7) << At least you can move yours - I'm in the Boston area and ours turned to ice. So we just crunch, rock'n roll in and out of the driveway. Mark -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 26) From: "Graham Holmes" Subject: Colour chips I would like to chip(sic) in a vote for RN colour chips for a special reason. I have several RN ships awaiting painting, but recently discovered I am colour blind in the blue/red area. This now explains why my ships have never looked the right colours to other people. Therefore, assistance in mixes would be helpful as well. Graham Holmes Columbus OH, USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27) From: John Snyder Subject: Re: The ATLANTA book Whoops! I meant to state that Glenn Arnold is the author, not Glen Boren (wrong name, wrong ship list--what my wife calls a "senior moment"). John -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 28) From: IBea351423@aol.com Subject: Re: DREADNOUGHT With regard to Lee francis Wilhelmson's query regarding Dreadnought not being present at Jutland, she was transferred in early May 1916 to the third battle squadron based at Sheerness to guard against a German raid on the Thames. I would agree about the book Dreadnoughts in Camera- excellent publication. This is the third in this series, the first being H.M. Submarines in Camera, the second Fleet Air Arm in Camera. The book "The Rules of The Game" is a superb read. I would say it is the best naval book I have read and I have read a fair number! Ian Beattie -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29) From: Malcolm Waite Subject: Re: HMS Dreadnought and Jutland Dreadnought refitted in early 1916 at Portsmouth, after refit was placed on tempary transfer to the 3rd Battle squadron ( King Edward Class PreDreadnoughts). Which had transferred from Rosyth to Sheerness as a guard against raids by units of the German High Seas Fleet. The Squadron was put on notice to sail to join the Grand Fleet at Jutland but not used. Dreadnought rejoined the Grand Fleet in June. She was sold in 1921 and broken up in Inverkeithing in 1923. Scrapped along with ever other British Battleship!!!!!!!!!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30) From: "Richard L. Neville" Subject: Large Scale Naval Weapons Kit Cast my vote for 5"38cal., 40mm twin and quad, 20mm single in that order. 1/72 scale or 1/35 scale in that order. Rick Cambodia -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 31) From: "Pletscher-Lenz-Schneider" Subject: German Catapult Ships O.k, Craig and Ken, sounds like a "Germans to the front" call. So I was browsing through my books last night, and I hope I found what you are asking for in Jung/Wenzel/Abendroth, Die Schiffe und Boote der deutschen Seeflieger, a book from 1977, which is long out of print now. The Lufthansa had four "Flugsicherungsschiffe" (flight safty ships). I think it would be too much for one posting to tell all their lives. So I will send the informations I could get in parts. S/S WESTFALEN Built 1906 at J.C. Tecklenborg, Wesermunde, for Norddeutscher Lloyd. Sold to Lufthansa 1933 and rebuilt into a catapult ship at Deschimag, Bremen. Besides an aircraft lifting crane, more powerful W/T and direction finding installations, two additional Diesel driven generators and new accomodation- and store-rooms as well as workshops and aviation fuel tanks, she received a Heinkel-K-6 catapult, and a landing sail was installed at her stern. To recover a flying boat, this had to slip onto the landing sail at low speed. Then the ship would increase speed which would stretch the landing sail until the flying boat was lifted out of the water. Then it could be picked up by the crane. As the catapult was at the bow, the aircraft had to be transported there to be launched. This required a somewhat strange procedure. The plane was put on a turntable-trolley which ran on a railway along the bridge. The plane could only be put on it with the tail ahead. So, between mast and funnel, the plane's tail was turned inboard, and thus the plane turned arround and went on, now with the props ahaed. Complicated as it was, it actually worked. But it was avoided on the later catapult ships. After trials in May and Oct.1933, WESTFALEN was on duty in the South Atlantic. Late 1934 she was removed to the Brasilian coast, where she served until Feb. 1938. She then was laid up, but was re-activated for war service. WESTFALEN was first attached to Seefliegerhorst Hornum/Sylt. In May 1941 she went to Trondheim as catapult ship for long-range recconaisance groups. 1942 she was stationed in Alta-Fjord, and in 1943 she was back at Trondheim. During WW 2 she also was rebuilt. She got a flush deck with no mast or bridge, and the funnel was repalced to the port side. This resulted in much less complicated aircraft handling. On Sept.7, 1944 WESTFALEN was sunk with the loss of 150 of her crew near Polsan off the Swedish coast after she hit two mines. (To be continued) Falk Pletscher -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 32) From: Michael Connelley Subject: Yamato type 89 12.7mm gun Hello: A point just hit me and I would like to know if anyone alse has thought of this or if they can offer evidence to support or contradict my thought. I was considering at the Yamato's open 12.7mm guns, added during her January 1944 refit. The Tamiya instructions (both on the old 1/350 kit and new 1/700 kit) say to paint these guns "gunmetal" color. It occured to me that it would be very unlikely that these guns would be left in gun metal color. You'd expect that for the 20mm machine guns, but these were 5" guns. It's good sized weapon all by itself, being mounted on almost everything that floated in the IJN. And in all of my references these guns were painted the same grey as the ship itself rather than the gunmetal color. The box art on my five IJN ship kits show this. Furthermore, as far as I can tell, these guns are the same color as the ship in the photographs of the Nagato and Mustu that I have. The only evidence I have which may be to the contrary are photographs taken from attacking US aircraft where the areas where these open guns were located appear dark, but given the detail of these photographs I don't think that's all together conclusive (also considering that in the same photos #1 turret appears very dark, #2 and #3 very light, the wood deck quite dark and the metal plating on the bow very light). Unfortunately, none of the photographs of the Yamato or Musashi which are in the Anatomy book show these guns, which isn't all together surprising given how rare photos of the Yamato and Musashi are. Is my idea of these guns being painted the hull grey correct or misfounded? Are there any pictures out there that can support either color? A somewhat related question also puzzles me. In the pictures of Yamato under attack in the Sibuyan Sea (Anatomy pg 26) show turret #1 to be very dark while the other two are much lighter. Is this just a lighting effect or was it actually a darker color for some odd reason? Cheers Mike Connelley -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: HDente@aol.com Subject: PREPUBLICATION ANNOUNCEMENT: The following books are annouced for Spring publication: The Naval Battle of Guadalcanal: Night Action, 13 November 1942 256 pages, 22 photos, 14 maps. The most famous of the cruiser actions: Atlanta, Juneau, San Fransisco, etc. Drawn in part from interviews with 200 survivors.--$32.95 list--prepublication offer:$26.95 The Bismark Chase: 192 pages, 75 photographs, 20 line drawings. A new explanation of the sinking of the Hood based on extensive computer modeling--$34.95 list--prepublication:$27.95 The Buckley Class Destroyer Escorts: 224 pages, 220 photos, 5 line drawings A complete photographic record of all 154 Buckley class DEs completed. $39.95 list--prepublication:$31.95 Wolfpack: U-boats at War, 1939-1945: paperback, 240 pages, 115 color,130 b&w photos. Hardcover sold out in a few months 2 years ago! list $28.95--prepublication:$23.95 Battleships of World War Two: An International Encyclopedia: 320 pages, 207 photos, 43 line drawings. Companion to Cruisers of WW2 and Destroyers of WW2 by M.J.Whitley $55.00 list--$45.00 prepublication Q-Ships Versus U-Boats: America's Secret Project 272 pages, 16 photos, 8 line drawings The author was an officer on one of the decoy ships, the USS Asterion. $32.95 list--$26.95 prepublication Shipping is $5.00 under $50.00, $6.00 $50.00 and up. Research in Scale, 205 Maryland Ave, Paterson, NJ 07503 e-mail: hdente@aol.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: Bill Gruner Subject: AD Correction Gakken Books Vol. 18 also contains Light Cruisers as well as Destroyers. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: SeaPhoto@aol.com Subject: Matchbox Corvette on Ebay Hello everyone, If someone wants a 1/72 scale Matchbox corvette, I have one listed on ebay. It is unbuilt, and in really nice shape. The parts are still in the orginal bags, and even the box is pretty nice - that old Matchbox art was pretty well done. Anyway, a chance to get a blast from the past. The URL is: http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=59089836 Thanks! Kurt SeaPhoto -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: "Alex F. Wojcicki" Subject: News about USS Pringle Website Address Hi... I have just found a potential glitch which may affect your ability to access the USS Pringle Website. Please check your "bookmarks" or "favorite pages", and edit if necessary. DUE TO CIRCUMSTANCES BEYOND OUR CONTROL... :-( Here's the problem: the "soft" host name is "www.foto.infi.net" OR "www.fayettevillenc.infi.net". The "hard" host name WAS "mh102.infi.net"; it is NOW "www.mh105.infi.net". If you type in "http://www.foto.infi.net/~wojo/pringle" you will get to the web site just fine. HOWEVER, if you use "http://www.mh102.infi.net/~wojo/pringle" you will go off into the ozone... IF YOU HAVE BOOKMARKED THE SITE ON YOUR BROWSER, YOU WILL PROBABLY HAVE THE "mh102" there... PLEASE EDIT YOUR BOOKMARK to reflect the "soft" address of "http://www.foto.infi.net/~wojo/pringle" They MAY move us all back after their maintenance, or they may NOT... the best thing to do is use the "soft" address"... This is at least as annoying for me as it is for you, and I apologize for the inconvenience... if there are any other changes, I will let you know... :-( Whoa-joe Alex Wojcicki USS Pringle (DD-477) Historic Reconstruction Project http://www.foto.infi.net/~wojo/pringle -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume