Subject: SMML VOL 1275 Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 03:24:41 +1000 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Re: Hurrying for the Nats 2: US Navy ships in color 1941-45 3: Re: measure 1 at PH 4: deck edge antennas on US carriers 5: Italian PE in 1:600 6: Re: Pearl Harbor movie 7: Ships on River Thames 8: Scharnhorst documentary 9: Re: raides letter ship names 10: RN Ship's Crests 11: Re: Enterprise AA 12: SS Ocona 13: Re: Arizona Wreck Dio 14: PH Merchandise 15: Re: Transform Hasegawa Essex into Hornet in 60's 16: Re: HMS CURLEW - Close Range AA 17: Re: Modeling Polls 18: ICM Konig article -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD INDEX 1: IHP 1:700 kits -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: Bradford Chaucer Subject: Re: Hurrying for the Nats >> The U-505 diorama will have to wait till next year. I'll be lucky to have my Ben Stoddart ready to go. Rusty White << Caroline is a wicked person for creating such a nice kit isn't she!! :-) Regards, Bradford Chaucer -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: DarekL Subject: US Navy ships in color 1941-45 Hi Craig you can contact Michael from Air Connection. Look up his web site; http://www.airconnection.on.ca/Default.htm Darek -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: isublett@home.com Subject: Re: measure 1 at PH John, I'm sitting here looking at your chart #1 U.S. Navy WWII Ship Colors and your 5-D and #20 Deck Gray look awfully cold to me. Indeed, they look like bone and white even when I carry them outside. While I have suspected that the "blue" the line appears to be painted at PH was sun-chaulked gray, I'm surprised at your present characterization of the colors. I've even considered using Brunswick Green for your 5-D (Not the RN color, the Pennsylvania Railroad's). I'm the last person to get into a dispute over paint, but is this a change on your part? Pirie Sublett -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: "Kelvin Mok" Subject: deck edge antennas on US carriers Doug Corp has a beautiful model of the Tamiya USS Enterprise. The model shows a number of deck edge "fishing rods" which I take are antennas that are lowered during aircraft operations and raised upright when under sail and no aircraft is being launched. I have noticed them in all post war US aircraft carriers but not on WWII or non US carriers. I may be wrong on their presence only on US vessels. What are they really? Their size seems an anachronism in that modern electronic communications devices do not need such large antennas (your pocket size cell phone works on milliwatts) and satellite technology and having them on all corners and along the sides of the deck far from the communications center seems puzzling. Kelvin Mok -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: Minadmiral@aol.com Subject: Italian PE in 1:600 Hi; Finally getting back to my 1:600 Italian SPICA class DD, resin from PT Dockyard. I started filling bubble holes and got distracted. This is a somewhat simplified "wargame" model. I'm doing it up as a display model just 'cause I like the class, it's a nice looking little ship. Does anyone make PE for WWII Italian ships in 1:600? What's on the fret?? PS - I'm a virgin at PE. Chuck Duggie WoodenWalls Listmeister http://www.egroups.com/group/WoodenWalls Naval wargamer, amateur naval historian, and ship modeler -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: Minadmiral@aol.com Subject: Re: Pearl Harbor movie >> He could have then landed on the Japanese carrier and kicked Yamamoto's ass. << Ah Dave? Would have been some leap. Probably would have added a few million $$ to the budget. Yamamoto was back in Japan holed up in a battleship. (8<)) Chuck Duggie WoodenWalls Listmeister "http://www.egroups.com/group/WoodenWalls Naval wargamer, amateur naval historian, and ship modeler -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: Kcompany@webtv.net (Marvin Reichman) Subject: Ships on River Thames Thanks to all for the information. Infantry Queen Of Battle -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: "Pletscher-Lenz-Schneider" Subject: Scharnhorst documentary Can anybody help me with a (PAL system) copy of this documentary? Would be great Falk Pletscher -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: SantMin@aol.com Subject: Re: raides letter ship names >> The kit is 1:426 scale, and based on the decals the letters are (as best I can tell with my cheap plastic caliper) 1/24-in tall. Do they go that small? If so, where might I find these? Thanks again for all the help s'guys << Derek, I just measured the raised letters on my Winslow and they are 1/32" tall, a bit smaller than your 1/24th. They are PE Brass made by ABER and they are sold in hobby shops for use on armor models. You can get them from VLS, (616)356-4888 or www.modelmecca.com Cheers, Bob Santos -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: "John Rule" Subject: RN Ship's Crests I'm not sure, but I believe someone was asking about a source for finding Royal Navy ship's crests. If you haven't found one, I have. A friend of mine just purchased a two volume set of books called Admiralty Ships Badges 1919 - 1994 by T.P. Stopford. These are beautiful books with Vol. 1 covering Abdiel to Lysander and Vol. 2 Mackay to Zulu. The books are large format and show 6 crests per page in full colour. My friend has started painting the crests on wood plaques of all the ships on which he served. These are beautiful books and may be available if you do a book search. Hope this helps. John -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: Craig R Bennett Subject: Re: Enterprise AA Hi Steve I believe the Enterprise AA fit on 12/7/41 was 8 5-38 caliber inch guns (8x1), 16 1.1 guns (4X4) that didn't gun tubs and 16 .50 caliber guns. Previously they had railings put around them. In March 1942 the Enterprise recieved a refit that replaced them with 20mm. Craig -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: "Harold Stockton" Subject: SS Ocona Where to get information on the SS Ocona, ex SS Maia, an impounded WW-I German registry steamer? My grand-father sailed on this vessel in 1917 carrying supplies to the White-Russian government forces in Murmansk and Archangel. I have his very detailed and well written accounts of what these sailings were like when the convoy system was not used. His transcribed diary/logbook will be available for purchase after I can run down the information on this ship. Any help would be appreciated and accredited in the publication. Thanks. Harold Stockton -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: Derek Wakefield Subject: Re: Arizona Wreck Dio Steve Allen said >> There was an article in SSM about 6 or 7 years ago about a post attack Arizona. [Snip] Your idea has a lot of merit to it; you'll probably be needing a coupla Loren Perry's PE sets, but the idea is intriguing, and the result would, as you say, make a statement. Hmmm. Maybe....Now you've got me thinking. << I didn't even know about FSM until about 7 yrs ago, let alone any of the ship modeling mags such as SSM. I say go for it! Ray D. Bean wrote >> ...as most folks who had been to the memorial at Pearl, or who were never there at all, all thought that the ship sank totally out of sight!!!! << I wondered about that myself for a long time myself. After I started finding photos of the ship after the attack, I wrote to the USN Historical Center (this was way back in the 70s mind you) out of curiousity. As you say, most folks have no idea that most of the upper works were removed and scrapped. I've surprised a number of my friends with that bit of information. >> someday after I dust off the model (and I almost threw it out a few days ago) << A near "Oops!!" if I ever heard one. >> I will fix it up even more since I have been totally inspired by not only the movie, but by owning both the GMM set and the kit. What I did to do the wreck would take far too much space here but perhaps in a future PSM article. << Both sound like good ideas, as it appears there's several folks here who are now thinking along these lines. >> If and when I can figure out how my scanner works, I will dig up my old negatives and print some pictures of this dio to post....if any of you wish to see it. << I would very much like to see those photos. Some year, I may try the "Enterprise passing Arizona" dio because that Freeman painting struck me to the core. At the moment, such a project would be far bond my current skill levels. Right now I'm struggling just trying to ID all the problems with the Revell kit and figure out how to correct them. Mike Leonard said >> Ray Bean did one hell of a nice post-attack ARIZONA several years back, and Dave Judy and others have done impressive models of the memorial and sunken wreck. I believe they both used the 1/426 Revell kit as a basis. << I've seen Dave Judy's memorial dio at steelnavy.com. VERY Impressive!! Made me wonder though, how many gallons of resin did he have to use to fill that shadow box mount. Derek Wakefield Denton, TX -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: Derek Wakefield Subject: PH Merchandise With the release of the PH movie, I thought I'd be able to find a Revell Arizona kit fairly easily at one of the local discount or hobby shops. Guess what...I couldn't. I ended up having to order a spares kit from Model Expo. Good price, but the shipping cost me nearly as much as the model did. Is it me, or does this scarcity of merchandise related to the movie seem odd. The only thing I've found are the GI-Joe PH Collection figures. With all the media hype about the movie, I expected to walk into the local Wal-Mart and find stacks of Arizona, P-40, Zero, and B-25 kits about to fall off the racks. The only thing about to fall off the rack at our local Wal-Mart were car kits. They did have the new books prominently displayed on their "father's day" racks up front, but nothing else. The local Hobby Lobby didn't have anything other than their standard fare either. Comparatively, the local Hastings had tons of the soundtrack stacked up on opening day. Did someone miss something on the way to the theater on this one? Or...is it a case of "we're going to wait to see how the movie does before considering the merchandise angle." Derek Wakefield Denton, TX -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: "Michael C. Smith" Subject: Re: Transform Hasegawa Essex into Hornet in 60's There is a detailed series of articles in Plastic Ship Modeler a year or two back doing exactly this - a terrific example of kitbashing that I've always wanted to do. But yes, it has been done before. Michael Smith Marshall, Texas -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: "Harold Stockton" Subject: Re: HMS CURLEW - Close Range AA >> Can anyone confirm CURLEW's lighter armament when sunk off Skaanland in 1940? Most references credit her with two 8-barreled 2-pdr pompoms when first converted, with the after one replaced by two quad 0.5" Vickers guns before the war, due to a shortage of pompoms elsewhere. However, 2 books I've seen recently, by well-respected authors, both state that she had the four-barreled variant (John Roberts' 'British Warships of the Second World War' and David Brown's 'Design and Construction of British Warships'. I've no photos detailed enough to determine which is correct. Any ideas? << Dear Tim, This is a very interesting question as I initially would have concurred with you on your conclusion of an old "Ceres" class cruiser HMS Curlew (I.42) having a "lighter" AA armament because of the shortage of available 8-barreled 2-pounder "pom-poms." So, "I went-a-looking" for an answer to your question. In Lenton & Colledge's "Warships Of World War II", page 26, the authors state that both Coventry and Curlew were both prototype conversions to AA vessels during the Abyssinian crisis (1936), page 23, which was also extended to include the Curacoa and the entire "Capetown" class. Coventry's and Curlew's AA suite is listed as being ten (10) 4 inch HA single mounts, and sixteen (16) 2-pounders of two (2) 8-barrel mounts. The Curacao on the other hand had an AA suite of only eight (8) 4 inch HA weapons in twin mounts, and four (4) 2-pounders in a single 4-barrel mount. According to the authors, the Washington Naval Treaties precluded the replacement of these older cruisers with more modern types, and the coming of the war precluded other more modern cruiser types from being so modernized. So, it is no wonder that these vessels were so involved so quickly in the many corners of the world. As prototype AA cruisers, I was intrigued at how the RN intended to use these vessels so I continued my search. These vessels wartime record showed that the Coventry, Curacoa, Curlew, Cairo, and the Calcutta, were all lost within the first two years of the war. Were these vessels inherently bad in their designed AA armament, or were they deliberately placed in "harm's way." This was an even more intriguing question. What I found on the web were these facts: HMS Curlew, light cruiser of the "Ceres" class and close sister to "Cassandra" (launched 1917, 4,190 tons, 5-6in guns, sunk by German air attack, Norway in May 1940). Recommissioned Nov 1922 for North America and West Indies Station, and escorted battlecruiser "Repulse" on 1923 World Tour by Prince of Wales accompanied by Lt. Louis Mountbatten. http://www.naval-history.net/RecordRN190428SmithGW.htm The next piece of information that I found gave the reason for all of the prototype AA conversion of these vessels. In essence, these were the first successful attempt at placing AA screening and airborne combat air control capable vessels within a carrier strike group. "In the 1930's the Royal Navy was rather bound in tradition with dated equipment. One asset they did have was a Signal School that also manufactured their large transmitter valves in quartz glass envelopes, as their requirement was considered too small to put out to industry. When the coastal radar for the RAF was being developed the RN school staff were asked if they could produce quantities of these high power valves. They obliged, and were soon let into the radar secret, being invited to observe trials. However, there was no backing from higher authority, and little progress overall in developing equipment for ships. "Then came the periodic rotation of naval officers. Those who had simply accepted the new stuff with little understanding or urgency moved off, and their replacements tried to get to grips with what they had inherited. Seeing the demonstrations of aircraft detection, they soon started pushing things along. What they lacked was an integrated plan backed by a chap like Air Marshal Dowding. By 1940 the aircraft carrier Ark Royal still didn't have radar, but it was accompanied by HMS Sheffield and HMS Curlew which did. Lt.Cdr. Coke was in charge of flying on the Ark, and he realized that the other ships could give him early warning of approaching enemy aircraft. "Communication was primitive. The radar operators passed messages which were sent to the carrier by hoisting flags. These were read, and passed to Lt.Cdr. Coke in the bridge wireless office. Morse code was used to tell the flying observers where the enemy was, and they spoke to their pilots through speaking tubes. It all took 4 minutes. When the operators realized that they could also see their own aircraft on the radar screen, they soon learned to give speed and direction in order to intercept an attack, and single letter codes were adopted to shorten the Morse messages. "The captain wanted to be kept informed, so a blackboard on the bridge was used to plot the latest positions. This was a primitive plotting table. Lt.Cdr. Coke called his system "The Directive Method", and it was the start of Fighter Control in the RN. By 1945 there were 800 officers specializing in this task." http://www.klif.demon.co.uk/raf/tales.htm So, it seems that Force H, being made up of Ark Royal, Sheffield, and Curlew, were only capable of a "seeing-eye dog" barking to tell its master to do this or that in response to the dog'd barking, but even "Lassie" could not provide the instantaneous information that was needed in an enemy aircraft dominated environment. It is surprising that the RN placed their few Type 86, 87, 251, 252, and 273, radio detection and interrogation sets aboard such vessels rather than aboard their carriers. The "Ark" did have a Type 273 radio homing beacon for its own aircraft. What the RN did do to improve the AA network aboard the "Ark," in order to help her fulfill her role as a "strike-carrier" was to not increase its initial armament suite, of 16 x 4.5in. twin-mountings (I think they were Mk. XIX mounts), 48 x 2pdr. in six 8-gun mounts, and 32 x 0.50 cal. in eight mounts, but rather rely on its supporting AA support vessels to provide close in protection. As stated above, the concept of the "strike group" concept had been invented by Lt.Cdr. Coke was in charge of flying on the Ark. The three main aspects of this concept were the need for "(1) an automatic "identification of friend or foe" (IFF) system, (2) a "fighter director ship" with radar and adequate, multichannel communications enabling it to monitor groups and "coach" defending interceptors against them, and (3) radio silence on the part of the carrier and their escorts unless and until they were attacked (American and British Aircraft Carrier Development, 1919, 1941. Home, Friedman, and Mandeles. Naval Inst. Press. p. 68)." On 30 January 1940, Rear Admiral W. F. (Bull) Halsey, commander Carrier Division One, argued that the RN efforts at developing fast carrier "strike groups" meant that a "carrier, with suitable airplane complement, constitutes a powerful threat against shore based aircraft and establishments . . . (and that) defending pursuit, even though in small numbers, are highly effective in reducing accuracy of attack, even though in small numbers (US Fleet, Battle Force. National Archives. Folder A16-3 #2, Box 128, Record Group 313. p. 6)." Halsey's request for a "fighter directing ship" as the Brits were actively using was changed significantly when it was applied to the USN. In October 1940, the Yorktown received her CXAM radar suite, but it was still a big issue about how USN carriers were so susceptible to any form of airstrike. So, though the USN was actively watching how the RN was using, and losing, its AA "fighter director ships", at such an alarming rate during the 1940 and 1941 time period, the loss of an AA cruiser was far more acceptable than the loss of ANY carrier, no matter how small its aircraft complement. Lest too much scorn be placed on the RN AA cruisers of the Ceres and Capetown class, their following classes of the RN "Diode" and the USN "Atlanta' and 'Oakland" classes were all attempts at the development of the late-war "radar-picket" ships, and eventually, to today's "Aegis" equipped "guard" ships for the USN carrier groups. And even as it was in 1940, it is still a problem at stopping every single dedicated attack from the enemy, ALA HMS Sheffield and a few other examples from both sides of the Atlantic. Harold Stockton -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: Michael Bartel Subject: Re: Modeling Polls >> About the polls "measuting" the interests of modelers, why were the (dare I say it?) railroaders omitted? << Model railroading is generally considered a totally separate subject area. That is why there are separate magazines for model railroaders and finescale modelers, not to mention the different 'zines for the various sub-groups within those two categories. They Rarely, if ever, cross over, although you do get people (like myself) who are interested in aspects of both areas. Check out: http://ihphobby.tripod.com and you'll see what I mean. One thing you do get a lot of is use of techniques and parts crossing over modeling lines. I have used model railroading parts and techniques in making ship masters, and vice versa. I'm sure there are other modelers who can say the same thing. I have never actually seen a poll with the various model railroading subgroups, but I can probably make a guess that transition modeling (50's era steam/diesel) is the most popular, with modern (freight) railroading a close second. In the cities, traction, commuter and subway modeling tends to be more predominant. Nostalgic modeling, such as the Pennsylvania railroad (the greatest in the world) in its heyday is probably right behind modern modeling. Mike Bartel IHP -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: "Ray Boorman" Subject: ICM Konig article Hi, Based on the fact I want ICM to produce HMS Hood I just bought the ICM Konig. (Well that's my excuse anyway) I wont be building this model for a while, but I remember a while back that in Fine Scale Modeler there was a lengthy article about building the ICM model. Since I tend not to buy FSM anymore is this article worth while searching out. Are there other building articles online or in other magazines??? Whilst I have built models for 30 years or so. I have only in the past month or so started building ships so these articles may be of more use to me as opposed to the lists grizzled veterans ;) Thanks for any information in advance by the way. Ray -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: Michael Bartel Subject: IHP 1:700 kits The anticipated Emile Bertin kit is being pushed back until next year so that I can make new masters. It's a long and rather embarassing story, and if anyone wants to hear it, they can contact me off-site. Meanwhile, the announced Algerie is being moved up and will be the next kit. The whole schedule is actually being brought forward, and the next release after that is a British World War I dreadnought (which one I haven't decided on yet- I have two sets of masters running neck in neck, and it depends on which gets done first). Check the Website for other updates as they appear. Fantasque kits are still in stock at $27 each. Mike Bartel IHP http://ihphobby.tripod.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the SMML site for the List Rules, Backissues, Member's models & reference pictures at: http://smmlonline.com Check out the APMA site for an index of ship articles in the Reference section at: http://www.tac.com.au/~sljenkins/apma.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume