Subject: SMML VOL 3015 Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 01:03:20 +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 British designed Mark 6 depth charge and the fitted American-designed hydrostatic fuze 2 Only one 3 Re Carrier Plane for All Seasons? 4 Re 1/700 Essex CV Comparison...Dragon v. Trumpeter? 5 Re Ships sinking stern first 6 Warship International Articles Needed 7 Re Ships Sinking Stern First? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD INDEX 1 warshipbooks.com New titles in stock ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From "Harold Stockton" Subject British designed Mark 6 depth charge and the fitted American-designed hydrostatic fuze At the start of WWII, the USN had no adequate depth charge and adopted the British designed Mark 6 and fitted an American-designed hydrostatic fuze. For all of you who want to further detail your various projects with more information about this weapon and its racks and the "K-gun" thrower, and with very nice detailed photos, you might want to visit http//www.de220.com/Armament/Depth%20Charges/DepthCharges.htm K-gun and the USN mounts, storage and loading racks and the earlier RN without storage and loading racks. http//www.ussslater.org/weapons/dpthchrg.html And for all of you out there who are working on "hunter/killer" or "creeper/pusher" groups and how to paint them, at least for the former, this same site has this page that discusses the various "Measures" patterns for American DEs. http//www.de220.com/Camouflage/DE%20Camouflage%20&%20Paint%20Patterns.htm A page on the eight Depth Charge (drop) Racks can be found at http//www.ussslater.org/weapons/racks.html . This same site also covers the 20mm, 40mm, 3/40 inch and Hedgehog weapons. Though John Lambert has all or most of these weapons covered in drawings, here are some vaarying perspectives that will help add that little bit extra detail. "A depth charge has a magnificent laxative effect on a submariner." Lt. Sheldon H. Kinney, Commander, USS Bronstein (DE 189) 'nuff said. Take that, all of you Revell Type VIIc U-boats. Harold Stockton ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From Ned Barnett Subject Only one From "Cameron Lynch" >> If you had limited space and could only build one model of an Essex class carrier, which one would it be, what time period and why? I'm leaning toward either the Yorktown (CV-10) in April 1945 during the Okinawa invasion and the sinking of the Yamato or the Lexington (CV-16) at the Philippine Sea in June 1944. I do like the short hull Essex carriers because I think they personify the ultimate in WWII carrier design and also look more different than the earlier Yorktown class. I appreciate your opinions. << If I had room for only one carrier, I think I'd choose the Enterprise instead of an Essex - she was the most-decorated ship of all time, and she had real character. However, if I had to choose one - just one - Essex class carrier, I'd choose one of the early Essex class in that late-war splinter camouflage, one just after a refit that had maxed out on AA weaponry. I'd have to do a bit of research to say which one, but frankly, any one of them would work for me. Ned ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From David Wells Subject Re Carrier Plane for All Seasons? Ned Barnett wrote >> I saw a Military Channel special on the FA-18 Hornet last night, and it mentioned that the new Super Hornet (FA-18 E/F) will be replacing the Hoover (S-2 Viking) aerial tanker and ASW aircraft, the Queer (EA-6) jammer aircraft, as well as the F-14 Tomcat fighter. I cannot for the life of me imagine how a fighter can effectively "do" ASW - or how a one- or two-man aircraft can effectively replace the six-man EA-6 in the jamming mission. Or, for that matter, how a slower fighter without a Phoenix can adequately defend the fleet. Anybody got any ideas on what the Navy's thinking? Is this a matter of "budget uber alles" or is there some other rationale that escapes me. As a fleet defense fighter, the Super Hornet seems to be a step in the right direction - more weapons, longer range (though why they're not figuring out how to fit the Phoenix is beyond me). But ASW requires low-and-slow, the ability to drop sonobouy patterns, an onboard TACCO officer (along with one or two other sensor platform operators), etc. Same kinds of limitations on a two-man jammer, or so it seems. So, any ideas, insights, rationales, excuses, or official "BS" << I'm going to go out on the proverbial limb, and suggest that this is mostly just official "BS". I admit that have never been a fan of the Hornet. When it first came out, I accused it of being the world's only 44,000 lb "light" fighter. Now, it's grown to 60,000 lbs. It has become the sort of heavy fighter that the "light" fighers were supposed to replace. But the real problem now, to mind, is that it isn't a very GOOD heavy fighter. Granted, I'm not quite so aware of the latest and greatest modifciations, but compare the current F/A-18E/F to say, the old F-14D, and the Hornet looks like a poor bargain. I'd bet that the F-14D is still faster, has better range, and of course, those big nasty Phoenix missiles. The USN is phasing out the Phoenix missile, so it will never be adapted to the F/A-18. In fact, the Phoenix will go away even before the F-14. As a multi-purpose plane, the Hornet still doesn't look that great. It's bomb capability is still rather limited. Like Ned, I have serious doubts about its ASW capabilities, and similar doubts about its EW and tanker capabilities. It's just too small to be a tanker. One assertion that I've made for years is that Congress treats all weapons projects as pork. That's why we have F/A-18s instead of other aircraft. Let's just hope that the F-35 (AKA JSF) works REALLY well. "There seems to be something wrong | David R. Wells with our bloody ships today" | Adm. D. Beatty, May 31, 1916 | http//home.att.net/~WellsBrothers/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From AAA Hobby Supply Subject Re 1/700 Essex CV Comparison...Dragon v. Trumpeter? From "Cameron Lynch" >> Anyone had a chance to compare the new Trumpeter kits with the Dragon offerings? I'm keenly waiting for a comprehensive pro versus con. << From designing the wood decks for each of them let me say this Nobody's gotten it right yet. At least not according to the copies of the blueprints I have taken from the archives. Trumpeter shortened the deck too much for the short hull (it's still slightly longer than the LH deck) and Dragons is too long. Neither managed to get the deck edge elevator at the proper frame accordign to my micrometer readings. I do like the DML hull better and they did manage to supply the flight deck in a single piece. I like Trumpys guns better - but these are just a matter of opinion, FWIW. BTW, the decks are now going into production and will be available on the nautilusmodels.com website next week. I'll post an announcement when it's up. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From Reynold.Oh@defence.gov.au Subject Re Ships sinking stern first 1. I'm a land-lubber, not a marine engineer. But I reckon that not all ships sink stern-first. Would not the loading & speed of the ship, and where the damage occured, have quite some influence? HMS Barham & Tirpitz both turned turtle by rolling onto a beam. Titanic went down by the bow before breaking roughly in half. Titanic's stern was the LAST piece to disappear. A ship travelling at speed and torpedoed in the bow would scoop-up water, and sink bow-first. The USS Ohio made Valetta (in Malta) level, but with her main deck almost awash (in Malta). If she sank, she would possibly have simply settled in an even keel. 2. I reckon the speculation that ships sink stern-first is a waste of time. George, out......... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From Skyking918@aol.com Subject Warship International Articles Needed I am badly in need of the articles by Dr. E. Lacroix on the development of 'A Class' cruisers in the Imperial Japanese Navy which appeared in Warship International in the late 1970s-early 1980s. I have Part 4 in the series, but need the following Part 1 Warship International, No. 4, 1977, pp. 337-357 Errata in Warship International, No. 2, 1978, p. 90 Part 2 Warship International, No. 1, 1979, pp. 41-62 Part 3 Warship International, No. 4, 1979, pp. 329-362 Part 5 Warship International, exact issue unknown, but believed to be in 1981 I cannot tell you why I need them, except that they may be clues to an upcoming Squadron/Signal book! Good quality photocopies preferred as opposed to scans of the pages. If you can help, please contact me off-list at either of the following email addresses skyking918@aol.com editor@squadron.com Many thanks. Michael McMurtrey Editor, Squadron/Signal Publications Carrollton, TX ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From George Levine Subject Re Ships Sinking Stern First? From John Mianowski >> Absolutely true! My point was that I've had the opportunity to see the same ship (not just a similar ship, or even an "identical" ship) sink repeatedly & have been able to note certain consistencies. << Just shows that the Laws of Physics still hold true. Note that the normally conducted calculations used in ship design do show exactly how the vessel will sink. The problem is in knowing what the future damage will be. You mentioned that your models have no compartmentation. This makes it easy, damage anywhere along the length of the model that is below the waterline will flood the entire hull. George Levine Edgewater Florida ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From Keith Butterley Subject warshipbooks.com New titles in stock Seasons Greetings! Now available to the two latest books in the Shipcraft series. These are much improved over the first two titles Shipcraft No. 3 Yorktown Class Aircraft Carriers This is the third volume in a new series providing ship modellers with all they need to know about a famous class of warship and associated model kits. The subject of this volume is the Yorktown class, the near legendary American aircraft carriers that kept the Japanese at bay in the dark days between Pearl Harbor and the decisive Battle of Midway, where Yorktown herself was lost. Hornet launched the famous Doolittle Raid on Japan before being sunk at Santa Cruz in October 1942, but Enterprise survived the fierce fighting of the early war years to become the US Navy's most decorated ship. With it unparalleled level of visual information - paint schemes, models, line drawings and photographs - it is simply the best reference for any modelmaker setting out to build one of these famous carriers. Canada $31 + shipping USA & Intl $28US + shipping Shipcraft No. 4 Type VII U-Boat This is the fourth volume in a new series providing ship modellers with all they need to know about a famous class of warship and associated model kits. This volume is devoted to the largest class of submarines ever built, the Type VII, which formed the backbone of the German effort in the critical Battle of the Atlantic. A pre-war design, the Type VII was developed as the campaign progressed and was still in frontline service in 1945. All major variants, as well as minor changes to equipment , are covered here. With it unparalleled level of visual information - paint schemes, models, line drawings and photographs - it is simply the best reference for any modelmaker setting out to build one of these famous boats. Canada $31 + shipping USA & Intl $28US + shipping I wish you all a very Merry Christmas and a healthy Happy New Year! Regards Keith Butterley warshipbooks.com Vancouver Site of the 2010 Winter Olympics ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the SMML site for the List Rules, Reviews, Articles, Backissues, Member's models & Reference Pictures at http//smmlonline.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume