Subject: SMML VOL 2721 Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 02:45:28 +1100 The Ship Modelling Mailing List (SMML) is proudly sponsored by SANDLE http//sandlehobbies.com For infomation on how to Post to SMML and Unsubscribe from SMML http//smmlonline.com/aboutsmml/rules.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1 Re old British Cruisers 2 KGV questions 3 Re Help with old British Cruisers 4 Re Old British Cruisers 5 What's "Lt (SC) SS"? 6 Re help with british cruisers 7 RN Cruisers 8 yamashiro,s ramp and crane thingy ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From "Mitsuaki Kubota" Subject Re old British Cruisers Hi Bob, All cruiser classes you listed are protected cruisers from the point of arrangement of armour. Saying more precisely, Blake and Blenheim are 1st class protected cruisers and the rest are 3rd class protected cruisers. Blake classes became very large to obtain high speed. Machineries for higher power need more space, and they reached 22 kts at forced draft. Surprise classes were originally planed as dispatch vessels with no armament, but completed as 3rd class cruisers with 4" guns. Scout, Archer and Barham classes are also 3rd class cruisers. They were expected to act as "torpedo cruisers". But their small hull didn't allow for powerful machineries. They reached only 15-16 kts at normal draft. It need more powerful and compact machineries with strongly built light hull to obtain small fast cruisers. In the process of the effort to build fast cruisers, Topaze (Gem) classes were completed lasts of 3rd class cruisers. They had very narrow hull and powerful machineries for their size. They reached more than 21 kts. Especially, Amethyst is first British cruiser shipped Persons turbine engine, and reached 22.5 kts. Gem classes don't have vertical armour, so they aren't light cruisers. But can be said as ancestor of scout cruisers and light cruisers. Hope these helps. Mitsuaki Kubota ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From Fisherharn@aol.com Subject KGV questions I am starting to build the Tamiya 1/350 KGV that I got a year ago. I wish to build her as a waterline model at anchor at Scapa before heading for the Pacific, my father joined her as a Midshipman there. I have been looking at books, photos that I have found on the internet and watching boards such as this and I have a number of questions. I am sorry if these are not new ones. 1. I have not found any photos of her at Scapa in the summer of 1944. Where I can I find some? 2. Tarrant's book (page 234) has a photo of her at Alexandria, on the way to the Pacific, and she was painted overall light grey (no B20 dark panel). Is this the scheme that she would have worn at Scapa? I can't help thinking/wishing that she might have been in a disruptive scheme. 3. It is clear to me that the rear starboard anchor should be omitted, but can anyone tell me why and when it was removed? Which anchor is the most likly one to have been used at Scapa. 4. The photos, etc that I have found suggest that there were a large number of carley floats around the superstructures, but the kit has only one stack of three. Where can I buy extra ones, or even, how could I try to make some? 5. How authoritive are the plans in the recent Chesneau book? I am particularly interested in the 20mm guns without tubs. What are the hatched rectangles close to the 5.25" guns? I am sure that there will be other questions in due course, sorry to be a pain. Michael Fisher, England ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From Subject Re Help with old British Cruisers In response to Bob Reddy's appeal, I offer the following. If anyone else pitches in with amendments and corrections, I'd be grateful. 1) Dates quoted against ships' names are conventionally the date the ship was laid down, i.e. the start of construction, not the date of completion. 2) There surely must be an official list of cruisers somewhere. I know the Admiralty prepared an annual list of ships in commission. I recommend an inquiry to the National Maritime Museum at Greenwich; the Caird Library e-mail address is library@nmm.ac.uk , and there is a source for 'specialist enquiries' at lxverity@nmm.ac.uk . Alternatively, a good source for all RN ships is the book "The Metal Fighting Ship in the Royal Navy 1860-1970" by E.H.H.Archibald, pub. Batsford, 1971 (ISBN 0 7137 0551 5). 3) The 'labels' attached to ships are sometimes confusing in the literature. There seems to be, broadly speaking, some progression of terms with the passage of time. The Victorian period was one of rapid development in warships, and it seems unsurprising that the classifications appear to blur. The early steel cruisers were 'labeled' with the particular style of armor protection, and also by a measure of ships' size and potency (First Class, Second, Third). In addition, there could be a descriptor of the operational role, such as 'Torpedo Cruiser' or the later 'Scout Cruiser'. In the early 20c., a type emerged called the 'Light Cruiser', in which armor protection and heavy armament were at first sacrificed for speed. The term 'Heavy Cruiser' seems to have been a fall-out from the Washington Treaty of 1921. The protective system of armor appears to have been originated with the HMS "Comus" Class in 1876-81. In this, armored structure was built around the vitals such as boilers, engines, and magazines.. The armor protecton was enhanced by the design of the coal bunkers (which presumed that the ship should have its bunkers full if it met an enemy of equal strength). Bunker protection was in fact employed with all styles of armor until the coming of oil as a fuel. In the early days when armor plate was very thick and heavy for a desired resistance to shell, the system enabled a degree of protection to be applied to a medium size of ship. On the other hand, a ship might be put out of action by the upperworks being destroyed, even though the vitals had survived the battle. The 'armored' cruiser' principle sought to minimise the disadvantage of the protective system by applying the armor to the outside of the hull and some of the upperworks. Such an extent of armor was only practicable on medium-size ships because of the introduction of hard-faced armor, which was much lighter then the previous compound type. Even so, it seems that only the larger (First Class) cruisers were so fitted. The first to be built was the "Cressy" Class (1899-19010, which displaced 12,000 tons. Some earlier first class cruisers had a limited amount of side armor, and were 'labeled' belted cruisers. The side system was not employed on smaller cruisers until the "Chatham" Class of of 1911, and then only to a limited area (thus being 'belted'). The role 'label' of 'Torpedo Cruiser' was applied to a design of ship intended to defeat torpedo boats while having sufficient size for good endurance and seakeeping. It was said that they proved unsuccesful in each objective, particularly because they were too slow. The 'Scout Cruiser' was designed to have the speed to lead flotillas of the fast destroyers then emerging. 4) Here are comments on the ships listed. My sources agree with the tonnages given; they are of course, Imperial tons. The dates have been changed where necessary to the dates laid down. "Blake" (1889), "Blenheim" (1890). Protected, with armored casemates. "Surprise". I can find no ship of this name prior to the destroyer (1916) which was one of the Improved M & R Class, 1173 tons.. I can find no ship named "Alacrity" prior to one of the "Black Swan" Class (1942-45). "Scout" (1885), "Fearless" (1886). I have no reference to the armor system, and would suggest there was none. "Archer" Class (1885-87). Third Class Protected, with very skimpy thicknesses of armor plate. Torpedo Cruiser. As Bob states, I believe that there were eight in the class, but Archibald names only seven, omitting "Serpent". The name "Serpent" does not appear at all in his index of ships. "Barham" (1889), "Bellona" (1890). Protected. "Topaze" Class (1903-04). Third class Protected. "Amethyst" (1903) was the first cruiser to be given turbine engines. Brian Taylor ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From George Colleen Hargreaves Subject Re Old British Cruisers Hi Bob, Class Type* Blake cl. first class protected cruiser Surprise cl. third class dispatch vessel Scout cl. third class torpedo cruiser Barham cl third class cruiser Gem cl. third class cruiser Topaze * As per Conway's Conway's, All the World's Fighting Ships, 1860-1905 ISBN 0 85177 133 5; this is a primary reference for vessels of this period. An other nice book on cruisers is by Douglas Morris, Cruisers of the Royal and Commonwealth Navies, ISBN 0 907771 35 1; there are some excellent photos in this book. Cheers, George Hargreaves ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From "Allan and Crystal Plumb" Subject What's "Lt (SC) SS"? Someone of my acquaintance was a "Lt (SC) SS" in 1974-77. The Lt is lieutenant, SC is probably Supply Corps, what about the SS (which I see for lots of the crew)? Surely not just Silent Service... Thanks. Allan Plumb ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From "Dave Ward" Subject Re help with british cruisers Bob, the most accessible reference will be 'Conways All the Worlds Fighting Ships 1860-1905' (isbn 0-85177-133-5). The naming and classification of cruisers - even when the first cruiser was completed is confusing, and the classification of the ships changed with new theories. The Conway book give the best reference of the period in one volume. Dave Ward ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From Mnw888@aol.com Subject RN Cruisers Hi I've found the following classifications of those RN Cruisers Blake Protected Cruiser Surprise Origianally Despatch Vessels then given some guns and reclassed as 3rd Class Cruisers Scout Torpedo Cruisers Archer Ditto Barham Ditto Topaze 3rd Class Protected Cruiser Don't know of a list but I can recommend "Cruisers of the Royal and Commonwealth Navies" by Douglas Morris published by Maritime Books who you will find on the net. Regards Malcolm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From "Alan Bickerton" Subject yamashiro,s ramp and crane thingy Back on line again after a gap of several months it is nice to get back to my daily fix of the smml .so as I overcome my incompetance with my keybrord I have two questons I have aoshima's yamashiro and as it has the same molding as the fuso I was wondering does the ramp like molding on the port side amidships need removeing because I pesume it was to do with the air craft handling as the yamashiro's planes were always on the quarterdeck is this a fuso feture and needs removing. My second queston is i also have kombrig's Imperatriza maria and Iwas wondering what the crane was for that was fitted to the bow was for regards alan bickerton who is still milking cows and modeling ship s in awet and windy cheshire ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the SMML site for the List Rules, Reviews, Articles, Backissues, Member's models & Reference Pictures at http//smmlonline.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume