Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans |
|
|
Aop Aur wrote: Hello. I saw the first post that Dave Wooley posted here included the images of Alex MCfadyen's G3 and now those pics are not working. Dave is still a member of the forum. Send him a PM - he may still have them.
[quote="Aop Aur"]Hello. I saw the first post that Dave Wooley posted here included the images of Alex MCfadyen's G3 and now those pics are not working. [/quote]
Dave is still a member of the forum. Send him a PM - he may still have them.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 3:57 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans |
|
|
Hello. I saw the first post that Dave Wooley posted here included the images of Alex MCfadyen's G3 and now those pics are not working. Can he or anyone send me some those images again? Or edit the post to make those pics viewable. I searched it on internet and seen some pics, but just curious to know what those pics are...
Regards, Aop.
Hello. I saw the first post that Dave Wooley posted here included the images of Alex MCfadyen's G3 and now those pics are not working. Can he or anyone send me some those images again? Or edit the post to make those pics viewable. I searched it on internet and seen some pics, but just curious to know what those pics are...
Regards, Aop.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 8:59 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans |
|
|
Wow, cool!!!! Do you have any more shots? What about for that 5 turret Yamato?!
Wow, cool!!!! Do you have any more shots? What about for that 5 turret [i]Yamato[/i]?!
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 8:27 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans |
|
|
[img]http://photo.sbanzu.com/album/photos_m/50333_1646234_83833.jpg[/img]
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 8:19 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans |
|
|
I thought I read they were to start with Invincible for the first ship.
I thought I read they were to start with Invincible for the first ship.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:58 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans |
|
|
Well, the past 8 months have shown a lot of info about these ships. One question I do have: What would their names have been?
Well, the past 8 months have shown a lot of info about these ships. One question I do have: What would their names have been?
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:59 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans |
|
|
Whoa. What's that??!!!?!?!?!
(I'm sorry, I don't usually go into detail with other navies. Go US!!!!!)
Whoa. What's that??!!!?!?!?!
(I'm sorry, I don't usually go into detail with other navies. Go US!!!!!)
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2010 6:27 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans |
|
|
[img]http://images.sonicalbum.com/bbs_album_29/photos/31_576296.jpg[/img]
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:28 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans |
|
|
I have to admit, I personally love the G3's and N3's - I have the IHP 700 N3 kit, in partial construction, you can see a few pics of her in my "Children of what if" thread over in the Works in Progress forum. I'd love to get the G3 to add in beside her and my other RN Battleship Whifs eventually, though I seem to be on a Japan fix right now.
I have to admit, I personally love the G3's and N3's - I have the IHP 700 N3 kit, in partial construction, you can see a few pics of her in my "Children of what if" thread over in the Works in Progress forum. I'd love to get the G3 to add in beside her and my other RN Battleship Whifs eventually, though I seem to be on a Japan fix right now.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 3:34 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans |
|
|
Wow Impressive. I love the detail
Now if somebody could make a Model of Design K3.
Wow Impressive. I love the detail
Now if somebody could make a Model of Design K3.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 7:38 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans |
|
|
Guest wrote: Gentleman,
I was interested in G3 desighn for some time and tried to gather information about these ships, however I never managed to find any kind of ships' plans. Can anyone give me an idea about the source of such drawings? I guess they should exist - construction actually started anf masterpiece discussed was built based on something.
Thank you in advance Commercially? No. The only plans available are reproductions of the originals from the NMM. I purchased a set from them in the early 1990s and they were, IIRC, somewhere in the £150-200 range. Not cheap. And, frankly, there's more information there than you'd need to build a model, as well as details that would have changed between the plans and production - like the 6-barrel 2pdr mountings. I started redrawing the plans to make them more modeler-friendly, but work & life haven't been cooperating and that project's on the back burner for now.
[quote="Guest"]Gentleman,
I was interested in G3 desighn for some time and tried to gather information about these ships, however I never managed to find any kind of ships' plans. Can anyone give me an idea about the source of such drawings? I guess they should exist - construction actually started anf masterpiece discussed was built based on something.
Thank you in advance[/quote]
Commercially? No. The only plans available are reproductions of the originals from the NMM. I purchased a set from them in the early 1990s and they were, IIRC, somewhere in the £150-200 range. Not cheap. And, frankly, there's more information there than you'd need to build a model, as well as details that would have changed between the plans and production - like the 6-barrel 2pdr mountings. I started redrawing the plans to make them more modeler-friendly, but work & life haven't been cooperating and that project's on the back burner for now.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 9:21 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans |
|
|
Gentleman,
I was interested in G3 desighn for some time and tried to gather information about these ships, however I never managed to find any kind of ships' plans. Can anyone give me an idea about the source of such drawings? I guess they should exist - construction actually started anf masterpiece discussed was built based on something.
Thank you in advance
Gentleman,
I was interested in G3 desighn for some time and tried to gather information about these ships, however I never managed to find any kind of ships' plans. Can anyone give me an idea about the source of such drawings? I guess they should exist - construction actually started anf masterpiece discussed was built based on something.
Thank you in advance
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:49 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
|
|
|
JWintjes wrote: ...the only examples that spring to my mind are Doggerbank and some parts of Jutland.
Much of Doggerbank occurred with the British forces at long range off the German's starboard stern quarter.
What does strike me as odd with regards to that battle - given the Blucher's low speed - was that a reduction in speed and a turn to starboard by the German forces would have aided the Blucher, and given them better control over the chase. If not crossing the T, at least forcing the British battlecruisers to turn to the right and trade blows between the battlelines.
And if that had happened, and British weaknesses in the battlecruisers had remained as they were (Lion was nearly lost, for example) then the outcome could have been wholly different.
Andy
[quote="JWintjes"]...the only examples that spring to my mind are Doggerbank and some parts of Jutland.[/quote]
Much of Doggerbank occurred with the British forces at long range off the German's starboard stern quarter.
What does strike me as odd with regards to that battle - given the Blucher's low speed - was that a reduction in speed and a turn to starboard by the German forces would have aided the Blucher, and given them better control over the chase. If not crossing the T, at least forcing the British battlecruisers to turn to the right and trade blows between the battlelines.
And if that had happened, and British weaknesses in the battlecruisers had remained as they were (Lion was nearly lost, for example) then the outcome could have been wholly different.
Andy
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:07 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
|
|
|
An incredibly impressive model. An outstanding effort!!
I'd only dispute the name, but perhaps the incomplete Admirals (Hood's near sisters) were carried over.
Quote: As a matter of fact, can anyone point me to any instance when a capital ship was compelled to engage an enemy on a dead astern bearing for any significant period of time?
I don't know if it was exactly bearing 180, but at Second Guadalcanal, South Dakota fired over her stern, setting her aircraft afire. Her second salvo blew them overboard...
S&G also were firing over their stern in the course of escaping from Renown in the Force 9 gale off of Norway in 1940.
Regards,
An incredibly impressive model. An outstanding effort!!
I'd only dispute the name, but perhaps the incomplete Admirals (Hood's near sisters) were carried over.
[quote]As a matter of fact, can anyone point me to any instance when a capital ship was compelled to engage an enemy on a dead astern bearing for any significant period of time?[/quote]
I don't know if it was exactly bearing 180, but at Second Guadalcanal, South Dakota fired over her stern, setting her aircraft afire. Her second salvo blew them overboard...
S&G also were firing over their stern in the course of escaping from Renown in the Force 9 gale off of Norway in 1940.
Regards,
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:43 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
|
|
|
IIRC, scharnhorst fired with C-turret dead astern when hit by DoY.
IIRC, scharnhorst fired with C-turret dead astern when hit by DoY.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 8:14 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
|
|
|
Anonymous wrote: Perhaps another reason for the Q turret was the desire to shorten the propeller shafts and the vulnerable section of side protection pierced by the shaft ally.
As a matter of fact, can anyone point me to any instance when a capital ship was compelled to engage an enemy on a dead astern bearing for any significant period of time? Swinging the guns around the stern while the ship turns does not count.
Chuck,
that's an interesting point indeed - the only examples that spring to my mind are Doggerbank and some parts of Jutland.
I'd guess that if you have superior armament, you wouldn't need a X/Y turret group.
Jorit
[quote="Anonymous"]Perhaps another reason for the Q turret was the desire to shorten the propeller shafts and the vulnerable section of side protection pierced by the shaft ally.
As a matter of fact, can anyone point me to [i]any[/i] instance when a capital ship was compelled to engage an enemy on a dead astern bearing for any significant period of time? Swinging the guns around the stern while the ship turns does not count.[/quote]
Chuck,
that's an interesting point indeed - the only examples that spring to my mind are Doggerbank and some parts of Jutland.
I'd guess that if you have superior armament, you wouldn't need a X/Y turret group.
Jorit
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 7:36 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
|
|
|
Perhaps another reason for the Q turret was the desire to shorten the propeller shafts and the vulnerable section of side protection pierced by the shaft ally.
As a matter of fact, can anyone point me to any instance when a capital ship was compelled to engage an enemy on a dead astern bearing for any significant period of time? Swinging the guns around the stern while the ship turns does not count.
Perhaps another reason for the Q turret was the desire to shorten the propeller shafts and the vulnerable section of side protection pierced by the shaft ally.
As a matter of fact, can anyone point me to [i]any[/i] instance when a capital ship was compelled to engage an enemy on a dead astern bearing for any significant period of time? Swinging the guns around the stern while the ship turns does not count.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 2:11 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
|
|
|
JWintjes wrote: Ok, so throw something at me, but I think these are actually much more beautiful than Nelson or Rodney.
Jorit
While I personally think it is the other way around, I have to admit it is possible for a ship to be much more beautiful than Nelson or Rodney and still be indescribably ugly. And G3 and N3 were spectacularly ugly, rather like a blocks of seaside factory buildings that somehow detached themselves from land and drifted out to sea.
[quote="JWintjes"]Ok, so throw something at me, but I think these are actually [i]much more[/i] beautiful than Nelson or Rodney.
Jorit[/quote]
While I personally think it is the other way around, I have to admit it is possible for a ship to be much more beautiful than Nelson or Rodney and still be indescribably ugly. And G3 and N3 were spectacularly ugly, rather like a blocks of seaside factory buildings that somehow detached themselves from land and drifted out to sea.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 2:07 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
|
|
|
JWintjes wrote: Somehow they capture the adventurous, future-orientated spirit of the 1920s much more like any other ship I know - as if they are out of a Fritz Lang movie... Jorit
Nah...You just need to spend a little more time gawping at Dino's Barham to see the best that the 20's and 30's could offer. Now THAT's what I'd call a ship. ...And one not as restricted as the G3's in terms of firing arcs.
Andy
[quote="JWintjes"]Somehow they capture the adventurous, future-orientated spirit of the 1920s much more like any other ship I know - as if they are out of a Fritz Lang movie... :big_grin:
Jorit[/quote]
:eyes_spinning:
Nah...You just need to spend a little more time gawping at [url=http://www.shipmodels.info/mwphpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=18343&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0]Dino's Barham[/url] to see the best that the 20's and 30's could offer. Now THAT's what I'd call a ship. ...And one not as restricted as the G3's in terms of firing arcs.
Andy
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 3:10 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
|
|
|
That is a semaphore signalling mast!
found on most British Ships I believe
HTH
JIM B
That is a semaphore signalling mast!
found on most British Ships I believe
HTH
JIM B
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 2:30 am |
|
|
|