Subject: SMML VOL 2957 Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 01:52:40 +1000 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 question toy boats 2 RN FAA fighters 3 RN escorts in WW2 4 Re DEs and Frigates 5 Kit request 6 Re FAA -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD INDEX 1 Model kits for sale ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From Donsrcships@wmconnect.com Subject Re question toy boats Hello all I have been out of touch for a wile so hello to all of you, I see someone is asking about plastic ship RC models. I would start with the large PT 109 by lingburg 1/32 nd scale it comes with everything except the radio, When you get it done and in the water a lot of you will agree it makes for a nice RC right out of the box. With a little adding of detail you can make it look even better. YOU can also add different motors and in many ways you can do a lot with it, BUT in the beginning I would build it right out of box and you will learn a lot from it and can go to other ships from there, I Have taught a buddy of mind about RC ships about 2 months ago he has went from the PT 109 kit to the old sterling BB 63 all in wood and I am helping him with that as well, BUT like me many years ago I started with that same PT and learn a lot from it been buliding ships since 1990 . I am now in the process of converting a BLUE divel Destroyer by lindburg to a WW 2 Summer class DD with a lot of changing and scratch building and she will be RC with many of my own changes of running gear and set ups, I hope I have help a little have a grate weekend DON That Portland Rustbucket ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From potter4@att.net Subject RN FAA fighters Comments on RN FAA fighters recently mentioned in SMML Six Blackburn Roc fighters were administratively assigned to HMS Ark Royal in 1940 but the ship evidently never embarked them. Off Norway the ship's Skua dive bombers served as interceptors. According to Capt. Eric Brown, the RN's chief test pilot, no Roc ever made a deck landing. The sources I cite below have no indication that a float version ever existed for battleships or other surface ships. By 1945 the Seafire's range was too short to accompany FAA strike aircraft such as Avengers. The RN FAA for whatever reason did not use Seafires for strikes. So their use as CAP may have been their only suitable mission. While TF 57 operated somewhat as a combat sea patrol (my unofficial term for the purpose of this message) to support the Okinawa operation, I haven't seen any reference that RN aircraft flew CAP for USN ships off Okinawa. Re "American CAPs were not that effective whilst the Royal Navy ones were much better as they were based on fighter interception techniques developed in the Battle of Britain." What is the basis for this statement? The RN's interception method predated the Battle of Britain. Before the USN officially entered WW2 it adopted RN FD doctrine. See my note in SMML 2956 for sources. Sources Thetford, Owen. British Naval Aircraft since 1912, 5th edition (London Putnam, 1982). Brown, Capt. Eric. Wings of the Navy Flying Allied Carrier Aircraft of WW2, 2nd edition (Annapolis USNI, 1987). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From potter4@att.net Subject RN escorts in WW2 About an item in SMML 2954 No RN/RCN River-class frigate mounted Squid mortars and their complex sonar sets during WW2. Only Loch-class frigates mounted this weapon system. About this item in SMML 2956 "Some Americans referred to Flower class corvettes as 'poor seaboats' with which the RN would hardly agree. This was because the Flowers, small and buoyant as corks, were very uncomfortable." It isn't only Americans. David K. Brown of the RCNC emphatically states that the Flower class were below the size necessary for human effectiveness in typical north Atlantic seas. He agrees that USN DEs at first had problems, too, involving rolling, but the DEs' problems could be and were remedied by modifying the bilge keels and by raising the CG. Corvettes were terminal cases. It isn't a completely fair comparison because corvettes were fighting the war long before DEs appeared. A poor escort ship was better than a non-existant alternative. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From "Allen Stevens" Subject Re DEs and Frigates To Jon Holford Good posting I certainly don't pretend to be an expert on WWII escorts (I did serve in the RN but in later times) I defer to my wife's grandfather for that. He started the war in command of a Flower class Corvette HMS Carnation (which he loved) he certainly agrees with the comment on buoyancy comments like rolling on wet grass come to mind but he did comment that in terms of sheer sea keeping capabilities he preferred the British Escorts, the American ships with a lower sheer line did tend to take it very green (much like our own British destroyers) but the US and Royal Navy both had different design philosophies neither of which were wrong in themselves (DK Browns books are highly recommended reading on this subject) its the old horses for courses debate I think on balance that both sides came up with good designs for the time that fitted the need and the service that they were designed for. Ps as for experience I defer to your personal experience's on escorts (it was Leanders and Type 22's when I joined) I currently work for the RNLI in the Design office and have spent a lot of time at sea over the years in all weathers in Lifeboats that make a Flower class corvette look inviting. To Ned and all of our American friends Quite agree the last time we went to war was darn near 200 years ago (reminds me of the fights I have with the in laws!) at the end of the day Britain and the US are stronger together (and always seem to win together if it works don't fix it) comparisons are fun but can go too far. And Ned, DAMN you know your stuff were you born with wings? I think the basic point here is horses for courses every side had something that was better than everybody else but at the end of the day it came down to the skill and sheer guts of the guys who operated the machinery we should never forget that. As for Mosquitos my Dad flew in them and I still am amazed at how fast that thing was even with a full bomb load apparently they used to polish the skin because they found it gave them a few more MPH! Lets call it a score draw on aircraft Jon Holford's verbal hand-grenade on Escort design has much more potential lets go for that instead! Regards to all Allen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From ELLshipmodeler@aol.com Subject Kit request Since I am mainly a wood modeler I am not totally familiar with the plastic and resin world of ship models. A Naval Academy classmate has asked the following "Gene, neither the modern-day hobby shops nor many websites carry much in the way of plastic U.S. Navy ship kits that my grandson could build. I would like to find a Geary Class destroyer and a Baltimore Class cruiser. Any suggestions as to where to look?" Any suggestions? Since asking for plastic is limiting the field, please include suggestions for resin kits. Please reply either on the forum, or off if the info might not be of interest to all. Thanks, Gene Larson Alexandria, VA ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From "Erhardtsen" Subject Re FAA I understand, that some of the readers of SMML are getting tired of the FAA debate, so I will try to make it short in an attempt to start the closing down of this discussion. But I canīt help it - if this is becoming an British/American pissing contest, where does that leave me? The British did take our navy in 1807, but I donīt think, that Ned Barnett see me as being on his team. Ok. Ned, you compare Doolittles Tokyo raid with the Sinking of Hermes. I do not find an attack on the Japanese home land as equal to transport aircraft in an ocean, where there have been no fighting previous. You can claim, that the Japanese could be anywhere - That remind me of the Russian fleet on the way to Tsushima (1905) opening fire on Japanese torpedoboats/British fishing boats in the North Sea. I do not know "World War II Combat Aircraft" by Enzo Angelucci. I do have 2 other of his books, and they both says 270 mph on the Claud (but have different speed on the Fulmar). I think you must have made an error with the 280 mph., but if not, then please send me a scan of the book off list. After all, your dislike of the Fulmar made you make an error. The Fulmar fighters from Illustrious did shoot Italian aircraft's down late August or early September 1940, so that kills most of your Fulmar argument. The replacement of the F3F started in December 1940/January 1941 (I do not count the 11 Buffalo on Lexington) - it did not finish at that time. >> Sure, and you can compare housecats with civet cats, but the comparison makes no sense. Why not compare a late-war F4U-4 (or better yet, the FG-2) Corsair with a pre-production F4F-3? Or a Mosquito with a Bristol Fighter (hey, they were both two-seated aircraft made of wood, eh?). << Now you are talking nonsense. When I do compare forces at a specific time, I need to compare the aircraft's in that force at that time - new or obsolete. It is the weapon at hand. A potential possibility of a development might be nice, but it donīt help at the moment - Do I really need to explain that to you? Please keep the level, that have made this discussion so interesting until now (from my point of view) >> If you mean September 1, 39, then you're comparing Sea Gladiators with Claudes (no question that in late '39, the USN had nothing to compare with the Claude on their flight decks, either). If you mean January '41, when the Fulmar began squadron service, you're dead-wrong << To me, the 2. World War starts with the German invasion of Poland. I do not see January 1941 as the beginning of the war. Early 1941 the FAA was falling behind, but they came back later that year, as the Wildcat started to operate from British carriers. Erik Erhardtsen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From "Rod" Subject Model kits for sale I have some ship model kits on Ebay auction. My username is "c177guy" and have both kits and a few built-ups. I'll be listing a few more over the weekend. Rod ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the SMML site for the List Rules, Reviews, Articles, Backissues, Member's models & Reference Pictures at http//smmlonline.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume