The Ship Model Forum

Added the aircraft (with launch cradle), starboard crane and the aft 5.25" directors (3D printed from Micro Master)

Railings are dumb and I hate them. And yet here I am.

So, regarding the fire control radars I had been dreading: I made a few attempts and... fail. Many PE parts have been a struggle but these are beyond my limit. However, a new option has appeared: Micro Master now offers the 5.25" and pom pom directors in 1/700. I immediately said "yes please". And they are amazing, although "easier to work with" is definitely relative. I can't over emphasize how amazing the detail is on these parts. One minor annoyance, however is the cotton packing, which leaves dozens of fibers to pick out of the parts (as you can see in the pictures).

Another caveat to these parts: The fit vs the Flyhawk kit is not perfect. The pom pom directors do not quite fit in the tubs. I had to cut away what looks like a tiny seat to get them to squeeze in. This part was especially difficult due to 1) There is almost no safe place to hold the part while working it and 2) My tears at having to maul such a gorgeous part made it hard to see what I was doing. Also, the aft 5.25" directors interfere a tiny bit with the railings on the platform. I had to remove them, I will see if I can tweak the position. Otherwise I will probably just omit those rails.

Despite the lack of updates I have been working, slowly... I did want to update everyone on an exciting development regarding the elusive aircraft catapult cradle - the WEM 1/700 KGV photo etch set has it! I will update when I find out if it actually fits!

Also, the cranes.

My issue, as with most PE is that I can almost never get it placed quite right and I need to adjust. And the turret railings are particularly unforgiving in that respect. And if you biff it a couple times you end up with a glob of glue at the tip of the post that is very difficult to remove without completely pulling the railing off. My other issue was the glue bead not quite getting on the tip of the rail, I struggle to get that consistently.

As far as paint, I did paint the turret before hand because it seemed like masking after adding the rails would be nearly impossible (remember this version also has the blast shields for the UP launchers). I tried to keep at least the edges free of paint but in the end didn't really succeed. For what it's worth it is not the paint that is pulling away when the rails don't stick.

For visual aid I am currently using the finest non-perscription reading glasses CVS can provide. But honestly they are not enough, and I am probably going to get a loupe. Wearing a headlamp (the rock climbing type) has been helpful.

I found that sometimes it is the thinnest tiny drop and one time adhesion works superb. But break that - gets bad. Unless you have a slow drying CA glue.

Id make sure the surface that you try to attach to and the railing itself is clean off paint. That would work I think.

Also, use loupe / magnifying glass - it really helps. Unless you really do already.

Just the regular Elmers glue. Heck, it's even the weaker "School glue" version! Just need to nudge the railing to the vertical every few seconds during the initial critical stages of drying until it doesn't tip over anymore. Get a pin or needle to apply another drop of glue to the attachment point if needed. Can even add superglue on top of the PVA - the two work together quite nicely since superglue hardens in the presence of moisture.

Timmy, I've tried PVA and white glue for other things and consistently had very poor results. Weak holding power and a tendency to creep after setting in place. And despite the allegedly longer working time they loose 95% of whatever strength they had after the first adjustment. What brand are you using?

Could try using PVA/white glue instead, and dipping the stanchions in it so the glue forms a little blob and then placing the run on the turret.

Trying to tackle the turret top railings and... it's not going well. The lack of a continuous lower edge is killing me for getting ca glue to bond. Any tips on this step would be hugely appreciated.

I was able to get one of the cranes together. I expected it to be a bit complicated, and I wasn't disappointed. Folding the crane was harder than expected. Flyhawk has a penchant for incorporating super helpful bend creases in 95% of the places they are needed. Also note to Flyhawk: putting a bend seam through a half millimeter wide beam is not super helpful. But anyway I got it together, but it did end up very slightly warped. Flyhawk instructions call for adding a plastic winch looking thing on the crane arm near the base. The original plastic crane lattice had a spot to place this piece, but the PE piece does not, at least not at the proper position and angle. The photo in Flyhawk's instructions have it slapped half-heartedly on top of the arm. Looking at other builds, it seems like most people just omit that piece, which is what I did.

As far as lining everything else up, here was my method:

1) Glue one main pulley/cable assembly on to the plastic base to give a reference for where to position the main crane 'arm' (or boom? Not sure the official term)
2) Glue on crane at desired angle
3) Glue on second main pulley/cable
4) Use the end hook and pulley to try and set the angle secondary boom. I had to tweak the length and angle of the this piece to get it so the hook was properly vertical.
5) Ruin the pulleys from step 1 in the process of fumbling around on step 4, so rip those off and replace them from the spare PE sheet
6) Glue on the hook and pully assembly.
7) Lock the assembly in a guarded vault where it can never be bumped, disturbed or damaged until the the rest of the ship is finished.

I still have to do crane number 2...

Well, I did my best at cleaning up the waterline. The rear ship wasn't perfect either right? Anyway position of the waterline seems more accurate. The ship does look a little high in the water but I will deal with that for now... maybe some day it will end up in a sea base

Here is a tip. Paint with clear lacquer (and let that bleed under tape) first. And only after that, paint with colour you want. This will give you much better finish perhaps next time. And indeed better take it easy and keep coats thin.

Well I made my go at correcting the waterline... it's not going well. After going through tremendous pains to get the line straight (I scribed a reference line by sliding the hull along it along a sharp ruler shimmed to the proper height) I painted it... and the paint bled through the tape, leaving a ragged and terrible looking line. I blamed it on spraying the paint too thickly - something I struggle with. I also suspected I didn't press the tape down firmly enough. After it dried for 24h I tried putting tape on the black side and brush painting the gray over the black that had bled through.... only to have it bleed right back through the tape. Fortunately I tried this on only a short section. Now I am wondering if this roll of tape is just crap. I haven't had issues with Tamiya tape before.

To make matters worse, I built up a high tape 'wall' around the superstructure but didn't enclose the top, as I was worried about damaging all the delicate pieces there. I've done this before without issue but this time specks of black paint somehow swooped up and in, leaving lots of lovely little black spots on the horizontal surfaces. I'm currently experimenting with creative weathering to cover up at least the deck.

In summary, I am not pleased right now. But no need to apologize pascalemod, I fully brought this on myself.

Sorry we made you redo a bit, but I think youll be glad when you photograph and it looks "right". A high freeboard it has, it just isnt high versus the length and height of the :censored_2:. Same freeboard on a cruiser would look pretty tall also.

The hull will sink in and trim a bit, so the stern could sink in a bit deeper. For Hood's wave pattern I did a few calculations returning both trim and sinkage; the latter was around half a meter in the higher 25+ knots range, but the trim angle was negligible, so she remains on an even keel. The wave pattern at the stern itself shows a large wave elevation, so it appears as if the stern is deeper, while it is not.

I tried to do a little digital CSI based on this photo from April '41. I came up with the boot topping coming up to the lower edge of the tape in this shot. So if I'm correct, the overall freeboard is a little high compared to the ship as in the photo. She clearly was floating deep as pascalemod indicated - the boot top is nearly submerged (and a little deeper at the stern). Note that my tape position is still slightly lower than pascalemod's ship.

Most likely I will paint the new waterline, but leave the hull as-is unless it looks super weird with a thick black line. I could try to remove the waterline base entirely but it will probably cause the lower edge of the hull to lose the proper shape, unless I scratch build some bracing. Eventually I might put in a seascape but that is a long way off, I have to build several more ships and decide how to arrange them.

I'm afraid that would not be accurate, I am depicting the famous meeting in harbor between Prince of Wales and Agincourt - so freeboard at 0 knots is most accurate

ETA: Hypothetically, if truly trying to show the ship at speed, the stern should be deeper as the back of the ship 'squats' yes?

Plus, at top speed most battleships would sink in about half a meter, so you need to consider that as well

So, I think that the freeboard was pretty accurate overall. I compared it to photos and then squinted looking at my model. I tried to compare the relative height of armor belt between the boot topping and top of armor belt, to the thickness of the boot topping overall. It was not exact science. So if you go back browse my model, feel free to use it as reference as I did sadly spent too much time on it. You can also see where hull plates are, where scuttles are - and draw the line somewhere.

She sat low, I think for the 1941 May sortie against Bismarck.