The Ship Model Forum

Thank you for confirmation! Those davits look good but are difficult to build.

mifune,

The published photographic evidence that I possess of the ship shows that she did not have her sea-boat davits fitted at Jutland.

Like her sisters, Lützow and Hindenburg, Derfflinger was equipped with davits of the angle iron type when completed: hers were of a slightly different appearance. They all seem to have had them removed after initial trials when the ships became operational, however, the fittings to hold them remained in place.

Hello.

When did they land Derfflinger's boat davits? Before Jutland or were these wrecked in battle?

81542,

No obligation. It's up to modeller to deside. Have fun with your Hindenburg model!

Seydlitz had rails for boats on her deck. That is new to me.

I think I am going to do something like this.

Mifune,

I have a copy of Staff's book and am engaged in making a 1:200 "scratch" model of SMS HINDENBURG: I am therefore obliged to accept what you say on what you call the powered "windlass" when making a model from a commercial kit of SMS SEYDLITZ. I do agree on the appearance of the "scotchman" under the chain cables of German warships. They were in fact of a different species of wood from the rest of the deck and I believe would appear slightly darker than the rest of the deck surface.

That said, I take the chance of advising anyone sufficiently interested in the subject ship type, that while the book is probably the best that we are likely to get printed in English for some while, one still needs to exercise caution in accepting the coloured "renditions" in it as "gospel." It is a good photographic resource though.

Hello!

While reading Gary Staffs book I realised some faults in Hobbyboss Seydlitz model. In real ship the deck under anchor chains was unpainted wood, not steel. The double barrelled capstan did not have a large steel disc under it. The one between capstans.

Can anyone point me in the direction of some decent diagrams of the SMS Seydlitz torpedo netting shelf and booms. I tried the CASF board but didn't notice a section for Seydlitz. The Hobby Boss kit doesn't include them and the Infini upgrade set is out of my price range. So an attempt at scratch building is my only option.

Thanks much!

Not somewhere you would immediately think to look for photos of German ships, but there is a veritable treasure trove of photos of the Yavuz (ex Goeben) available online on the U.K. Imperial War Museum Website:
https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/search?query=yavuz&pageSize=90&filters%5BwebCategory%5D%5BPhotographs%5D=on&page=0

The majority seem to have been taken in August 1966 by which time Yavuz was out of commission and berthed at Gölcük. There are plenty of 'walkaround' exterior photos and even some interior ones. Lots of angles and details that should be very useful to modellers.

The Warship Pictorial refers to the first turret as "Anton"
Cheers
Jim

Both are correct. It deppends how you name the turrets. If we go for the British convention of name the bow turrets A-B-C..., the middle turrets P-Q-R... and the aft ones X-Y, the Seydlitz Turrets would be A-P-Q-X-Y with the circles in A and X.
Probably you are counting A-B-C.... to name the turrets so then they would be A(A)-B(P)-C(Q)-D(X)-E(Y) then for you the marking is in D turret.
Then probably Warship Pictorial 47 is using the German convention of naming the turrets in a clockwise or anticlockwise (I dont remember) manner then the turrets are A(A)-B(P or Q)-C(X)-D(Y)-E(Q or P) then the circle is in the C turret (always the superfiring aft one or X).

In Seydlitz the turrets were named Anna, Berta, Cäsar, Dora, Emil

Gents:
I'm currently working on a 1:700 Seydlitz.
I've got a question on the air recognition markings.
Pages 22 and 23 of Warship Pictorial 47 make reference to the markings being on both the "Anton" and "Caesar" turrets.
On the https://www.naval-encyclopedia.com/ww1/germany/seydlitz illustration shows the air recognition markings on "Anton" and "Dora". I'm inclined to go with the Warships Illustrated photos, although the "Caesar" marking isn't that evident.
Do any of you know of a definitive work that illustrates the air recognition markings of the High Seas Fleet at Jutland?
Cheers
Jim

The cutouts were also added later in the Derflinger. I found it out by viewing pics closely when I build the Flyhawk Derflinger in her 1915 fit out. In my case I had to close the cutouts and straighten the deck.

Greetings Christian

That picture is clearly post of Jutland because the presence of the life rafts in the turret sides, lack of torpedo nets and most of all the presence of the concrete patch in the starboard side turret (turret B) just next to the right gun, following a penetration on that battle.

I have the Warship Pictorial 47 and I'm really happy to learn that it will be one of the German Battleships too.

Great observation! I've merged this thread into the Calling all Imperial German Navy Große Kreuzer fans thread, so we don't lose the information.

Both following photos are crops from Steve Wiper's Warship Pictorial German Battlecruisers 1910 - 1919, a booklet I highly recommend.

First is taken from an aerial view of Seydlitz on Page 22, identified by Steve as "about 1916, prior to the Battle of Jutland" and he mentions the view was taken on a post repair trial in the Baltic following damage at Dogger Bank. Note she is not carrying her anti-torpedo nets. I've marked up view in yellow to show the rebatement of the deck as discussed above.



And the same crop without my editing



Finally, here from a familiar photo presented on Page 46 in large format and excellent clarity, is Seydlitz on a date certain, that is at least post June 3, 1916, in Wilhelmshaven after her return from Jutland. Again I've highlighted the deck edge alteration, in this case to the area above the second 5.9 inch casemate from the bow. The other casemates are not clear to my eye but I believe the alteration to the deck was consistent for all casemates, as shown in the first crop.



Any comments are appreciated.

The next step is to resolve the method of securing to the deck the lifelines which were struck down when cleared for action.

Mike Powell,

Go right ahead, and thanks for asking !

At this time, not much of a chance on the Italian light cruisers, as I do not have a good collection of images on that topic.

Next up is German Battleships 1909-1919.

Thank you again for asking and the great comments about my publications. You hit the nail on the head when you stated best value for money spent, which was exactly my goal.

Steve Wiper
www.classicwarships.com

Steve Wiper

Your book, Warship Pictorial 47 German Battlecruisers 1910 - 1919 has been seminal to my thinking on this. The two views of Seydlitz taken from above jolted me to the opinion the deck certainly was rebated above the central casemates's gun barrels. But pre or post Jutland remained an issue. That I believe is definitively answered by your extraordinarily clear presentation of the photos of her at Wilhelmshaven following the battle. Once you know what you are looking for, these features are very evident.

With your permission I would like to post a few crops of the images in question which I would mark with highlights to show just what we're talking about.

I have several of your pictorials. They are all excellent and I consider them great value for the cost. Is there any possibility of a companion to WP 23 Italian Heavy cruisers of WWII that would illustrate the lighter units? Raimondo Montecuccoli was one of the loveliest warships ever and I'd enjoy seeing you cover her and her sister units as well.

Please let me know about posting the photos I mentioned.

Best regards,

Mike Powell

Mike Powell,

If you are able to obtain my book......

"WP47 - German Battlecruisers 1909-1919"

.........there are multiple images with a glimpse of the modifications you are asking about in it.

Please see the review on this website, linked on the main page left, below the menu.

Also, please see my website......

Steve Wiper
http://www.classicwarships.com

Ooooooppppsssss ! Just saw you mention my book. Get out the magnifying glass and look closely at the images. I see the modifications in some of them.

SMS Seydlitz definitely had the modification Mike Powell so astutely observed, and it was likely done in 1917 or 1918.

Alas, the web is not rich in photographs of Seyd's midships 5.9-in guns. There are some very good views of them as they were prewar:

https://www.sms-navy.com/bc/SMS_Seydlit ... tbdmid.jpg

https://www.naval-encyclopedia.com/ww1/germany/seydlitz (first photo)

After modification (ca. 1918: note that the midships battery casemates have had the deck cut away above them---the plating above the casemates is no longer flush with the hull, but has been cut back to allow higher elevation of the 5.9-in. guns):

https://www.welt.de/geschichte/geschich ... eedaca.png

One is much better off looking at a book about Seyd to see this very clearly. The web is not your friend in this matter.

Hi Mike;

Having suffered through a lot of research to scratch build a card model of Syedlitz, here are some comments to ponder. The general view drawings on pages 146 and seven are derived from the booklet of general plans from the constructor and are quite accurate up to the launch. The color illustrations, while very beautiful, detract from the excellence of the text in general. You can clearly see that the midship frames from the waterline to the weather deck arte pretty much a straight line. It allows for a flat armor belt. The apertures for the casemate guns are rectangular cuts. The area is a more or less flat surface. The guns were attached to the deck and the semi-circular shields were attached to rotate with the guns. Concentration of fire for casemate guns was arranged six guns forward and four aft. The photographs on pages 150 and 151 confirm this. The tops of the gun shields for the two forward and aft mounts are partially visible from above. The outside of the shields for all the others are flush with the sides of the hull and not visible from above.

Note, there is no photographic evidence that the forward four, eighty eight millimeter guns were ever actually fitted to the ship. This was likely because they were a conduit to flooding in a heavy sea. These were flat trajectory naval weapons and not directly related to the famous anti aircraft weapons. Post Jutland, while the torpedo netting was intentionally deleted and make view of the hull much clearer. There is no direct evidence that the original arrangement of the casemates was altered up to the time of the great scuttle.

The development of the card model can be viewed on "papermodelers.com" under "design threads" or by chasing it through "rjccjr." It may clarify this discussion. Hope it helps.

Regards, rjccjr