Subject: SMML VOL 2476 Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2004 20:10:05 +1000 SMML is proudly sponsored by SANDLE http//sandlehobbies.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1 Re Franklin hanger 2 Re Mystery Ship Cage Masts 3 Visiting London 4 Re SS Pennsylvania 5 Re HMS GOATHLAND. Hunt class destroyer 6 Re SS Pennsylvania 7 Re Mystery Ship Cage Masts 8 Cage Masts 9 Re Cage Masts 10 Re HMS GOATHLAND. Hunt class destroyer 11 Re Mystery Ship Cage Masts 12 Re Cage masts 13 Re 1950s Destroyers 14 Re SS Pennsylvania 15 Re Cage Masts 16 Re US Destroyer Tactics in WW2 17 Re Cage Masts 18 Zevelda 1/100 kits 19 Re Migraine submarine conversions 20 1/600 De Gaulle 21 Re HMS Goatland - Hunt Class Destroyer 22 Re hanger decks 23 More ships to identify -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD INDEX 1 New Colourcoats Available ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From "keith" Subject Re Franklin hanger Hi SMMLies, If the hanger deck was painted deck gray then that means the sponson decks would be painted deck blue 20-B because the sponsons are whether decks and are outboard of the hanger deck. Then line between the two colors would be where the curtain lowered or the doors closed ? Any comments please. Keith ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From Ned Barnett Subject Re Mystery Ship Cage Masts From Kelvin Mok >> Their original single military masts were replaced by twin cage masts in 1912. << While cage masts were distinctive of early battleships I have not come across a good engineering or operational reason why this particular design was adopted. For example The above statement says it had single masts originally and was changed to cage masts. What was the reason for the change? Were cage masts only on battleships or were they installed on smaller ships too? Cage masts were thought to provide better cushioning for shock damage caused by the firing of big guns - and also to be more resistant to battle damage from other big-gun ships. Eventually they were seen to be less useful than sturdy tripod masts, and were replaced. Ned Barnett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From "Phil Collins" Subject Visiting London Also on the subject of historic warplane museum, RAF Hendon. Just go northbound on the Northern Line until you get to Colindale (NOT Hendon Central). As well as aircraft there had a pair of WWII rescue launches. Unfortunately, due to building work, they were blocked off last time I was there. However as the building is over you should be able to get to them. Phil ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From ZNWOOD@aol.com Subject Re SS Pennsylvania I beleive there was a small article including a drawing on the Pennsylvania and her sisters in an old issue of Plastic Ship Modeler, hope this helps zack wood ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From Tim Stoneman Subject Re HMS GOATHLAND. Hunt class destroyer GOATHLAND was completed in December 1942 in a variant of the well-known Western Approaches camouflage scheme - there is a photo in John English, "The Hunts" (Kendal World Ship Society, 1987). She appears to wear the standard 3 colours (White, Western Approaches Green and Western Approaches Blue), with Light Grey pennant numbers. There's a picture of her sister ship, LIMBOURNE, in a very similar scheme on the CHARYBDIS Association website, at http//www.charybdis.limbourne.cwc.net/flash/limbourne_details.htm. I've also seen a picture of her (in the Portsmouth, UK Naval Base Museum) shortly before the Normandy landings which shows her in either light grey overall or Admiralty Standard camouflage - my guess is that she was repainted whilst undergoing conversion to an Assault Group HQ ship at Liverpool between September 1943 and January 1944, when her 3 single 20mm Oerlikons were replaced by twin powered 20mm mountings and a 2-pounder bowchaser was fitted. Tim Stoneman ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From Subject Re SS Pennsylvania >> Do you have anything on the above ship? My Grandfather may have come over on it from Poznan, Poland via Antwerp, Belgium in 1892, into Philadelphia Customs, assuming it is the same ship! << There were three ships by that name but the most likely is the one built for the American Line in 1873. She was used in the Philadelphia-Antwerp service. She had two masts and one funnel , powered by compound engines driving a single screw for a speed of 13 knots. She had a gross register of 3,126 tons and measured 360 x 42 ft. She had her accomodation enlarged in the 1880's and a corresponding tonnage increase to 3,300. She was transferred to the Red Star Line in 1892 but still on the same service then, in 1898, sold to Pacific Mail Line. She was destroyed by fire at Iquique Bay, Chile in November 1918. Michael London ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From BRADFORD CHAUCER Subject Re Mystery Ship Cage Masts >> While cage masts were distinctive of early battleships I have not come across a good engineering or operational reason why this particular design was adopted. For example The above statement says it had single masts originally and was changed to cage masts. What was the reason for the change? Were cage masts only on battleships or were they installed on smaller ships too? << Cage masts were generally used on Battleships thought there may have been one or two larger cruisers with them, though not sure on that one. The reason for the cage masts were to support the fighting tops, again generally only seen on BBs. I think it was felt that the old style military mast Like the one on the Brooklyn or Oregon pre 1921 refit would have had to have been too beefy to support the tops, which would have created wind resistance problems. However the cage mast themselves proved to have all sorts of aerodynamic problems, did not prove to be all that strong, and sang in a stiff wind. One, on the USS Michigan collapsed in a strong wind. The navy subsequently went back to a single mast arrangement, and achieved the necessary strength and rigidity through the use of a tripod arrangement below the tops; as seen on the refitted Arizona. Smaller ships probably could not support that much weight that high up and remain stable and sea worthy Regards, Bradford Chaucer ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From Douglas Simpkin Subject Cage Masts cf Friedman 1. Maximum reasonable height for gun spotting (important before radar). 2. Light weight (relative to British tripods). 3. It was felt that a single enemy shot would not destroy a cage mast (too little mass to detonate a major shell, and a small shell would only take out a few of the wires of the cage). 4. Acceptable strength. This last one was tossed out in the 1920s when one of the cage masts was lost in a hurricane. This, and the vibrations caused by the less-than rigid cage, convinced the USN to abandon the cage mast for more optically stable tripods in the rebuilds of the old BBs in the late 20s-early 30s. There's an interesting 1918 USN comparison of cage masts vs. tripods on line at http//www.gwpda.org/naval/cagvtrip.htm . The USN dreadnoughts the early 20s, some armored cruisers and obsolete BBs were so equipped/retrofitted. Doug ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From David Sepos Subject Re Cage Masts You must remember this was long before the thought of radar fire control and during the time when the concept of battleship combat was 2 lines of ships slugging it out at visual range. It has always been my understanding that cage masts were an engineering answer to the vulnerability of any arrangement of pole masts to gunfire. Since spotting was many times done from the tops, loss of the mast(s) meant that turrets would have to go to local control, therefore, gunnery was less accurate. So what you have is a principle not unlike a golfer hitting a ball through a deciduous tree. "It's 90% air." And even when you do hit a limb, you don't knock the tree down. In the entire structure, any one support carries only a fraction of the load, loose it, and the other supports assume the load. I would also assume that you did not see this in smaller ships as top weight was a bigger concern for ship stability. In battleships, the margin was much greater due to the absence of all the AAA fit that would become necessary by WWII. Replacement with tripods and superstructures by the WWII era was probably due to a combination of deterioration, and requirements for sturdier structures to support larger fire control equipment, radar, plus AAA. HTH, Dave ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From "George Peat" Subject Re HMS GOATHLAND. Hunt class destroyer Gordon, Reference HMS Goathland give me a call sometime I have reference to Camouflage colours and patterns in Naval Camouflage 1914-1945 that may be of help, George Peat ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From "Kevin W. Woodruff" Subject Re Mystery Ship Cage Masts Kelvin Cage masts were thought to be sturdier and might survive a hit by a large caliber shell better than the previously-used military masts used before them, because the hit would theoretically only damage part of the support rather than the whole support. In fact the cage mast proved to be unstable and rather flimsy in foul weather and at least one battleship's cage mast failed (the USS Michigan on Janurary 15, 1918) during high winds and crumpled. The British-style tripod mast was adopted and found to combine the best features of both and most of the post-World War I battleship refurbishments adopted the tripod mast. http//www.gwpda.org/naval/cagvtrip.htm The armored cruisers of the Pensylvania, Tennessee, and St. Louis classes also carried the cage mast design. Kevin ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From Gary Kingzett Subject Re Cage masts BB-1 thru BB-4, Indiana thru Iowa, all had single military masts, basically a pole mounted on top of a hollow tapered cylinder. From BB-5, Kearsarge thru BB-25, New Hampshire, these predreadnought battleships were fitted with 2 such military masts, except for BB-23 and 24, Mississippi and Idaho, which were an attempt to cut costs by down sizing, and among many other drawbacks, only had one