Subject: SMML VOL 789 Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 00:15:14 +1100 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Re: All-forward armament ships 2: Resin hulls and bollards 3: Re: Model Kits for Sale 4: Part for Exeter kit 5: Re: The name of DD 540 6: Re: Rodney and Nelson 7: Quotations 8: Battleship Design 9: Bismarck paint references 10: Re: Nelson cl Design Origins 11: Re: CV6 and Midway Flight Deck 12: USS JFK CVA67 13: Penelope's Brown/White Camouflage Scheme 14: Czarist armored ships underwater 15: Weird request 16: HMS TRUCULENT 12/01/1950 17: Help on Med blue... 18: Re: US Four Stack Destroyers 19: Modern Royal Navy ship colour 20: Bofors on the California 21: Re: Famous Naval Quotations 22: USNI Color Photo Database 23: HMS Hood 1942? 24: Countershading 25: Revell USS Forrest Sherman kit -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD INDEX 1: Re: items for sale -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: "Percy, John" Subject: Re: All-forward armament ships Another interesting design of note besides Nelson, Richielu, and Dunkerque, while not a battleship, was Japan's Tone class Heavy cruisers. They had 4 turrets (dual 8") foward, 1 superimposing over the other three (one head, two behind). Aft was a small floatplane deck. John Percy -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: Gene Larson Subject: Resin hulls and bollards I received a 1/350 hull a week ago, an update to a kit. When it arrived I noted that eight of the bollards were broken off. A couple were found in the bubble wrap. The rest "gone". This has also been noted on other resin hulls I have received. The manufacturer has offered to send another hull. Is it really worth that effort? The replacement might also have broken bollards. They are quite fragile. The tight bubble wrap used in shipping plays a big role in the breakage, in my opinion. The manufacturer states: "The broken bollards has been a problem but they can be easily replaced with a short length of .030 plastic rod. This is one of those cases where if they were not provided and left up to the modeler to scratch build, their would be complaints and as you have noted when broken they still cause problems." Is the suggested "fix" acceptable? Gene Larson, Alexandria, Virginia Nautical Research Guild, Inc. http://www.Naut-Res-Guild.org "A non-profit, tax exempt, charitable, educational organization with international membership, dedicated to maritime research and accurate ship model building." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: Rod Dauteuil Subject: Re: Model Kits for Sale >> Found this guy's list on the web. I never did business with him, dont know anything about him, but theres a few interesting maybe rare model ship kits on his list. Have a look: http://homepage.av.com/gk_scale_models/files/GKkitlist122599HTML.htm << Just a word to the wise---This guy's prices are pretty high. He has some OK older pieces, but his prices are significantly above worth. Rod. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: John_Impenna@hyperion.com Subject: Part for Exeter kit Hi All, This is probably a tough one, but here goes! I recently purchased a UPC HMS Exeter in 1/500 scale. I know this kit has been in and out of production under various companies since UPC went out of business. The kit is missing the bow half of the main deck, part #5 on the instructions. Does anyone out there have one they would part with? It could be from a "junked" kit, built, painted etc....I am not in a position to be choosy. The kit is pretty nice(seems to be a late-war config) and I would like to back date it to the Battle of the River Platte. Also, if someone could lend me one, I might be able to cast a duplicate. The only other alternative is to scratchbuild, but I will save that as a last resort!!!!. Thanks. John Hi Gang, Be advised that the UPC kit is the ex-Frog kit. It's also had other incarnations as well. Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: The name of DD 540 I'm almost done with a 1/350 Fletcher class destroyer model of DD 540. Unfortunately, I don't know the name of that vessel. I picked it out of the Floating Dry-dock book "Camouflage 1 of the WW2 Era" because of it's unusual paint scheme. Can someone tell me the name of DD 540? My Alan Raven book is on loan to someone presently. Rusty White Flagship Models Inc. http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ "Yeah I want Cheesy Poofs" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: Mark Shannon Subject: Re: Rodney and Nelson "Ronald Wild" wrote: >> If my memory is correct, the Rodney and Nelson were designed with after turrets but (and correct me here) due to the Washington Treaty, had to be altered to conform to the maximum tonnage allowed. The easiest way for the designers to do this was to simply redesign the stern by removing the aft turrets << Actually, the "re-introduction" of the 'All-or-Nothing" armor scheme with the U.S.S. Nevada led the British designers to play some with the best way to get the most armor and fastest speed into the ship -- even without treaty limitations, there is always going to be a set of compromises due to power limitations, dock and harbor size, draft, etc. They started coming down to draft designs with most of the features of the eventual Rodney and Nelson for both battleship and battlecruiser designs. When they were told to design to a 35,000 tonne limit, incorporating 16" main armament, they dusted off the battlecruiser designs, decreased the horsepower and maximum speed to what was believed to be the "battleline" speed of 23-24 knots (which had been planned all along for the new battleship draft designs), and incorporated the features into the two. The turret-forward design was intended to shorten the length of the armored citadel so it could be made thicker for the same armor tonnage. They ended up with two relatively mediocre ships on the whole. Because of weight saving measures, their machinery did not stand up well to the heavy wartime service. Because little time was spent testing the guns, they turned out to have a short bore life and so a greater change between firings. Because triple turrets were new, the sequencing was difficult and never was to be as fast as for twin turrets. Limited arcs for the X-turret were a major weakness. Aside from the masking by A and B-turrets, it was found that the blast from a firing on a bearing aft of 90 degrees dangerously damaged or impeded the bridge decks -- solutions of sealing off several open levels were quickly used, and baffles to minimize the blast wave were fitted, but until WWII broke out, the turret was not to fire aft of about 100 degrees in training shoots. On the other hand, the twin turret secondary armament worked very well, and the tower bridge was found to be excellent. They were some of the best seaboats that the RN put out, and that is saying a lot. Most of their troubles, especially Rodney's, in WWII came from the combination of a lighter build than was typical and penny pinching lack of refit time during the 1930's. Rodney's turbines probably should have been replaced, they seem to have had the lion's share of the tolerance issues in their manufacture, and heavy use wore them out badly by late 1940. Mark -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: WRPRESSINC@aol.com Subject: Quotations Tovey to Admiralty after engaging Bismarck with gunfire for some time. "THE BUGGER WON'T SINK" Rear Admiral Vian to Fleet Admiral Fraser. Vian flying his flag on carrier when ship hit on flight deck by Kamikaze off Okinawa, with subsequent explosion, fire, smoke and mess. To Fraser (his boss) flying flag in battleship. "LITTLE YELLOW BASTARD" Reply from Fraser to Vian. "ARE YOU REFERRING TO ME" German Naval Command to Bismarck, after Bismarck was sunk. "REUTERS REPORTS BISMARCK SUNK, PLEASE GIVE YOUR POSITION" These are all actual signals. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: "chenyangzhang" Subject: Battleship Design >> Actually, Clemenceau was designed to have both main battery turrets forward. The secondary turrets were redistributed in Clemenceau. The projected fourth ship of the class, the Gascogne, would have had one turret forward, and one aft, but she was never laid down << I stand corrected, Jeffrey is right about Clemenceau. Gascogne though was meant to be the start of a new class. >> If my memory is correct, the Rodney and Nelson were designed with after turrets but (and correct me here) due to the Washington Treaty, had to be altered to conform to the maximum tonnage allowed. The easiest way for the designers to do this was to simply redesign the stern by removing the aft turrets << Actually Nelson and Rodney were based on the pre conference G3 design which had an A and B turret and P turret in the middle. There wer no X or Y turrets. For a really fascinating account of British battleship design before the Washington conference its worth looking at Raven and Roberts 'British Battleships of World War II'. The length of a ships armoured citadel is an important factor not only in its weight but also how big the ship is. As more armour is added the size of the ship needs to increase and this was an important factor in battleship design. Rodney and Nelson suffered by being underweight and some of Rodney's later problems would have been cured if she had had heavier construction (not more armour). Chris Langtree -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: Keith Butterley Subject: Bismarck paint references Hi group, Ok, ok we have been over this a number of times, but I wasn't really paying attention, so please forgive me. Can somebody (Dave? Falk? EJ?) give me Model Master or Humbrol paint matches for the Bismarcks hull, superstructure and decks ca. May '41. If it's any consolation this isn't for me, it's for my Father who I have convinced after building winged thingies for sixty years to try something different. See, you can teach an old dog new tricks ;-p Don't even think about it Shane! Happy modeling Keith Butterley Hi Keith, I shocked!!! that you'd think I'd make a smart arse comment. I wouldn't comment on that - it's just way too easy ;-þ. I'll let others do it, like ex-pat kiwis ;-)). Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: Derek Wakefield Subject: Re: Nelson cl Design Origins IIRC, the Nelsons were essentially economy (scaled down) versions of the 1921 Battlecruisers. They had two main turrets forward of the bridge and a third turret amidships (between the bridge tower and the aft superstructure). Four were actually laid down I believe but scrapped in accordance with the Washington treaty. Had they been completed (at 48,500 tons) they would've represented the world's first true fast battleships. By far, they were superior to anything the US or Japan had on the blocks or on the drawing board at that time. They (along with four almost identical 18-in gunned battleship versions - that weren't laid down) were definitely ahead of their time, and would've put HMS Hood to shame. In ways, they represented a new "Dreadnought" in the eyes of the other world navies. TBK though, they were really too expensive for Britain to build right after WWI. In the long run though, IMO at least, the odd arrangement of their main guns probably would've hampered them. OTOH, they would've had plenty of room for a large AA battery on the sparsly populated aft superstucture. I believe there is a scan of a drawing of one of these ships at Furashita's Fleet site (in the Royal Navy section - under St. Andrew [one of the conjectural names of the four battleship versions). Sorry, don't have the URL handy at the moment. Dasvidanya! _|_o_|_ Derek "Tiger" (/\)akefield /---(.](o)[.)---\ iscandar2@chatter.com o oo O oo o http://www.iscandar-66.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: "Steven P. Allen" Subject: Re: CV6 and Midway Flight Deck USS Enterprise won 20 battle Stars; that is, she participated in, often as the only capital ship and usually in a pivotal role, 20 separate actions. the only major PTO actions she missed were Coral Sea and the last raids on Japan. As for the armor on the flight deck, it was NOT a result of the performance of any RN ship: the design studies for the Midways were already on-going by the time of the incidents cited. In fact, the Midways and the Essexs were concurrent designs. The USN was moderately impressed with the armor on the flight deck of RN carriers, but they unwilling to trade-off aircraft capacity on a design limited by treaty restrictions (hence no armor on the Essexes). The Midways were the first USN carreirs to have armored flight decks because they were the first to be freed from treaty limitations. The USN quite rightly chose aircraft capacity over armor for the Essexes. There is only one measure of the effectiveness of an aircraft carrier: how many aircraft she can effectively operate (in which respect, the Essexes were superior to the Midways until postwar a/c grew so large and heavy). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: Alan Simon Subject: USS JFK CVA67 Want to buy kit as gift for friend who served aboard JFK early 70's, now recuperating from surgery. He has beginner skill level. The Naval Base offers Monogram 1/600 JFK, but Rajendra's list (9/97) shows Monogram JFK at 1/800 with Fair rating (little detail, much of that molded into deck). Is this kit worth buying, or is there another alternative? Not much to choose that's boxed as JFK. How about Kittyhawk or America? Thanks for your comments. Alan Simon Atlanta, Ga. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: Dimitrios Apostolopoulos Subject: Penelope's Brown/White Camouflage Scheme Hello SMML, Is anybody aware of any photographs of HMS Penelope during the Norwegian campaign other than the three photographs appearing in Ed Gordon's book HMS Pepperpot? Partial information exists that she wore multiple camouflage schemes during a short period of time. A careful examination of the photographs in Gordon's book reveals at least two variants of the brown/white scheme and that one of them was not the same on the starboard and portside. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Dimi -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: Suvoroff@aol.com Subject: Czarist armored ships underwater This is an interesting question. It was not uncommon in the pre-dreadnought era for cruisers meant for foriegn service, and even second-class battleships, to be sheathed in wood with copper sheathing over the wood (since you can't have the copper touch the iron hull) which also requires that the rudder post and other such items of the hull which will be exposed must be of bronze. This is to keep down seagrowth in areas where drydocking facilities were limited or totally unavailable. However, conversely it is hard to see why the Potemkin (restricted permanently to the Black Sea by treaties prohibiting the Russians from moving battleships through the Dardanelles) would be sheathed. There were plenty of drydocks available to the Russians in the limited area of the Black Sea, surely? Yours, James D. Gray -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: "Percy, John" Subject: Weird request Hello, all. I have a strange info/resource/piece request. What I am interested in is the flight deck and island of the Independence class CVLs (Saipan class would also be acceptable, or maybe Commencement Bay/Sangamon). Are/were there any models of these ships out there in 1/700 scale? Or, does anyone have a "top-view" drawing that I could copy and blow-up/reduce with a copy machine so that I could make my own from stock card? I am interested because I am thinking of converting my Fujimi 1/700 New Jersey to a battle carrier, and I think the lengths of these flight decks would be perfect. Thanks for any info, John Percy mailto:jpercy@clariion.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: Norman Alfred Sells Subject: HMS TRUCULENT 12/01/1950 Hello SMML'ers wherever you are, With all the lengthy discussions I have read regarding models and the finer details of paint chips etc let us take just one minute this day to remember in quiet reflection the 12th January 1950. Today is the 50th anniversary of the day when we suffered the tragic loss of a fine submarine. A 'T' class submarine that gave of her best during WWll sank following a suface collision with a Danish freighter in the Thames estuary. The loss of the ship and 68 of it's crew (both civilian and naval) was the largest peacetime naval loss which was all the more poigniant in that it occurred nearly wihin sight of its Home Port of Chatham. So lets not only remember the ships that we try and finely model in detail but let that model serve as a memorial to all who serve in them, and for those who failed to return to their home port Norman From a chilly damp Garden of England -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: cwjerden Subject: Help on Med blue... Help! I'am trying to finish a 1/400 scale HMS Upholder by the 17th (IPMS club meeting). My can of Humbrol "Med Blue" is WAY off (looking awfully blue-GREEN insted of purple-ish). Does anyone out there have a favorite mix to get the correct hue? Any help would be great. I'am trying to finish what has been an awful little kit, the darn thing has really tried my patience! I didn't think to look at what was in the tin until last night (DUH!) hence the problem. Can anyone help? One last question, anyone know how HMS Upholder"s Conning tower was marked at the time of her loss in the Med? My Only photo shows nothing contrasting, but a little bird says the ships name was may have been on it, in dark red. Thoughts... Thanks, Charles "I'll get Lamberts plans next time..."J. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: mprager@juno.com Subject: Re: US Four Stack Destroyers Just received WSW's USS BORIE (DD-215) four stack destroyer kit in 1/700. A quick look shows it to be a nice kit, well molded with all the needed parts. Can anyone out there point me in the direction of a 1/700 PE Brass kit for flush-deck destroyers? Matt Prager -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: Robert OConnor Subject: Modern Royal Navy ship colour I was wondering if anyone can give me an accurate name and shade, preferably in Humbrol or Model Master, of modern Royal Navy ships. Is it Admiralty grey or something else?? I've seen models depicted in an almost white-a very pale gloss(?) grey color/colour, appearing to almost blend to white. I know it's a pale grey, but, HELP...what is it?? I've used MM light gull grey (gloss) in the past on modern British hulls, but don't think that's close enough.Any ideas? Bob O'Connor, in central Florida, with pollen and flu so thick you may as well stay away until April.On the upside, it's shirtsleeve weather. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: "James Kloek" Subject: Bofors on the California My wife gave me the ISW late war Tennessee/California/West Virginia for Christmas. I am making it up as the California since I have previously done the pre war California, also from ISW. I think this question has been asked before, but I never did see an answer. Did the quad 40mm Bofors mounts on the California (1944-45) have shields and rails? The kit does not provide them, and I am wondering if I need the GMM set to detail them. The photographic sources I have are not great, but I can almost convince myself they do not have the shields on front, and only are shielded by the gun tub. I can not tell about rails on the rear of the mount. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21) From: MRTIBABS@aol.com Subject: Re: Famous Naval Quotations In reply to Keith Butterley the website for Famous Naval Quotations may be found at; http://www.history.navy.mil/trivia/trivia02.htm Nick Tiberio -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22) From: Ed Grune Subject: USNI Color Photo Database Hello SMMLies; I found in the US Naval Institute website their list of color photos which they have on WWII subjects. It is located at http://www.usni.org/hrp/images/thumbnails/WWII_Color/WW_Colorindex.htm They have some highlights of their B&W collection at http://www.usni.org/hrp/collectionhighlights.htm For most of thes selections, you will be presented a thumbnail view of the photo which you may then order from USNI. ED -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23) From: Mike Connelley Subject: HMS Hood 1942? Howdy: With the recent talk of "what if" ships and my own growing interest in the Hood, I was wondering where I might find drawings of pictures of models if the Hood as she would have looked if she had survived her encouter with the Bismarck and had undergone her badly needed refit. Many of the older British BBs traded their old style bridge and armored conn for the large blocky superstructure a la KGV class. Would have the same fate been bestowed upon the Hood had she survived? Would her AA fit be upgraded? What other changes would have been made? Cheers Mike Connelley Hi Mike, MW Williams did an article (or two) on the proposed Hood refit, using the Tamiya 1/700 kit. HMS Hood proposed 1942-45 refit Scale Models International Jan 1985 pp 31 article Tamiya 1/700 Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24) From: Damian Pliszka Subject: Countershading Hi, In some WW2 USN measures there was used countershading on recessed vertical surfaces in permanent shadow. On some camouflage schemes there is visible that some undersides of platforms are painted with 5-U. My question is if all of them were painted with white 5-U? Damian Pliszka Slupsk, Poland -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25) From: "Tarri White" Subject: Revell USS Forrest Sherman kit I am looking for the Revell USS Forrest Sherman kit. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: CokerRE@aol.com Subject: Re: items for sale I have the following items for sale: Ship Plans from US Navy General Arrangement Sets Battleship SOUTH CAROLINA 1906 1/4" scale $90.00 Battleship CONNECTICUT 1910 1/8" scale $30.00 Battleship NEVADA (BB-36) 1/16" scale $25.00 Battleship PENNSYLVANIA (BB-38) 1944 1/16" $30.00 Battleship OKLAHOMA 1/16" $30.00 Battleship NEW MEXICO class 1930s 1/16" $30.00 BOOKS Peterkin, Drawings of the USS Monitor 1985 best offer Alden, The Fleet Submarine in the USN, 1985 $25.00 Cohen, East Wind Rain (Pearl Harbor) `1985 10.00 Ewing, the Lady Lex and the Blue Ghost 8.00 USS Enterprise (CV-6) 8.00 American Cruisers of WWII 1984 12.00 Johnson, PT Boats of WWII 1983 $20.00 USS Missouri, (surrender pamphlet 1945) 20.00 Please reply off list to CokerRE@aol.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for having SMML at your home, why not stop by our home at: http://www.smml.org.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume