The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Sat Jul 20, 2019 8:27 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 610 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 27, 28, 29, 30, 31
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jun 03, 2019 7:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:51 pm
Posts: 2408
You're welcome. And yes, a bit of white would be nice.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 11:44 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 1:52 pm
Posts: 379
Location: Inverness
I now have my sticky mitts on the 1/200 Hood and the Pontos set.

I have carried out a bit of research and am now in a position to get going as it were. Many many thanks to those who have contributed to the Pontos set and the HMS Hood Association for their review and critique of the kit and suggestions for improvements.

This is directed towards Frank and the review on the hood site - http://www.hmshood.com/hoodtoday/models/trumpeter/trumpeter200.htm

The section on 'Suggestions for Improvement' is comprehensive and very well written and contains quite a number of improvements required, a considerable number of these have been addressed in the Pontos kit after excellent contributions from Frank EJ and many others.

So, Frank, is it possible to add a small note to each section to indicate that that particular improvement has been addressed in the Pontos set?

Just a thought

Cheers Jab

_________________
HMS Hood, the big one!

I used to be indecisive, now I'm not so sure.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 12:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 1982
What is the latest thought on Hood's armor and the "fatal hit"?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 1:40 am 
Offline
SovereignHobbies
SovereignHobbies

Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2015 9:09 am
Posts: 842
Location: Aberdeenshire, Scotland, UK
Fliger747 wrote:
What is the latest thought on Hood's armor and the "fatal hit"?


Based on the range and the German gunnery tables, the shell trajectory would be somewhere close to 14 degrees below horizontal. This has been known by people seriously interested in Hood for a good while, but like all sorts of misinformation, myths like "plunging fire" are oft repeated and very difficult to kill.

Hood's deck armour wasn't weak per se - it was a multi-deck system. What it lacked was one very heavy deck. The main belt armour was 12" thick and covered the waterline to just above the magazine roof. Above this was a 7" armour up to the next deck and 5" above to main deck level. Round-downs at 45% within the hull should have protected the interior from oblique shots but these were light at 2" compared to 4" (I think) on the Queen Elizabeths. This was planned to be upgraded at the refit that Hood kept being passed over, mostly because she was still the warship least in need of it other than the Nelson class and until the KGVs were commissioned.

Image

Hood was very heavily armoured overall with over 32% of her displacement attributed to armour - this was ground breaking stuff and she was, overall, more heavily armoured than any battleship at the time. There's a school of thought that she only retained the Battlecruiser classification because the Royal Navy was traditional, and that's how she was initially laid down, and she was clearly too fast to simply chug along in battle line. She was absolutely not a 1911 "Invincible" repeat.

Whilst the German gunnery was erratic at best, Hood's final turn appears to have corrected the range for Bismarck and the final hit penetrated close to the mainmast through the 7" armour and reached NOT the 15" main magazine but the adjacent unarmoured 4" magazine which had been expanded in a previous minor refit. At the outbreak of war the dubiety of this expansion was raised and this work too was to be undone at the next refit.

There was no massive explosion, no secondary explosion of the forward 15" magazine or anything like that. There was an updraft of smoke through the deck ventilators from the engineering spaces and tall column of red, hissing flame appeared vertically from the boat deck. Overpressure from the rapidly expanding gases generated by the aft magazines burning blew out the plating amidships and broke the keel. According to Ted Briggs' account, the commanding officers didn't even appear to realise what was happening behind them to the hull. The helmsman called "Steering's gone!" and was answered with "Very good. Switch to emergency steering."

_________________
James Duff
Sovereign Hobbies Ltd
http://www.sovereignhobbies.co.uk

Current build:
HMS Imperial D09 1/350
http://www.shipmodels.info/mws_forum/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=167151


Last edited by SovereignHobbies on Wed Jun 12, 2019 1:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 11:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 1982
Thank you for the good dissertation! Quite informative.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2019 7:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 9:27 am
Posts: 630
Location: Kingston, Jamaica
Really good explanation Jamie!

We can also consider that the diagrams illustrate the tests done in 1920 with British 15-inch shells. Bismarck's 38 cm, though a lighter shell, had a higher muzzle velocity and therefore may have had greater penetrating power. In 1941, British experts testified that a shell with a MV of 3050 fps could have penetrated the 12-inch belt and reached a magazine. Bismarck's shells could exceed that.

Still the 7-inch belt, through the 2-inch scarp, then the 1-inch lower deck was more likely, given that the ship was still well inclined towards the Germans when she took the final hit (her A-arcs had just opened as she turned).

Paul

_________________
Hard a starboard.......Shoot!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2019 11:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 5:06 pm
Posts: 715
Location: Cambridgeshire
Concur... an excellent and informative post.

The point about Hood being very heavily armoured, even more so than many classified as battleships, was well made.

A perspective changing post... and we don't get many of those!

_________________
Bill Livingston
Cambridge


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2019 11:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:45 pm
Posts: 1322
Location: Abu Dhabi
Thanks a lot James a fantastic explanation ,very interesting indeed.
IMHO Hood was a great ship ,just a unlucky one, a real beauty and magnificent vessel .

_________________
No Whine Policy
1.- Modify it
2.- Ignore it
3.- Don't build it


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jul 03, 2019 9:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 2:50 pm
Posts: 195
Jabberwock wrote:
So, Frank, is it possible to add a small note to each section to indicate that that particular improvement has been addressed in the Pontos set?


Sorry for the very late response, but I rarely check online forums these days. We would be happy to add something like that to our article if someone would like to compile the information for us. We’re currently putting more effort into our crew database and our photo collections, but we can still certainly make changes to other areas. It all comes down to time and resources. So again, If anyone would like to compile such a list as Jab referenced, we’d be happy to use it (and of course, anyone contributing would be given credit online if they wish).

_________________
Frank Allen
H.M.S. Hood Association
http://www.hmshood.com
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jul 11, 2019 5:50 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 1:52 pm
Posts: 379
Location: Inverness
Thank you Frank, I'm not going to 'throw my hat in the ring' for this one - just yet!

Cheers Jabb.

_________________
HMS Hood, the big one!

I used to be indecisive, now I'm not so sure.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 610 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 27, 28, 29, 30, 31

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 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