mast each. All these masts supported elevated platforms, which were equipped with small machine guns for repelling boarders or chasing away small attack craft, or with searchlights for night fighting, or for general lookout purposes. They were given two masts in case one was shot down. These masts were heavy and cumbersome as constructed, taking up deack space, contributing to rolling instability, and worst of all, it was feared that they would be very inviting targets at the early 1900 battle ranges of 3-4,000 yards, when they could be shot down and would collapse over the conning towers and piloting positions, blinding the ship. In addition, the pole masts on top of the cylinder were wood, or very slender metal, which made them very limber and required extensive rigging, almost as much as the earlier sailing warships had required. At the same time, the early 1900's, a group of progressive US naval officers, most notably William Sims and Bradley Fisk, began to do a great deal of developmental work in naval gunnery and fire control. (The Royal Navy's foremost proponent of these improvements was Percy Scott. He is generally creditted with having been the inspiration and possibly mentor of the US progressives.) Realistic target practice was instituted, from which it was discovered that it was impossible to spot the fall of shot at the increased battle ranges which modern guns allowed, and that it was also nearly impossible to plot course, speed, bearing, etc, of opposing ships under way, which were trying to avoid being hit. Those problems led to two major improvements, salvo firing, whereby several guns of the same caliber attempted to fire at the same time, blanketing a target with overwhelming explosive power, and director firing, a centralized means of plotting the variables of naval gunnery, and electrically aiming and firing the guns from one place, at one time, by one officer. So, in about 1904, the following requirements had evolved. A uniform main battery large enough to blanket an opponent with a salvo, the need to be able to function at battle ranges of 10-12,000 yards, the need for some mechanical computation devices to plot battle variables of range, course and speed, and to tie it all together, some means of reliably SEEING what needed to be seen, and the ability to transfer that visual information to the fire control officers. The answer to this requirement was to raise the upper platform high enough above the waterline so a spotter up there could see to the horizon 12, 000 yards away, and to be able to compute range and bearing, and transfer that information down to fire control. All this required very sophisticated and delicate optical equipment. It was found that mounting this equipment on normal masts was very unsatisfactory. The mounting was not rigid enough, and conversely, the shock and vibration of firing the main battery seriously upset the instruments. The Royal Navy solved this problem by using large tripod masts supporting heavy director tops. The Dreadnought appears to have the first of these, probably made possible because she was so much bigger than her contemporaries. The answer was different in the US Navy. There, tests showed that a properly constructed cage mast was rigid enough for accuracy, flexible enough to isolate the instruments from harmful vibration, but also light enough not to act as a shell burster (it was thought that heavy shells would go right through without exploding), but had enough internal strength to be able to withstand several structural elements being shot away by such shells without collapsing. Michigan and South Carolina were the first US dreadnoughts capable of fulfilling all the requirements enumerated above, and were built with cage masts. When the Great White Fleet returned from its around the world voyage, its ships were quickly equipped with cage masts, so they would at least look up-to-date, and could perform some portions of modern gunnery. Cage masts continued to be applied to the US battlefleet, (battleships, and the abortive battlecruisers) for all the ships constructed or planned before the Washington Arms limitation agreement. By the time North Carolina and Washington were designed, radar was contemplated and purely optical battle observation was less critcal. Many of the existing 2nd generation battleships were equipped in the 30's with director firing for almost all of their gun batteries. These were combined and housed in very large and heavy tops, which were much too heavy for many of the old cage masts. Hence, Arizona, and many of her sisters, were fitted with tripod masts. A few of the more modern 2nd generation ships, some ofthe Marylands and Californias, for example, carried their cage masts through WW II. Those of you still awake should study your notes, we'll have a quiz later. >) Gary ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From Peter Nolan Subject Re 1950s Destroyers Thanks, folks, for your replies. I've been able to chose a destroyer, the Woolsey, DD437, a Gleaves-class, which was towed to Boston, Mass., in October 1957. That's exactly the time period and location for part of my N scale railroad. It will be scratchbuilt at 1160 scale, with some 1192 detail parts. I'll post links to images as I go along. Pete ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From Sab1156@aol.com Subject Re SS Pennsylvania Dear K. Johnson, I cannot give you any informations about the SS Pennsylvania,but if you grandfather left at the end of the 19th century Europe,he did not came from Poland,because until 1945 Posnan was named Posen in the province of Silesia,which then a part of Germany. Best Regards D.Hartwig ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From wem Subject Re Cage Masts Hi Kelvin, The theory behind cage masts was that they were less vulnerable to shell hits than conventional tripod masts, where a shell hit on one leg of the tripod might bring down the whole structure. With a cage mast, the severing of a single lattice member--or even several--would not appreciably weaken the structure. Best, John Snyder The Token Yank White Ensign Models http//WhiteEnsignModels.com for secure online ordering. For the latest news from WEM, Click Here http//www.whiteensignmodels.com/brochure/whats_new1.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From wem Subject Re US Destroyer Tactics in WW2 Harold Stockton quoted >> During this night battle all weapons were reported as operating effectively, with torpedoes tracking true and detonating, and only the 3"/23 antiaircraft gun's illumination shells note performing as designed. Torpedoes were fired at right-angle broadsides and main-guns were not used until all torpedoes has been expended. << Interestingly, that tactic had to be re-learned in the Solomons campaign, where initially the US DDs often opened first with radar-directed gunfire, believing themselves to be outside effective torpedo range; their gun flashes proved to be fine aiming points for IJN torpedomen with their Type 93 torpedoes. It took a long while for the US to modify its tactic back to using radar to track a target for a first-strike torpedo attack, holding gun fire until the torpedoes hit. Best, John Snyder The Token Yank White Ensign Models http//WhiteEnsignModels.com for secure online ordering. For the latest news from WEM, Click Here http//www.whiteensignmodels.com/brochure/whats_new1.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From AAA Hobby Supply Subject Re Cage Masts The switch from pole masts to cage masts was based on a flawed theory that the cage mast, with 24 sets of oppositely "twisted" pipes, would be stronger and able to withstand shellfire. The nemrous collapses of masts in the 20s put this theory in doubt, and the case was closed during the "treaty drawdowns" which saw older ships, often with cage masts, being demolished in target practice - with the cage masts collapsing due to damage and their older military mast counterparts taking slightly more punishment before failure. The answer was the tripod mast which first appeared in the mid-20s on BB refits. As to smaller ships having cage masts, I cannot recall anything below BB size in the USN having a cage mast - but I could be wrong. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From "bendinggrass" Subject Zevelda 1/100 kits Hello SMML, I have read that the "new" kits now sold by Zeveda are actually former Heller 1/100 kits. Could anyone please comment on this, and on the Zeveda kit quality for those kits. This would be helpful especially given the costs of these kits. Thanks. Randy Nugent ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From Ives100@aol.com Subject Re Migraine submarine conversions Hi Rui, There are currently no additional conversion kits for the Lionfish other than the 4 Nautilus Models resin conversion sets. These are all for WWII Fleet Boats. The Migraine boats were usually Guppied, with streamlined sails (there were three different Guppy sail variants). There was talk at one point of a Guppy set from Nautilus, but nothing ever came of it. Dave did the Migraine many years ago for a customer. I have the original article form the SubCommittee Report where he described the conversion and all the unique parts and metal casting he did for that project. He also had to cast the large radar antenna that gave the class their code name (appropriate, as the salt water caused real havoc with the radar!). There was an article on converting the Lionfish to a step sail Guppy (Electric Boat step sail) in Model Ship (??) magazine. Anyhow, I have a copy and could scan and send it to you. The author used a bread and butter method to construct the sail out of laminated sheets of styrene. Came out looking pretty decent, although he did not reshape the bow, hence it looked more like a Fleet Snorkle conversion. Drop me a line if you are interested. Tom's Modelworks makes a resin kit with the three Guppy sail variants. The hull is basically his Balao hull, so you have to fill in the freeflood limber holes, and he gives you a brass template to reshape the bow to the Guppy configuration. Unfortunately, you get the standard 4 bladed photoetch propellers, rather than the 5 bladed Guppy props. Tom Dougherty ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From NeilTaylor54@aol.com Subject 1/600 De Gaulle From 'Warspite' In Sept 03 I was rooting through the piles of kits in my local Hobby shop in Lincoln (UK) when I found a or should I more correctly say the Russian Aircraft Carrier in 1 800 scale, made by a new company that I had not seen before, Kitech. As I left the shop I asked the owner, a very helpful chap, not surprising considering my own spending in the shop probably is paying for at least half of his pension, about this new company. He told me it was from China and were the cheapest kits he had sold. I bemoaned the fact that they were in 1800 and not my beloved 1600 when he then said " Oh dear there were some kits of a French Aircraft Carrier the De Gaulle in that scale, but I've sold them all." His son joined in the conversation confirming the story. I have called on them at least once a month and did phone once a week until recently to secure at least three kits when the 'new order' arrived. So I ask all you , brothers and sisters, does this kit exist and if so where can I get one? I wait in hope! Best wishes Neil Taylor ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21) From "Noel Paris" Subject Re HMS Goatland - Hunt Class Destroyer IN response to Gordon's enquiry I wish to refer him to photo of HMS Goathland which appears on page 66 of the World Ship Society publication entitled THE HUNTS by John English. This is a 3/4 aft (port side) view of the Goathland showing in her in what looks to be a slightly modified 1942 three colour Western Approaches type scheme meant for the Hunt Class. Colors are WA Green, WA Blue and white. If you have the WR PRESS RN Camouflage Volume Two by Alan Raven a similar design appears on page 46 of this volume showing the pattern, and colours, as applied identically to HMS Windsor port and starboard sides. Perhaps other SMMLies might be able to confirm the above. Meantime I trust the above is of assistance and wish you all the best of luck with your 1/48th Goathland model. With warmest regard from Malta Noel Paris ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22) From HAZEGRAYADM@aol.com Subject Re hanger decks To John Snyder et all, Re USN / WW II CVs & painting of hanger decks therein I agree with you John about the (Very) dark #20 standard deck gray & white for walls & ceilings in general but I have been looking at some photos (Both color & B & W) and believe the colors are different within the walls of the elevator spaces. A color shot of the Enterprise / CV-6 with elevator down shows something like 5H / haze gray in the well, while other B & W photos of CV-9 class ships looks to be darker than white, also. I'm not sure if this shows in the directives and became a "Captain's choice," but I assume they wanted something less than white showing to the sky. These elevator wells would make pretty large and easy targets in that color. Maybe the wells were not considered part of the hanger spaces since they were exposed skyward. Anyhow, I feel that we might consider three colors possible below the flight deck. Let us know what you think, O.K.? Bert McDowell. P.S. I'm using Colorcoats on my next CV project so I hope you guys are right. Bert. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23) From RCClem@aol.com Subject More ships to identify You guys must be commended for your access to diverse resources. As the USS Olympia travelled about Europe and Turkey after WW1, she berthed near several ships of many other countries. My family has these original photos Archangelsk HMS Ladas, which looks like a minesweeper. HMS Haldan, which also looks like a minsweeper, except I think I see paddlewheels! Venice DD 98 4-stacker DD 101 4-stacker Fiume (now in Croatia) July 14, 1919 French BB, with fore and aft turrets and 2 others in side sponsons, probably repeated on opposite side. No name. High bow, severe tumble home, 2 short stacks behind foremast, then a long space and 2 more stacks, all 4 stcks with some sort of black reducer cap. The following are large capital ships (Italian?) Filberto Dante Aligieri San Marco Dardanelles, August 22, 1919 The caption says English cruiser. I think I read a large white "55" on the bow. Unich, Turkey (on Black Sea, now Unye?) September 4, 1919 DD 155 4-stacker At sea off Smyrna Sept 16, 1919 DD 263 4-stacker Thanks for the help, Roger Clemens Hinsdale, Illinois ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From John Snyder Subject New Colourcoats Available OK, you late-war USN fans, we now have #27 Haze Gray, the late-war neutral Haze Gray, available. Order Colourcoats US 28. You can order Colourcoats online at http//www.whiteensignmodels.com/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_Colourcoats_Paint_19.html Best, John Snyder The Token Yank White Ensign Models http//WhiteEnsignModels.com for secure online ordering. For the latest news from WEM, Click Here http//www.whiteensignmodels.com/brochure/whats_new1.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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//apma.org.au/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume