Subject: SMML VOL 3016 Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 02:12:54 +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 Lacroix's articles in WI 2 Re Warship International Articles Needed 3 Seacat et al 4 1/700 Essex CV Comparison...Dragon v. Trumpeter? 5 Standoff weapons 6 Attitude of sinking ships 7 Carrier Plane for All Seasons 8 Liberty Ship Model on Amazon? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From Richa5011@aol.com Subject Lacroix's articles in WI Michael asked >> 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. << An easier way to go is to use Lacroix's book on Japanese Cruisers that came out 6 or 7 years ago which contains all of the material from the WI articles along with much more. Don't think Squadron carries it, but it is still available direct from USNI Press. If you still want the articles, contact me off list. Nat Richards ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From "Daniel A. Kaplan" Subject Re Warship International Articles Needed It might actually be easier to pick up a used copy of Lacroix & Wells "Japanese Cruisers of the Pacific War", which used those articles as the basis for the book. Very thorough. FWIW, Dan Kaplan ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From Subject Seacat et al Thanks for the help on the Seacats and the photos. My main purpose was to trace the MRS Directors in use and match them to systems and ships. I really appreciate the help. That the RN was still using the MRS-1 CRBFD to arm new ships over fifteen years after it was invented seems a bit ridiculous given the advances in aircraft performance and jamming capability over that period (1945 to 1960). Anyway I think I now have the time line and ships for the Directors, both for gun and Seacat control. (Unless you know better!) Briefly Bafflingly the MOD-0 and MOD-1 seem to have come out at the same time in the late 50's (again I point to the example of the Tiger Class cruiser). MRS-3 MOD-0 and MOD-1 equip the Tiger Class Cruiser from build. (1959-1961) MRS-3 MOD-0 equips the Tribals from build as Gun Directors. (1961-1964) MRS-3 MOD-0 also replaces the MK6M 275 radar director on older ships such as the Whitby, Rothesay, Salisbury, Leopard and Daring Class (Early - mid 60's) But gradually MOD-0 was withdrawn from Bridge Roofs as gun controllers and replaced with MOD-1, the MOD-0 then starts to appear on the stern of ships as the Seacat GWS-22 Director and then again is phased out and replaced by MOD-1, presumably as they become available with gun systems gradually dying out. But it would be incorrect to say this occurs at mid-life refit on the Leanders, I have a number of photo examples of Ikara equipped ships with MOD-0 Seacat Directors for instance, but by 1980 these seem to have all been replaced with MOD-1 on the Leander Class and the County's so only the Rothesay class still have drafty MOD-0 directors by the Falklands. The Tribals retaining CRBFD to the end, in fact some are retro fitted it as initially only three were equipped. I only lack info now on Fearless and Intrepid, please don't tell me these major units were sent to the Falklands still with GWS-20! I am squinting over pictures of them from the period and I cannot even find the Directors! Just to confuse the issue I was sent a terrific shot of Cleopatra's MRS-3 MOD-1 director, date unknown, and it has a glass panel cut into it below the main tower and some sort of mast between the ray dome and the tower, no idea what that is about! ?? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From Subject 1/700 Essex CV Comparison...Dragon v. Trumpeter? I have both but have not compared them in detail yet. The Trumpter hanger sides are separate, in the Dragon they are molded with the hull. The Trumpter planes, guns and detail seem to be slightly better to me. They both offer a full or waterline hull. For those with small closets, the Trumpter box is smaller. Also the Trumpter kit comes with a pretty blue clear plastic waterline display base but the Dragon kit comes with some photo-etch. No slamdunk for either kit, besides, if your are a true SMMLie you will get both kits anyway! Dave Miller Palm Bay, FL ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From Raven0222@aol.com Subject Standoff weapons With regards to the Super Hornet. One need look no farther than your super slim cell phone to realize that the advances in state of the art, stand off weapons has prompted the Super Hornet's roll. Currently in heavy development are two significant aerial weapons platforms that are completely unmanned. All target acquisition as well as actual target assignments are made by satellite uplink. Radar jamming is actually accomplished mostly by F-117 Stealth aircraft that carry only one pilot. GPS will soon offer us a warhead that can walk up to your door, deliver a personal video message and then detonate. The flying platform although still important, will serve mostly as a delivery vehicle with the big decisions made far away........online. The weapons themselves will carry the front. Christian A. Raven Raven Arts RavenArts.