Subject: SMML VOL 2583 Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 03:22:08 +1000 SMML is proudly sponsored by SANDLE http//sandlehobbies.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1 Italian ship in Russian hands 2 Shane's photos 3 Malta pics 4 Re Malta pics 5 Re Ned Barnett and History Channel Show 6 More on Barnett and History Channel 7 RN Type 251 puzzle ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Model club & SMMLcon Information 1 SMML site update ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From "Lou Meszaros" Subject Italian ship in Russian hands Found this web page, is this the remains of the Conti (I think that was the one) that was turned over to the Russians. http//flot.sevastopol.info/ship/linkor/novorossiysk.htm Looks like she had an internal explosion or mine hit? Anyone have information? Thanks, Lou ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From "John Rule" Subject Shane's photos Hi Shane, I checked out the photos you posted in the Miscellaneous section of References on the SMML webpage. I can identify some of the photos as follows. Row 1 Photos 3 and 4 show HMS Warspite. (Not a Royal Sovereign as noted) Row 2 Photo 4 shows HMS Howe. Row 3 Photo1 shows HMS Anson. Row 3 Photo shows HMS Malaya. Hope this helps. John Rule ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From "bert" Subject Malta Pics Shane, Re Malta Page http//smmlonline.com/reference/walkabouts/malta/malta.html The carrier in Malta looks more like a "Collosus" class light fleet than an Illustrious class. look closely at the bow and note the deep curving sweepdown from the flight deck going aft this is more a feature of the "lights" than the "fleets" having served on both types I look for these points. Now I am going on memory. I believe the "Maori" settled flat on the bottom, the destroyer shown looks as if it has been run ashore, or perhaps my memory and eyesight are failing. hope this is of some use to you. No doubt you will get a lot of theories on this, One of the better recent subjects for discussion in my opinion. Yours Aye (TaT). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From "bert" Subject Re Malta pics Shane, More thoughts on the pics' "Maori" was sunk in February 1942. I would have thought that by the end of the war the remains of "Maori" would have been removed. There was the "Corfu incident" about 46/47 when the albanians mined the Corfu channel and two R.N. Destroyers and a cruiser were trapped in the mines and much damage done one was the "Saumarez" and the other might have been the "Volage" (not sure of that one) the cruiser could have been "Ajax", these could have ended up in Malta and the ship that is depicted down by the stern may be one of these destroyers. pure theory is this. I hope that all your recent maladies have now been cleared, and thank you Shane and Lorna for keeping the site going. Bert ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From Ned Barnett Subject Re Ned Barnett and History Channel Show >> I don't know your email so I am using this forum for my questions. You present a good TV appearance, knowledgeable, and watchable. Good show. Nice to see someone in living color, and I did watch the entire show. << Thanks, Gene. This was my first time as both an on-camera "expert" and a behind-the-scenes historical consultant. It was my job to ensure that the script was historically accurate AND that the images on my program matched the text. I found (in reviewing the rough draft-cut of the tape) two out-of-context images, and advised them to change them (I forgot to look to see if the changes were made). There are many production companies that work with History Channel - the programs are presented as if produced by the History Channel, but in fact they are produced by independent production companies. I currently work primarily with two of them (though I'd be glad to work with all of them - I really enjoy this). >> The WW1 in color show kept me glued to the set Sunday night. Even with it's seagoing errors and incorrect voiceovers. But, many of the History Channel's (not your) voiceovers didn't match the film being showed. Maybe picky, but when they are talking about B-17s, they showed B-24s (at least once); talking about the Douglas DB-7, they showed Martin B-10s/12s; talking about another aircraft, they cut to a Martin Marauder assembly line; and several other editing mistakes. There were even some conflicting discrepancies between numbers (quantities, losses, etc.) given in diff segments of the shows. << That can happen when shows aren't properly reviewed and edited. I do not believe that any of the shows I've been connected with (three that have been aired, three more that are going to be taped Friday of next week, and several others still in the research phase) have those problems, but like you, I've seen some of those problems on shows I watch. Certainly the WW-I (in color) shows had a few of the images wrong (a WW-I era battleship sunk in WW-II - I'm sure you know the one), but they were still enjoyable to me. However, I had nothing to do with those shows, except as a glued-to-the-screen watcher. >> Am I wrong in assuming they don't have really professional editors or at least editors who know the diff in WW2 aircraft or WW1 warships? Or doesn't anyone knowledgeable coordinate the film with the voice script? << As I said, I did both of those on the World War I Tech program that premiered on July 30. However, that was my first opportunity to do so (I hope to do so again in an upcoming program on Submarine Disasters, but that's still in negotiations). I'm sure some programs have experts who vet the programs, and some don't. ALSO - consider that they need to have footage that illustrates the points being made. So, if they show the WW-I era HMS Barham sinking (in the Med in WW-II) while talking about U-9's trifecta (of which no photos exist), they are having to accommodate the needs of VIDEO as well as the needs of HISTORY. In those cases, I'm inclined to forgive them ... at least they didn't use the Yamato to stand in for the HMS Aboukir, Hogue and Cressy . However, those were armored cruisers, not battleships, and I was sorry to see that error in the script. Gene, I think I'm going to have to expand on this for my new blog - Barnett on History - thanks for the ideas! All the best Ned ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From Ned Barnett Subject More on Barnett and History Channel Another brief (modest) brag, if you don't mind. Next Friday (August 13), I'm going to be taping a kind of History Channel "trifecta" (or "hat trick" to you hockey fans) - three programs in one day's taping. The core will be Submarine Disasters, but I'll also be talking about the engineering failures of the Sherman tank and the R-101 passenger dirigible (which crashed in 1930-31 on it's maiden cruise). This is a labor of love - if I can figure out a way to make money at it, so much the better . But I still love it, and I want to thank all the folks here who so materially assisted me in preparing for the Sub Disaster program. All the best Ned ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From Mike Potter Subject RN Type 251 puzzle Thanks to the several SMMLers who sent information about the RN Type 251 antenna. You gentlemen established that this was part of an IFF system, not an aircraft homing beacon. That is perplexing because a 1949 DNC memorandum cites Type 251P as a radar beacon. Given the number of respondents and sources, I think you have it right and the DNC's typist had it wrong. RN designs of the early 1950s specified a USN Type YE homing beacon, which was in use in WW2. So it is possible that the RN would use the YE beacon in the late 1940s. Against the notion In WW2 and again during the Korean War, the US offered the UK military equipment, presumably including the YE beacon. In the late 1940s, the UK was watching its imports carefully and was unlikely to import military equipment that it could manufacture at home. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Model club & SMMLcon Information ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From Mistress Lorna Subject SMML site update We go to a fair few modelling shows and I can't help but notice the increase of models in the ship categories. Proof that more people are being tempted to build a ship or have we all been able to finish something at last? Enjoy what others have been building at the following Show Pages ACTSMS 2004 NSW State Championships 2004 Cheers Mistress Lorna ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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