Spottier,
I guess I must be an extreme rivet counter - my CAD model includes all the nuts, bolts, rivets and such that I can find in the blueprints, drawings, photos, etc. - probably at least a million of them! It is an attempt to be extremely accurate.
viewtopic.php?f=27&t=70810But I have no problem with you creating your model however you want to. If anyone criticizes you just say you are building it the way you think it
should have been built! There have been several other scratchbuilds and even kitbashes that were done just for this purpose. Each is an interesting statement about what might have been, and give us something to think about.
For what it is worth, after 14 years of gathering as much information (blueprints, photos, parts drawings, etc.) as I can get on just one ship I am often skeptical about the accuracy of many so-called "accurate" models, especially those created from just simple profile and deck plan drawings. For some things perfect accuracy just isn't possible because of a lack of dimensioned drawings. And of course ships changed with time, so what was correct for one period is wrong for another. Rarely are there enough detailed close up photos to allow determination of exactly how all the details were arranged at any one time. So just build your model the way you want to and ignore the "historical' criticisms.
I do urge you to start your own thread for the Rodney. It is a very interesting ship, and there is another Rodney thread in progress.
Phil
PS: I have often thought about what a behemoth Rodney would have been if they had broadened the beam, lengthened it with another set of boilers and funnel and placed three triple turrets on the stern. It would have made the Yamato look small! Now there is something to speculate about! And that would make an interesting "what if" model!