The Ship Model Forum

Well that is definiteve, and amazing footage. Thank you very much!

[quote="Vlad"]I have a question about the yellow turret markings for Operation Weserubung. The usual interpretation is to show these over the whole roof including the rangefinder housings "ears". However, some photos seem to show these "ears" in a lighter colour, so left grey not yellow. Which is more correct? Are the photos deceptive or the usual interpretation incorrect?[/quote]

Gneisenau in April 1940 I think:

[url]https://youtu.be/EKn0Z_e70sU?si=OsTU29x1gwadR2kh[/url]

I have a question about the yellow turret markings for Operation Weserubung. The usual interpretation is to show these over the whole roof including the rangefinder housings "ears". However, some photos seem to show these "ears" in a lighter colour, so left grey not yellow. Which is more correct? Are the photos deceptive or the usual interpretation incorrect?

Seeking detailed photos of [i]Scharnhorst[/i]'s main battery fire control directors. Any help is greatly appreciated. Photos of [i]Gneisenau[/i]'s directors are also appreciated.

[quote="chuck"]Thanks, charles.

I thought it was most probable that all the areas painted yellow were painted dark gray before the ship approached German occupied territory. But there is a color photo of Scharnhorst during Berlin, taken from port quarter by the Genisenau, in which it appears the side slopes of the main turrets were painted a similar color to the vertical sides, while the forward slope of the rear turret seemed to be quite dark. There is another black and white photo taken from off the port bow in which the both the forward and side slopes of the forward turrets appears quite light. Both photos seems to have been taken well into Operation Berlin because the ships’ sides appears unkempt and rust streaked.

Also, by comparison, when Bismarck first sortied towards Norway, photos show both the tops and slopes of her main turrets were painted dark gray as part of Baltic Camouflage pattern. But at Norway the slopes of her main turrets appears to have been overpainted with light gray so all the photos of her taken from the Prinz Eugen during the break out into Atlantic, Denmark strait and afterwards show all the turret slopes were the same light color as turret sides.

The new AOTS Bismarck is not entirely reliable in the depiction of the paint scheme because it shows the turret slopes and black/white stripes of Baltic scheme painted over, But it showed the hull sides bow and stern remained dark gray after Bismarck left Norway. But photos during the main part of Rheinübung clearly show the the hull sides were entirely painted with medium gray. Many other references capture this, but left the white patch of the false bow wave from the Baltic scheme. However I do not see the white false bow wave from any photo of the Bismarck while afloat, only on the wreck, so I think the white bow wave also also overpainted, but the overpaint fell off over the years at sea bottom leaving the white bow wave exposed again on the wreck.[/quote]



Hi Chuck

Re Bismarcks false bow wave, you better check here, you will see it is clearly not painted over..... :smallsmile:


[url]https://kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1608[/url]

Thanks, charles.

I thought it was most probable that all the areas painted yellow were painted dark gray before the ship approached German occupied territory. But there is a color photo of Scharnhorst during Berlin, taken from port quarter by the Genisenau, in which it appears the side slopes of the main turrets were painted a similar color to the vertical sides, while the forward slope of the rear turret seemed to be quite dark. There is another black and white photo taken from off the port bow in which the both the forward and side slopes of the forward turrets appears quite light. Both photos seems to have been taken well into Operation Berlin because the ships’ sides appears unkempt and rust streaked.

Also, by comparison, when Bismarck first sortied towards Norway, photos show both the tops and slopes of her main turrets were painted dark gray as part of Baltic Camouflage pattern. But at Norway the slopes of her main turrets appears to have been overpainted with light gray so all the photos of her taken from the Prinz Eugen during the break out into Atlantic, Denmark strait and afterwards show all the turret slopes were the same light color as turret sides.

The new AOTS Bismarck is not entirely reliable in the depiction of the paint scheme because it shows the turret slopes and black/white stripes of Baltic scheme painted over, But it showed the hull sides bow and stern remained dark gray after Bismarck left Norway. But photos during the main part of Rheinübung clearly show the the hull sides were entirely painted with medium gray. Many other references capture this, but left the white patch of the false bow wave from the Baltic scheme. However I do not see the white false bow wave from any photo of the Bismarck while afloat, only on the wreck, so I think the white bow wave also also overpainted, but the overpaint fell off over the years at sea bottom leaving the white bow wave exposed again on the wreck.

I defer to others more knowledgeable, but I found a good reference when I built my Scharnhorst to be German Naval Camouflage 1939-1941, Asmussen and Leon, Seaforth Publishing, 2012. On page 69 in open sea, Early March 1941, the main and secondary turrets were Dunklegrau on the tops and slopes of each turret. This was a paint over of the recognition yellow applied near the coasts. There is no evidence of the recognition flags on the focsle and quarterdeck.

On page 71 the ship is depicted in Brest, later in March 1941, with all turrets tops and slopes back to yellow and the flags back on the focsle and quarterdeck.

HTH

Does anyone know how the turrets on the Scharnhorst was painted during must of the Operation Berlin in early 1941? AOTS depicts the turret tops and slopes painted yellow as aerial recognition. I would think that would only have been applied while the ship was within range of shore based German aircraft, otherwise it would make the ship more conspicuous and unmistakeable to British air power. Were the tops and slopes painted dark gray? was it only the flat part of the top? or was it pained some other scheme?

thank you, Paul. I am so glad that you could see this one. ps: I am sorry I never had a chance to reply to you on your other message. Hold me to that. There is just a lot going on over here.. it is a very interesting thesis you have, re: Denmark Strait!

[quote="Joseph R"]
https://josephreindler.com/battleship-scharnhorst-battle-of-north-cape[/quote]

:big_eyes: :worship_1: :good_job:

Oh WOW Joseph! You've done it again!

Hi folks,

For anybody interested - my latest studio original oil painting, depicting the German side of the Battle of North Cape, was recently added to my website via the below link. My apologies in advance if I cannot reply to anybody individually who might comment on this. There is quite a lot going on with work.

I hope you will enjoy seeing this at any rate.

Also, yes this is why I was asking the above .. !

Best wishes,

Joseph

[url]https://josephreindler.com/battleship-scharnhorst-battle-of-north-cape[/url]

Hey David,

Yes this is a very good point. I had also wondered if it was a loading rail or above deck magazine etc for the tripple TT mount just forward of it. But the height of it in some photos baffled me. Perhaps it has a large full length hatch opening, as shown below. Actually on second thought I do think this is a hatch rather than a clinker screen etc..

Thanks for your input. Perhaps this question is now answered!

Cheers,

Joseph

Hi folks,

A couple of random questions regarding SCHARNHORST:

1). Was the shielding added outboard of the #4 15cm twin turrets, abaft the cranes, a permanent feature? I am seeing photographs which appear to illustrate movable extensions rigged, effectively doubling its height. But was the half height structure permanently fitted steel? i.e.: am I right to assume that the 15cm twin turrets could rotate clear of it when ship was cleared for action?

2). I don't suppose any references have survived pertaining to where Vice Admiral Bey flew his flag at North Cape i.e.: from the foremast truck or the mainmast truck? I am finding numerous references to German Admirals' flags being flown from both - i.e.: then Vice Admiral Lutgens' flag being flown from the fore in GNEISENAU during one of his earlier sorties of the war (Weserübung or Berlin, sorry I forget which) - and meanwhile his full Admiral's flag being flown from the main in BISMARCK during Rhine. Vice Admiral Ciliax meanwhile appears to have flown his flag from the main in SCHARNHORST during Cerberus. There are more photos of what appears to be an Admiral's flag flying from the fore in SCHARNHORST (sorry do not have the exact date references in front of me). I did put a chronology of references together of when various German Admirals of various ranks i.e.: Rear, Vize or full, flew their flags in various German BBs, wondering whether there was a practice for use of either mast for different flag ranks etc, but found apparently no rhyme or reason to any practice. Can anybody correct me in this? And / or does anybody know of any reference to how Vize Admiral Bey's flag was flown at North Cape?

I attach the below to help clarify what I am talking about in both points.

Thank you in advance for any input..

Best wishes,

Joseph

[quote="Mr. Church"]Likely too late to be of use to you, however the Gehringer / Bonomi Tirpitz Volume V book has drawings of Scharnhorst in her 1943 fit in her final camouflage scheme:
[url]https://bismarck-tirpitz.com/5/SHOP-Schlachtschiff-Tirpitz-Vol-V[/url]

That shows the little square liferafts adjacent to her aircraft hangar as being yellow. But then in the same book there is a closeup photo of her during the Spitzbergen operation which clearly shows the hull and superstructure camouflage pattern continuing over the rafts. A small detail, that in no way detracts from the overall value of the book. It is well worth buying in my opinion.

So it would appear that the rafts were painted in the hull camouflage colours in Scharnhorst's final configuration? Unless they were repainted yellow again sometime between the Spitzbergen Operation and her loss? Though that seems unlikely.[/quote]

I went for red type 2 rafts, and yellow type 1 rafts. Call it "before matched to camouflate" if you like. :) They look very good on the model.

Likely too late to be of use to you, however the Gehringer / Bonomi Tirpitz Volume V book has drawings of Scharnhorst in her 1943 fit in her final camouflage scheme:
[url]https://bismarck-tirpitz.com/5/SHOP-Schlachtschiff-Tirpitz-Vol-V[/url]

That shows the little square liferafts adjacent to her aircraft hangar as being yellow. But then in the same book there is a closeup photo of her during the Spitzbergen operation which clearly shows the hull and superstructure camouflage pattern continuing over the rafts. A small detail, that in no way detracts from the overall value of the book. It is well worth buying in my opinion.

So it would appear that the rafts were painted in the hull camouflage colours in Scharnhorst's final configuration? Unless they were repainted yellow again sometime between the Spitzbergen Operation and her loss? Though that seems unlikely.

Quick question on SH 1943 (as sunk) float colors.

Bonomi book - instructs to paint square life rafts in dark yellow, and bigger Type 2 life rafts in dark red.

Does that seem right to all? Not grey, but yellow and red?

Because I have not seen them red in any book, and yellow I thought was indeed possible but prior to War.

And all floats from USN or from Royal Navy seem just grey or navy blue depending on ship, certainly not bright.

Were they really bright floats in German navy, up north in the fjords for ... reasons... or? Any input is appreciated. Kind of at a stage of installing them on a model and would rather get them right.

Just thought I’d chime in about the new 1/200 Gneisenau from Trumpeter, especially as it compares to their Scharnhorst. The hulls account for the differences between the two. SH has the extra row of portholes at each end of the ship, and GN does not. The bows of both ships are different, no bow anchor on GN, and a different hawse arrangement at the point of the bow. The SH bow needs to be a little sharper in profile, but that is a pretty simple fix. The gun deck for the six 105 mm aaa guns is tread plate on SH, planked on GN. The vents along the deck edge of GN are also included as an add on. I’m sure there are corrections but I think Trumpeter put their A team on these sisters. Now for some aftermarket attention, and you’ll have really something

Evening all,

Hoping for a bit of a steer from your goodselves, I've just picked up Dragons 1/350 Scharnhorst (1940 version), do yourselves have any idea/view on which upgrade set would be best to go with out of Flyhawk and MK1?

He's out of the mask business - sold it to another company, who hasn't started production, AFAIK.

[quote="Madhatter"]Thats great, thanks Sean! I'll go check them out. If anything, maybe they can be used as a template to transfer them to normal tape.
Where do you get them from, or more over, are they still in existence?[/quote]

His current site is here:
https://gatorsmodelstudio.com/

Looks like he doesn't list specific masks anymore, but he does still offer to make custom masks. He may still have the files to make them from; wouldn't hurt to ask. (Though I seem to recall him getting walloped by a hurricane at some point, so perhaps not)

Side note, but while we're talking about Gator: if you haven't tried it, his Gator's Grip Glue is excellent.

- Sean F.