The Ship Model Forum

Hi Chris, yes, been plugging away slowly. will post some pics soon.

Hi Pete,

Any updates on your Hood?

Cheers,
Chris

I also added the front tripod posts between decks as per the plans and photo's. ( Trumpeter only give us the top bit).

Morning All, I have been able to do a bit more to the model including scratch building the conning tower platform in order to add detail underneath without causing excess deck thickness. So, on with the pics.

Hi Pete, has to be said you're going a bit deeper into accuracy than I am. I just like adding detail without doing too much to the actual shape of things.

Looking really good!

I'm away for a few days but will keep watching nevertheless.

Keep up the good work.

Cheers, Jabb

note the railing goes further around the corner as per the ship photos.

new side

the bottom pic is a before, ...

ok, so, a bit more progress. the port side is modified, stbd as per kit. Differences are: the rail has been removed and replaced with 10 thou card. The quad gun tub has been reduced in size as per the AOTS plans and EJ's model. The inset area below the rail has been filled, I have not found any photographic evidence of this recess, but a lot of evidence for a smooth surface. The overhanging semi circle of the quad gun tub has been moved forward. The internals of the quad gun deck have been detailed. Rail stays from 10 thou have been added. I am replacing some of Pontos's brass deck end detail with plastic as I could not get a reliably eliminated seam between the brass and plastic. So far, I think I should have scratch built this part. It would have been quicker and easier.

Oh, yes, errrr, EJ! I hope you don't mind me using one of your thread photo's here for illustration, I should of asked permission first. My apologies. But it is a perfect shot to show the differences.

a strip of 10 thou added to the remaining depression, filled, waiting to dry. And various other imperfections filled as well.

Hi all. Been doing a bit of modifying over the last couple of evenings. I have removed the port side rail and modified the quad gun platform to the AOTS plans. Comparing the new shape to a picture of the same area on EJ's model it looks a lot better, and the railing now goes around the corner. The top (port) side is modified, the other side is as per kit. Note the shallower depth.

OK, got a question. How do forum members concentrate on modeling while watching Black Adder?

OK, sorry, its been a while. I have been futzing with the Admirals platform for a while, trying to figure out why it looks wrong. ( and real life getting in the way, very little bench time lately.) So, looking at ship photo's, the kit part, EJ's site and model photo's, I think I know what's wrong. The quad gun tubs are misplaced on the kit. They should be moved slightly forward, which will give more space between the tubs and the superstructure angle. They are also too long fore to aft. Will post photo's in a while to show what I mean. In the interim more surgery is required, redoing the work already done as it is inaccurate. (BIG SIGH) lololol. Regards, Pete in RI.

Hi Pete, nice to see you around. In response to you question, there are a couple of photo's on the Hood association site http://www.hmshood.com/hoodtoday/models/trumpeter/trumpeter200.htm (click the link 'Click here to view an image showing the location of the lower areas.' in the Splinter Shields section) which show these and tbh are ambiguous. I think they are set back, but not to the degree replicated in the kit. I have left 'as is', but I can see that an improvement can be made. I also noted that there are some fixings on the stanchions which I will replicate with some dots of PVA or CA.

Look forward to more updates

Cheers, Jabb

WOW! thank you Guys! will order the correct size. I think that will make a big difference in the end result. Hopefully other builders will read this and use the info. OK, next Q. Regarding the railings section on the Admirals platform. Specifically, the vertical supports area. The kit has recessed areas' between the supports, and a recessed ridge horizontally. However, when I look at photo's of the ship at the same area, I see no ridge. Is it me? I see rail supports on the outside going down, I see an external hand rail at the top, but no horizontal recess at the bottom as the kit has. My take on this is that the hand rail is supported by outside posts on a smooth outside surface with no recesses between the posts. What does everyone else think? Look at the photo's, the builder's model (smooth surface) and let me know. I do not see the recesses as Trumpeter has molded them. If no recess, it is an easy fix, and will improve the side screens. As molded in the kit, the side screens are a wedge shape, thick at the base and thin at the top, due to production limitations no doubt. BUT, this gives a distinct slope to the screens inner surface. I have been contemplating replacing these with sheet anyway as I am really not happy with the inner slope. BUT, is the external ridge there or not. I need to know what the general consensus is. Looking at the photo's, I do not see it, unless someone can post a shot that shows otherwise. (actual ship, not model). Regards, Pete in RI.

Hi EJ, you are quite right. Forgot that in my calculation! (Doh!)

So lets say 10 -13.25 for the sake of argument!

Cheers Jabb

Simple math is ok but also wrong Two links overlap by twice the diameter of the link, so you are left with 20 - 2* 3 3/8 = 13 1/4" of added length per link.

A 75ft cable thus has about 67 links (not taking into account joining shackles: (#links = (75*12-20)/13.25 + 1 = 67.4)). A 75ft cable in 1:200 scale is about 4.5": about 15 links per inch. This is when the chain is pulled taut and all links are exactly 3 3/8" and etcetera etcetera. Should have checked the Hood website but my estimate is not too bad.

(200/13.25 by approximation)

For my model I should have a 1.45mm link if 20" is the right size; I'll check if my 13.5 estimate is what I actually built cause I think I have more...

Hi all,

I quote from the HMS Hood Association site http://www.hmshood.com/ship/hoodspecs5.htm -

"The bow anchor cables/chains were made up of 1 ft 8 inch links which were 3 3/8 inches in diameter. The combined cables consisted of 41 shackles (35 full shackles and 12 half shackles) for an overall (combined) length of 3,075 ft when three bow anchors were carried (the bower cables were each about 15 shackles/1,125 ft in length and the sheet cable was somewhat smaller at about 825ft)"

Simple maths gives us 'Each link = 20" X 10 = 200". Divide by 1/200 = 1 X 10". Therefore there are 10 chain links per inch at this scale.

(I knew I didn't dream it!)

Hope this helps

Cheers, Jabb

Cool, thank you guys! Jabb, that's a new supplier to me, thank you. EJ, will have a dig through, but I wager that you have WAY more references than I.