The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Wed Apr 24, 2019 1:12 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 637 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 28, 29, 30, 31, 32
Author Message
 Post subject: Romas' Hull Color....
PostPosted: Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 1:47 am
Posts: 2
Hi all, I have the Trumpeter 1/350 kit w/accy pack, and am picking up smaller caliber barrels. This is my first ship kit since the Revell kits in the '60s. I saw the photos of the Main Deck and rigging above, and say thankyouthankyouthankyou for posting them! Everybodys' work on this site is very impressive and so are the people sharing information-all of this will make my build a pleasure. Two questions I have on the ship are hull color and foredeck I.D. Which brings me to the question of hull color. I've heard there is some vague argument about whether the hull was painted in red oxide or Italian Hull Green as their torpedo boats were. Which is correct, from yalls point of view. The oxide is a safe bet, but wow that massive hull would look fantastic in green(how very Italian).
Secondly, the kit plan views show the I.D. starting at, and parallell to, the starboard side of the breakwater. It looks wrong, compared with ship photos of the Pola(and not many at that-I confess I have very little research material on ships). Are the prints in the above post more like it?
Thanks for any help I can get, fellers, this is going to be an epic build


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 29, 2016 2:48 am 
Offline
Regia Marina
Regia Marina
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 2:08 am
Posts: 407
Location: Roma - Italy
Ciao Speedbird,

very nice compliments :thumbs_up_1: :thumbs_up_1:

Ciao Giampiero


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jan 02, 2017 10:50 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 7:06 am
Posts: 2311
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Hi Mpgl62,

I've compared the differences between the Vittorio Veneto instructions at the link below and the instructions from my Trumpeter Littorio kit. Even though the same parts are numbered differently for both kits, the parts' arrangement still seems to be identical.

Originally I was going to build the Littorio kit from 1st Sirte, but I am now interested in possibly building instead as Vittorio Veneto at Matapan in May 1941 if the differences aren't too different.


mpgl62 wrote:
Haijun watcher wrote:
Is the Trumpeter Littorio kit merely a re-box of the Trumpeter Vittorio Veneto kit? So any upgrades in Littorio's AA suite after Taranto wouldn't really be shown in the 1941 kit?

I'm asking this question to see whether if the Littorio 1941 kit can be built out of box and painted as 1940 if not a lot of backdating has to be done.


Main differences between twins are directors. You can see, that they are different in the kits.

Vittorio Veneto
http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/image/10147777z3/70/3

Littorio
http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/image/10155302z3/70/3

In general both are correct but some little modifications as AA armament, bridge's windows and wind deflectors can change in the time.

Which ship do you want? And what date?

_________________
"Haijun" means "navy" in Mandarin Chinese.

"You have enemies? Good. It means you stood up for something in your life."- Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jan 03, 2017 10:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:21 am
Posts: 88
Location: Madrid, Spain
Happy new year


The diferences are principally in the directors. Main director have diferent rear in superior rangefinger. Straight VV angular L. Four apertures in superior rangefinder VV two only in L. And two catwalks in the rear of two rangefinders.

Secondary directors have diferent shape, because diferent producer: San Giorgio for L and Officine Galileo for VV (and Roma)

A good view of secondary directors:

http://i.imgur.com/obLrINU.jpg

This picture is VV no Littorio, you can observed superior rangefinder with four apertures.

http://www.gettyimages.in/detail/news-p ... /173455022

In this photo you can view the superior bridge (admiral's bridge) without lateral windows and partially open. The picture (april 1th 1941) is just some days after Matapan. I don´t know if the stripes around turrets´ barbettes are Grigio Piombo (as decks) or black


https://weaponsandwarfare.files.wordpre ... ferwrf.png

Magari Giampiero lo sa! (Perhaps Giampiero knows it!)


Last edited by mpgl62 on Tue Jan 03, 2017 12:35 pm, edited 8 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jan 03, 2017 10:35 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 7:06 am
Posts: 2311
Location: Vancouver, Canada
mpgl62 wrote:
The diferences are principally in the directors. Main director have diferent rear. Straight VV angular L. For apertures in superior telemeter VV two only in L.

Secondary directors have diferent shape because diferent productor San Giorgio for L and Officine Galileo for VV (and Roma)
http://i.imgur.com/obLrINU.jpg


Thanks for clarifying this. I guess I have no choice but to build this kit as Littorio.

_________________
"Haijun" means "navy" in Mandarin Chinese.

"You have enemies? Good. It means you stood up for something in your life."- Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Feb 08, 2019 7:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 1:08 am
Posts: 94
Hello. I am building the Trumpeter 1/700 Vittorio Veneto. The kit is said to depict the 1940 condition. I would like to enquire whether the kit can also reflect the condition during the Battle of Matapan, i.e. March 1941 except for the locations of anti-aircraft guns and life-rafts as discussed earlier in this thread.

Actually, I have the two references in hand, one is Profile Morskie (PM) plan and The Littorio Class: Italy's Last and Largest Battleships 1937-1948 by Erminio Bagnasco. However, the former and most of the illustrations in the latter are showing the 1942 version, which I can noticed quite a number of difference to the bridge part as compared to the kit.

Besides, I am puzzled by the design of the Trumpeter kits and want to check their accuracy:

1. Parts D19 and D24, which form the base of the AA gun platforms at the two sides of the fore funnel. As per the kit’s instruction, it should be glued to the lower part of the gun platform (A5/A7). However, part of D19+D24 will be left unattached to the upper part of the gun platform as shown in the photo below. What make it even more obscure is that the topside of D19+D24 is not covered. The void between parts D19 and D24 is viewable in an oblique angle. In the Profile Morskie’s plan, the base is extended to attach to the upper part of the gun platform instead.

Image

2. Moreover, in the kit, three PE parts depicting the vent louvres should be attached to part D19. However, in the PM plan, there are only two vents at the outer side of the AA gun platform and there is another one vent at the inner side. Which one is correct?

3. Concerning part K19 which is the deck house attached to the fore part of the fore tunnel, it is not attached to the bridge tower in the front in the kit. However, as shown in the PM plan, the deck house is attached to the bridge tower. Which one is correct?

Thanks.

_________________
Hong Kong Naval Model Association
https://www.facebook.com/groups/659559407492511/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 4:59 pm 
Offline
Regia Marina
Regia Marina
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 2:08 am
Posts: 407
Location: Roma - Italy
Ciao Kazec,


the vent louvres are like in the picture I attach to you


Image


for the empty space, in reality there was a part on which the gun platform
Image

For the third question the base of the control tower is connected to part K19

Ciao Giampiero


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Feb 23, 2019 10:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 1:08 am
Posts: 94
Ciao Giampiero,

Thank you very much for your information.

For the issue of part K19, it is not connected to the bridge base as shown in the photo below:

Image

So, do you mean that it should connect to the bridge base like shown in the PM plan below? i,e the kit is wrong? As this is supposed to be a major flaw of the kit but I am not notice it has been mentioned. It will be a major modification if it has to be ratified.

Image

_________________
Hong Kong Naval Model Association
https://www.facebook.com/groups/659559407492511/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 12:56 pm 
Offline
Regia Marina
Regia Marina
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 2:08 am
Posts: 407
Location: Roma - Italy
Ciao Kazec,

Yes was connected
Image

So, do you mean that it should connect to the bridge base like shown in the PM plan below? i,e the kit is wrong? As this is supposed to be a major flaw of the kit but I am not notice it has been mentioned. It will be a major modification if it has to be ratified.

Image[/quote]


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 3:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 8:31 am
Posts: 1
Hello, does any of you have a photo or layout plans for the side sheathing of Vittorio veneto?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Mar 14, 2019 5:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 2:04 pm
Posts: 17
Hello everybody

Does anybody knows what was the correct colour of bottom on battleship Roma (brown, red, green, etc)?
Thanks for help
Chris


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2016 5:33 pm
Posts: 748
Guys, OOB Vittorio Veneto Cape Matapan was all light grey, correct? XF19 Tamiya call out is suitable or you found via experience a better paint?

_________________
Work in Progress 1/350
HMS Duke of York, 1943

My 1/700 projects:
Bismarck, 1941
HMS Hood, 1941
HIJMS Mikasa, 1902
USS Washington, Atlantic 1942


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 2:37 am 
Offline
Regia Marina
Regia Marina
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 2:08 am
Posts: 407
Location: Roma - Italy
Hello Chris ,

The colour of bottom is green.

Regards
Giampiero


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 2:50 am 
Offline
Regia Marina
Regia Marina
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 2:08 am
Posts: 407
Location: Roma - Italy
Hello Pascal,


Yes the colour Vittorio Veneto is light grey , I use the Humbrol 147, I have attached the scheme

Regards Giampiero

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:29 pm
Posts: 71
Hi, All
I have and seen two Recognition Models of LITTORIO without 90mm guns and range finders (one a Bassett-Lowke, the other a RAF brass one), as well as seen the photos of her in that configuration. How long was LITTORIO in that state, and did she ever "serve" in that condition? Or were the British just eager to get a representation of that ship out?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2019 3:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:21 am
Posts: 88
Location: Madrid, Spain
DougKn wrote:
Hi, All
I have and seen two Recognition Models of LITTORIO without 90mm guns and range finders (one a Bassett-Lowke, the other a RAF brass one), as well as seen the photos of her in that configuration. How long was LITTORIO in that state, and did she ever "serve" in that condition? Or were the British just eager to get a representation of that ship out?

Hello

Those models are very interesting. Can you publish some pictures?

Littorio was commissioned May 6, 1940, and Vittorio Veneto April 28. Both in external completed condition (all guns and directors). Some tests and problems made the effective service in August.

So, for Italian war declaration (June 10) the twins were on tests and exercises. Also, because this, they did not participate in the battle of Punta Stilo (Battle of Calabria in english).

In conclusion, uncompleted Littorio did not saw some naval service. Only civilian service, without Regia Marina ensign.

Littorio and Vittorio Venneto tests (summer 1940).
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Apr 15, 2019 7:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:29 pm
Posts: 71
Hi, these are a few pictures: the first is a brass RAF Ministry model, the 2nd is a Bassett-Lowke Recognition model for RAF, and the third (LIT) and fourth (VV) are pictures off the web. I've also seen/have the models from the same makers with the 90mm and bridge structure filled out. Your timelines might explain why the Recognition models were as of yet uncompleted ships


Image Image
Image Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 637 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 28, 29, 30, 31, 32

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group