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From Fkbrown90@aol.com Subject Attitude of sinking ships To George, at reynold.oh@defence.gov.au Thank you for your opinions of how ships sink. It was I who initiated this Thread, and I invite you to revisit my opening question. None of the respondents, nor I, ever claimed that ALL ships sink stern first. Some contributors did, in fact, differentiate between combat ships and merchant type vessels, and went on to offer explanations as to the causes of many "bow first", and also of many longitudinal capsizing ("turning turtle"), sinkings of ships of both categories. However, I do opine that the majority, but not all, merchant men do indeed go down stern first, and that naval ships are more disposed to a variety of attitudes whilst making their final plunge. A curious mind wanted to know, and SMML, as usual, slaked that thirst. Thank you, Gentlemen. Franklyn ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From Rick Lundin Subject Carrier Plane for All Seasons I don't think the FA-18E or FA-18F are intended to replace the S-3A/B in the ASW role. In fact if I am not mistaken that mission capability was largely removed from the S-3A/B community subsequent to the fall of the Soviet Union. There just aren't that many high performance submarines out there anymore to threaten USN carriers. In the past decade the United States Navy has largely reoriented itself from a blue water confrontation with the Soviet Union to littoral warfare with lesser powers. The Vikings are now used for land and surface attack, surveillance, search and rescue, command/control/communications as well as tanking. Obviously the Hornet and/or Super Hornet is no ASW platform regardless what the History Channel says. That is now a ship borne helicioper and land based VP mission Tanking is a function of being able to launch with a lot fuel and pass it on to another aircraft - a mission that numerous Navy aircraft have demonstrated for decades. The original mission of the aircraft dosen't matter as long as it can carry and off-load gas.. The electronic warfare mission was one formerly carried out by the two-man EF-111A Raven as well as the four-man EA-6B Prowler so a two-man EW aircraft is not new. The two-man EF-18G will be taking over that mission in the next few years. In all probability ever increasing computer power will be taking the place of two of the Prowler's Electronic Warfare Officers. Sounds reasonable. The Tomcat/Phoenix combination was designed to kill Soviet Bears before they were able to close to air to surface missile launching range. This is why the Phoenix had such a prodigious range. Without the Bears and Backfires there is nothing for the Phoenix to shoot down - current potential targets are now much smaller and more manuverable. The Hornet may not have the absolute top speed of the Tomcat but what does that have to do with anything? Fighter top speed is not much of a measure of anything except top speed. The number looks good on paper but that's about it. There is an old saying that a mach 2 fighter will reach it's top speed just in time to run out of fuel. In fact there is little practical use for all out high mach number speed in a real world situation. The real factors in air combat are tactical employment of multiple aircraft, pilot/personnel competance, individual and collective aircraft systems capabilities and aircraft flight performance - more or less in that order. Flight performance being defined as range, manuverability and acceleration - flat out speed just dosen't have that much tactical relevence. There is much to be said for the standardization on fewer types of aircraft especially in the cramped quarters of an aircraft carrier. Space is at a premium aboard any ship - even one that displaces 100,000 tons. Fewer types of airframes to support means fewer spare parts and those that remain can be managed more effectively. Likewise, maintenance personnel who are familiar with the F/A-18C could be better able to lend a hand to the F/A-18E guys. The Tomcat and Viking were designed and built for an environment with a dramatically different threat array than the one faced today. Change happens and so far the Hornet/Super Hornet combination seem to be up to the job. Rick Lundin Hopkinton, RI USA ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From Ned Barnett Subject Liberty Ship Model on Amazon? I went looking for books on Liberty Ships on Amazon - blow me away, but the Trumpeter model was there, $8 off retail. Amazon sells models? Who knew ... (and over $25, free shipping, no sales tax) Ned ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the SMML site for the List Rules, Reviews, Articles, Backissues, Member's models & Reference Pictures at http//smmlonline.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume