Subject: SMML19/05/99VOL550 Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 00:02:08 +1000 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Pink Cruiser 2: Triple 20mm mounting on the Enterprise 3: Original Research - The Final Chapter 4: Yamato's catapults 5: Re: Turned Barrels 6: Haguro 7: Re: Polish Painting 8: Re: Haguro sinking 9: Re: Photographing models 10: Early Fletcher Camoflage 11: Research 12: Searching for Destroyer Tender 13: USN Dazzle Camo 14: Those Flower things (again) 15: Re: IJN stuff 16: LCM-3 info please 17: Re: USS Yorktown CV5 18: Re: Lightship etchings 19: Scheer and Original Research 20: Re: RTV & resin casting 21: Research 22: Collectors in Ireland 23: Re: Research vs. Regurgitation 24: Reading hull station diagrams 25: New Kombrig kits of BORODINO Class BBs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: Vimieraa@aol.com Subject: Pink Cruiser I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the possibility that the Japanese cruiser Haguro was painted pink at the time that she was sunk in 1945. My instinct tells me that there might be something to the story, and for the serious researcher it would be worth while writing to the author,(c/o the publisher), to ascertain the source of the statement. It does not sound like a proofing error to me. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: Vimieraa@aol.com Subject: Triple 20mm mounting on the Enterprise An experimental twin 20mm mounting, and an experimental triple 20mm mounting fitted to the Enterprise during her 1943 refit. Reference is U.S.AIRCRAFT CARRIERS by Friedman, page 99. The question now is, what did this triple mounting look like, are there any drawings, did it have an associated director, and precisely where was the thing fitted? At least one person on this list knows the answers to the above questions, and it's not me. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: "Jeff Herne" Subject: Original Research - The Final Chapter I hope I didn't offend anyone, but it seems that's not difficult to do. The way I see it, if you're offended, then you're probably the same guy who believes Elvis is alive and well in North Dakota. I saw him at a Burger King just the other day... There comes a time when modeling, when you simply don't have the info you need to complete the job to your liking. While lists like SMML are invaluable, there are only a handful of people out there who have more info than the average modeler. Without naming names...it is usually these people who post up tidbits of info that we can use, stuff that's not found in books. To these people, and we all know they are, thank you. A perfect example: Vimieraa posted a quick two-line response about HMS Tynsdale a few days ago. Now, how many of us can honestly say that we even have a photo of Tynsdale, much less know her camo scheme for a particular time period? Did he speculate? Probably not, because I've corresponded with Mr. Vimieraa and he has always supported his data with photographic evidence in the past. In fact, he seems to have a large collection of original photos and has obviously done the research. A photo is worth a thousand words, true, but there are only a handful of people whose words I take at face value. And it's not because they're "experts", it's because of the quality of the work they produce. Eventually, after you study it long enough, you can actually track their methodology behind their research. For example, I read Alan Raven's Fletcher Class Destroyer book while preparing mine for WR Press. After several trips to the archives, and after going through countless BuShips manuals on weapons systems, electronics, etc., I found roughly 80% of the data he used in his book, in its raw form. The balance of the information, when I questioned him personally, (he is my publisher after all) he told me the exact same thing Mr. Vimierra told you, "go out and find it, it's out there". You'd be amazed at what's sitting in photo albums up your street. It can get expensive, but that all depends upon how far you want to take it. And the Internet is rapidly becoming an enormous resource. And to think, all of this just because we build models... Jeff -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: Loren Perry Subject: Yamato's catapults I was just advised by Paolo Pizzi on the Yamato's catapult lengths vs. the lengths given in the recent Lacroix/Wells book on IJN cruisers of the Pacific war. He says the book is definitelyt in error on this one. Paolo appears to be as knowledgeable on IJN matters as anyone I've found in the U.S. He's actually traveled to Japan and visited & photographed naval museum model collections while there which is more than I've done. It makes sense to me, because a twenty-foot discrepancy in catapult lengths is pretty substantial and I think that would be noticeable before now. Skulski's Fuso book, as stated in several previous posts here, does indicate (in the preface, not the introduction) his access to new material: "Most of the Imperial Navy's documents were lost during or after the Second World War. Hence, it has been impossible to find, for instance, the drawings of Fuso's engine machinery or the precise details of the hull structure. As was the case with my last monograph on the heavy cruiser Takao, it is therefore unlikely that the scope of this book will be expanded in the future. I am delighted to say, however, that, rather unexpectedly, and thanks to the extreme kindness of my contacts in Japan, I have recently received new material on HIJMS Yamato that was not previously available to the public, which will hopefully enhance and develop information on Yamato and her sister ships Musashi and Shinano already available in my previous book in the 'Anatomy of the Ship' series." The above was written in November 1997. Nowhere does he indicate that any major changes are in order, only enhancements. Seeing as Tamiya's corrected 1/700 scale model appeared in mid-1998, my guess is that Tamiya and Skulsi likely had access to the same information via the same sources, seeing as both are internationally well-known and respected players re. IJN modelbuilding. And Tamiya's decision to spend money re-tooling an already available kit is an indication that the information they had was sufficiently accurate to proceed with the project. In my mind, they could therefore justify the expense because the increased accuracy would create a solid market for the new kit and sales of same would be profitable. So I've now reached my own decision that the Lacroix/Wells book is indeed incorrect in this area, ie. the length of the Yamato's catapults. Paolo also located several other errors in this book, but qualified this by saying that after all, we're all human. He then stated that the wealth of new details contained therein still make it an enormously valuable resource for IJN modelers. In this, I also agree. The book is still excellent. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: "Doremus, Mark" Subject: Re: Turned Barrels Folks, Someone was looking for turned barrels last week. I don't know how much taper you will actually see at the smaller scales and smaller size guns. If you are more interested in the round nature of the barrel, I saw a vendor (data below) at Nordic Con in Minneapolis last weekend with a wide selection of sub millimeter diameter tubing in lengths from 10 to 250 mm. The manufacturers were Accurate Details (USA I guess) and Minimac (SP?) from Spain. Vendor: CRM Hobbies, 3326 Watson Rd. St. Louis, MO, USA, 63139 (314)-645-1117 Email CRM@inlink.com Mark Doremus Eden Prairie, MN -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: "chenyangzhang" Subject: Haguro This is obviously an interesting problem but I think the submarine report can be disregarded - it is unlikely that the colours would have been discernable at 10.30 pm at night and none of the other accounts mention camouflage (the destroyer attacks and the Avenger sighting). What is clear from the destroyer crews reports is the fact that Haguro seems to have had a gloss finish "Her side was shining like a wet wall" Captain Power, Saumarez. Remember the submarine was underwater with very little light whereas the destroyers were actually illuminating the Haguro with starshell. A check with the account of Lieutenant Commander Motora (the Haguro's communications officer) might supply an answer. Chris Langtree -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: John Snyder Subject: Re: Polish Painting >> I do so hope that I won't have to wait too long for Snyder & Short to come out with their chips for the Russo-Japanese War. BTW guys, when can we expect that product to hit the store shelves? << The easy part will be slipping into Japan in the dead of night to scrape samples from MIKASA. The problem we're having at present is convincing Bob Ballard to sail into Russian territorial waters to recover parts and pieces at Port Arthur.... :^) John Snyder Snyder & Short Enterprises The Paint Guys (Who've just obtained six more original RN colors to be matched) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: Keith Butterley Subject: Re: Haguro sinking Hi all, >> Pink Haguro? At 0150 hrs.? Sunk at 0247 hrs. I think we need to know Professor Dull's source; I can't imagine it was the attacking DD's at that hour. << According to the book Engage the Enemy More Closely by Correlli Barnett: "On the 15th an aircraft from the escort carrier Shah spotted the cruiser - the 10,000-ton Haguro - whereupon Avengers bombed and damaged her. Now five destroyers of the 26th Flotilla, Saumarez, Venus, Vigilant, Virago and Verulam (all of wartime construction), steamed at 27 knots to close the 85 miles between them and the Haguro. After searching for her along a bearing calculated from her guessed 'farthest on' position they picked her up on their radar screens shortly after midnight, and pounced on her simultaneosuly from different directions in a superbly timed and executed attack. Shattered by no fewer than eight torpedoes, the Haguro went down in a few minutes." Keith Butterley I am not a researcher in cold rainy Vancouver. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: "Hill, David" Subject: Re: Photographing models Ok, this has been beat almost to death, but I'll recap with: Your camera and lens are fine. It's physics, not technology. You need more depth of field, hence as small a lens aperature as possible. The bigger numbers mean smaller aperatures, e.g. f/22 is smaller (and better for your purpose) than f/8. To get this small aperature you need (a) Bright light, (b) Fast film, and (c) Slow shutter speed. Outdoors bright sun or a couple photofloods, and 400 speed film should do. Set your camera on aperature priority and let the meter handle the speed. You'll need a tripod if the shutter speed is slower than maybe 1/30 second. Fill lights or reflectors are useful to lighten up the shadows. But let me add... You'll also get more depth of field if you move further from the subject, which of course makes it smaller in the picture. You could move back and get the center portion of the photo enlarged. Same thing with a wider lens. A shorter (wider) lens will give more depth of field than a longer lens_at_the_same_distance from the subject. If you then move closer to fill the wider frame with your subject, you lose the depth-if-field you gained with the shorter lens. So that's basicly a washout. Choose your lens according to the perspective you want. A macro (close focusing) lens will let you zero in on the details, which is handy to show all your fantastic work. Close-up add-on lenses will do the same for less money (but without the same quality as a dedicated macro lens.) A 'soft-focus' filter may be useful to take the edge off your very-nearly-scale details and make it all look more realistic. Don't overdo this, but a tiny bit of softening may help. Good luck David Hill, davhill@camberley.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: GrafSpee34@aol.com Subject: Early Fletcher Camoflage Hello After checking my public library, I can make the following statement about the feisty little O'Bannon: She definately wore measure 21, dark blue-grey overall BEFORE her refit. She also definately had the square SC radar and a 40mm bofors in her elevated aft gun tub at the start of her combat duty. (The 1.1" guns quickly proved themselves useless and hazardous.) While cruising in a combat zone, her whaleboats were sometimes swung outwards. She had medium-grey colored blast bags. The Mk 4 radar screen was either left in bare metal, or painted a light grey. I can also state that Chevalier DD 451, Taylor DD468 and Strong DD 467 were wearing measure 21 in the late spring and summer of 1943. Note that Strong was lost May '43, and Chevalier was lost on 10 July 43. Interestingly, I have not yet found any photos of any Fletchers outside of US waters wearing the Measure 12 dapple camoflage. At the time of O'Bannon's Friday-the- 13th shootout with the IJN Hei, in November 1942, I do not know if the Measure 12 scheme had already been overpainted. I suspect it was, but have no proof. However, my model will show her in Measure 21, which she wore at the Vella LaVella Landings. Above statements based on photos in following books: "New Guniea, Pattern for Victory" by Horton, "Destroyers" by Anthony Preston, "Guadalcanal, Decision at Sea" by Hammell. The Hammel book is also a very good read which I recommend for a history of the USN in early WWII. What a beaurocratic mess. QUESTION: Does anyone know of any books worth reading specifically about the O'Bannon? Pity if there aren't any, it seems O' Bannon was constantly in a brawl... typical Irishman. Cheers Dave Krakow -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: GrafSpee34@aol.com Subject: Research As for the photos and documentation which Jeff mentioned, I am in the late stages of research-gathering, and the early stages of writing, a book on the Prinz Eugen. I can not say at this point when to expect publication, I can only say that it will be a thorough and lavishly illustrated study of this superb heavy cruiser. (BTW If anyone has original photo-materials, please e-mail me.) My experience with research has been "seek and ye shall find". It is amazing what one can find if one bothers to go looking. It is likewise amazing how few professional researchers and historians bother to do so. From new books with the same old photos, one gets the impression that there is nothing more out there, when unpublished photos and untold tales are in fact plentiful. I would recommend that anyone with an interest in a particular ship or campaign have a look on the internet for the relevant veteran's organization. Get their mailing list and get in touch with a couple of guys who live nearby. Chances are, they will be thrilled that someone is interested in their war stories. They may well have a few photos to give you or let you copy. You may get invited over for dinner. One thing I can say for certain, getting to know a ship through its veterans is a fascinating experience, worlds apart from looking at black and white photos. Even if your search turns up goose eggs, it is both humbling and uplifting to know a man who was "there". Dave Krakow -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: Alan Simon Subject: Searching for Destroyer Tender Looking for plastic or metal kit in any scale of USS Grand Canyon(AD28), preferably as she appeared after 1967 with DASH helicopter hangar/flight deck aft. Ship was modified C3 hull, so would consider kitbashing similar freighter. Alnavco once carried (in 1996-97 catalog) Viking Forge Austrian 1:2400 Ship Program Item No. SB036, Repair Ship Grand Canyon. Anyone know where to find? Thanks. Alan Simon Atlanta, Georgia -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: "Humber, Thom" Subject: USN Dazzle Camo What is the general consensus? Is it better to paint the Ms 31 and Ms 32 type camo and variants before or after construction? During sub-assembly construction? I'm about to plunge, as it were, into the realm of dazzle camo and would like to know the input of other SMMLies as to what you have found to be the most efficient. I can see advantages and drawbacks to severals of the methods. Thanks in advance for the response. Thom Humber -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: "LAMKEEL" (by way of Greg Lee) Subject: Those Flower things (again) Dear Greg, I really enjoy your efforts, I brush over some items, but still look them over. There is a tremendous amount of help out there. Having seen the question (From France)? two days ago, I tried to reply but my message, went off somewhere. Reading the rave reports from Vimera. As we say in England.... "Gosh". I think I'll buy one myself. (Ha ha). The situation to date is. All the Flower drawings are on their way over the pond, as are my selection of photographs. I have the pull out drawing on my board now. 40% completed. I had a mad rush of blood, what to provide for the pull out. It was to have been HMS Monkshood, but I have a better starboard side view, HMS Anemone 1942, modified as a fleet Tug, but still fully armed after a mid life refit. One of the original short fox'l units from the first order, but updated with a long fox'l for more space, a new bridge and 271 radar. For those that undertake the original research, its a great learning curve. My source is the original "As Fitted" shipbuilders drawings, drawn at 1/4" = 1ft. All are redrawn and the weapons are redrawn from original material rather than the basic views by the shipbuilders draughtsmen. As I have gathered different ships from different yards some draughtsmen add more detail than others. Add on the contents of the "Ships Covers", the original letters appertaining to the development of the class design and you have an original package and 16 months work. My only problem, (which I have passed on to the publisher). How do we get everything in? To date I have typed some 13 pages of text, and there's more to add. But I hope you readers will not be disappointed with our efforts. Copies of my original drawings at 1/8" = 1 Ft. are available. (But it helps if your mad). Unfortunately there is masses of material, but not the space to include it. The photographs I have seen are great. BUT I'M GETTING THERE! Yours "aye". John Lambert. (Who is this man in a white coat? Do I know you)? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: Jon Parshall Subject: Re: IJN stuff >> However, he has apparently received new material on the Yamato not previously available to the public, "which will hopefully enhance and develope information on Yamato and her sisters Musashi & Shinano already available in my previous book ...". That's it. No word on when, how, what, etc. I'd recommend finishing all your projects as is. You can dry mount the catapults if you really choose to believe that the new info. will pertain to catapults, for instance. There is no indication what the new info. will be. However, I do recall reading not long ago, posted thru Jon Parshall's site (actually the link/site his acquaintance in Japan maintains on his page), that material had surfaced in Kure about some of the electrical systems and light bulbs specially created for Yamato. I'll bet these additions draw in part on those discoveries. << I'd say that's a safe bet. Skulski's Japanese sources are apparently very good. And there may yet be more useful Yamato information out there. I was talking to Bill Jurens about this topic a year or so ago. He is hopeful that additional documents may yet turn up in some of the anchorages that were used by the Japanese as major fleet anchorages, such as Singapore and Brunei. These bases had complete sets of plans in case they were needed to effect repairs to major warships calling there. The fact that the electrical documents referred to above were lying around in a warehouse in Kure for 55 years before somebody turned them up means there might yet be other stuff lurking in Japan, too. Who knows? jon parshall Imperial Japanese Navy Homepage http://www.skypoint.com/members/jbp/kaigun.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: "Robert A. Clifton, R.A." Subject: LCM-3 info please Does anyone have any idea where I can find high quality photos of an LCM-3(or LCM-6 for that matter). I'm looking to do a large scale LCM-3 (i.e.. 1/35 scale), and the detail oriented photographic references seem a bit thin. I have drawings from the Floating Drydock, and the book "Allied Landing Craft of WWII" from NIP. Friedman's "US Small Combatants" have a few pictures from Vietnam modified to the monitor role, but I'm looking for the standard, unmodified version. What am I missing? Is anyone aware of any existing LCM's still in existence? Any contacts, locations, etc? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you Bob Clifton -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: James Corley Subject: Re: USS Yorktown CV5 >> I've been looking forward to the Nautilus resin upgrade for the Revell 1/480 Yorktown, but I was a bit confused by the post about it the other day. Will the upgrade be correct for the Yorktown at Coral Sea but not at Midway? If so, what were the differences in the Yorktown between the two battles? I'd prefer to build her as she was at the Battle of Midway. << Unfortunately, the plans which claim to have been good for June 42 were proven wrong by Dr Ballard last year. There is a splinter shield around the lower bridge patform, which we did not know about and wasnt evident in the photos....obviously added in those infamous 3 days. Thats the major item, but there were also other minor points we found in the photos which were missing in the plans. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: "John S. Platt" Subject: Re: Lightship etchings Good evening, well it is here. I have just thought of a couple of other things to include in the etchings set. 1. Some different names, say East or North Goodwin or maybe Varne or even Tongue (spelling?) 2. Many of the lightships have been converted to solar power so perhaps solar panel exteriors surfaces. 3. Also, most of the ships still afloat have helidecks so to have the wire mess on the helideck and the rope safety barrier around the helideck would be wonderful. These would allow several variants of the model to be made. Oh, this is wonderful. What about.........no, I could go on for ever. You battleship boys have no idea what you are missing. Best wishes. John S. Platt. Brasted, UK, Kent. Wet, very wet, incredibly wet, unbelievably wet, up to your ankles time. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: K-Marsh@webtv.net (Rich Hahn) Subject: Scheer and Original Research Hello All! I want to thank the gentlemen who assisted me with my Admiral Scheer questions. As far as turret top colors go, if anyone is familiar with the photo of Scheer on page 138 of Breyer and Koop's "German Navy at War-The Battleships 1935-1945", what color are they there? I agree that original research is a very exciting thing to get involved in, which leads to another question. I have an old (1982) W.Z. Bilddienst, Wilhelmshaven catalog of KM warship photos, which is obviously out of date. Are they still in business, do they now sell an English version, and do they have a website? How about any other sources for KM warship photos? Thanks again. Rich Hahn Bensalem, PA -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: Mike Settle Subject: Re: RTV & resin casting >> I have a friend who is producing 1:600 coastal craft for wargame purposes, not regular modelling. I have been trying to help him with my limited knowledge and experience with RTV and resin casting from 12 years ago when I was a partner in a D&D and other wargame figure company. Do you know of any books or online sites with help, instructions, or FAQ`s for RTV mold making or resin casting.? << Check out the following site. From there, you can subscribe to a casting mailing list. There are a lot of very well informed casters and manufacturers that are participants. http://mc.cyklone.com/castlist.htm Mike Settle -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21) From: JECHAM3981@aol.com Subject: Research Jeff, Just a single return round. I think that if we are talking about the U.S. CV's named Lexington, we'll find that they are named after the Revolutionary War battle in the Massachusetts town of that name. Jim Chambers -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22) From: b29@ix.netcom.com Subject: Collectors in Ireland In June I'll be staying near Galway, Ireland, and am wondering if there are any 1:1200 or 1:1250 collectors in those parts who might be interested in a visit to talk ships. Paul Jacobs 1250 Editor http://warship.simplenet.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23) From: Growlrr@aol.com Subject: Re: Research vs. Regurgitation Oh well, what the hell...In we go with both feet... While Jeff is as subtle as a boot to the groin, he brings up many valid points about original research. We have all run across inaccurate kits, mis-identified ships in photos and "facts" that are just plain dead wrong - period. Some of these mistakes are over 50 years old and have been taken as gospel - In reality, all these are are old mistakes...and unlike the scotch Shane and I are so fond of, they do not improve with age. All of Jeffs suggestions for research are valid as well...But don't kid yourselves, this isn't a picnic. I am now working on my second book for WR Press. In the past two months I have sent out 143 letters, 300 emails and spent more time on the phone than a room full of teenagers...BUT occasionally you hit a potential gold mine....I'll close my argument with a snippet of an email I got 5 minutes ago - sorry, the name of the ship must remain a secret lest my publisher kill me.... ""Dear Mr Arnold My name is Jim and I am an associate member of the ------------Cruiser Association. My father, Herbert served on the ------------. I will forward the name and address of a man who served on the -----------, who has about 100 pictures of the -------------. He was friends with the photographer on the ------------- who photographed the cruise book "Life Aboard the USS ------------". I am sure he will have everything you are looking for."" Now this is just ONE ship in the class, but it may be one less ship I need to dig up unpublished photos of....and let me tell you one other thing - completing a well researched and accurate model is a thrill unto itself, but talking to the men who served on them and seeing the ships through their eyes - well....there is nothing like it.....Sermon over - Glenn -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24) From: Douglas Bauer Subject: Reading hull station diagrams I've asked this question before, but I can't find the reply in my files, so I'm asking it again. I'm going to scratchbuild a hull in 1:350 for a model of the USS Salamonie....I've got the Floating Drydock plans and the hull stations, but I don't know how to transfer the numbers to the appropriate areas of the ship., e.g., the numbers "8", "8 1/2", and "9" hull stations corresponds to what frames of the hull. I hope my question is clear to someone....I got confused just writing it! I guess I'm asking, "how do I know where one frame shape changes, and another begins?" Heartfelt thanks to anyone who can give me a reasonably clear explanation. Doug Bauer -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25) From: "Pletscher-Lenz-Schneider" Subject: New Kombrig kits of BORODINO Class BBs When I came home from work yesterday evening, I was very pleased to find three new Kombrig kits in my post box, the battleships BORODINO, KNAZ SUVOROV, and OREL. Alas, my first enthusiasm soon calmed down when I opened their boxes and found that all three kits were identical. More than $60 paid for each one and no more than three identical kits (not even some differing details in the building instruction) ... I was not really amused. Since I also have the Modelkrak kit of SUVOROV, I next went to compare both kits, and what came now, finally ruined the whole evening. The Modelkrak kit is remarkably bigger than the Kombrig kit. So I wanted to check out what was wrong. I measured out both kits and compared the results with the drawing in Conway's Fighting Ships of the World 1860-1905 (which, by the way, is also used as "building instruction" for the Kombrig kits). As there is also a photo with a square broadside view, I could cross-check the results. The Modelkrak kit has the correct length, but the deck levels are about 1-1.5mm too high. The proportions of the Kombrig kit are halfway correct - if you fit some 1.5mm of thickness to the bottom to raise the general level ... and if you take into account that the scale is not 1/700 but rather 1/730. Also the Modelkrak kit shows some more details, but most of them are a little too crude or have to be corrected. So I have got four kits of the same ship, I had to pay some $250 for them, and none of them is a correct 1/700 scale kit. I could bite myself in my ass (excuse these words, but this is a German phrase exactly describing how I feel). Falk Pletscher -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume