The Ship Model Forum

I've used the frame spacing of HMS Hood to place some lines on the model and although that frame spacing was mainly 48 inches, it shifted to 36 inches at the bow, stern and nearly half the larger bulkheads averaging out to about 45 inches; I can well image that the frame spacing of a County class cruiser isn't constant either? To be sure you would need a good drawing from e.g. the National Maritime Museum (or a better answer )

Actually, that's a pretty good answer. I have a set of as-builts from the NMM for Dorsetshire. The frames are mostly spaced at 48" and shift to 36" at the bow and stern. There are a few frames that break the pattern here and there, but for the most part they are consistent. The transition from 48" to 36" is at Frame 25 at the bow and Frame 260 at the stern. The 36" spaced frames are numbered sequentially, 1, 2, 3.... The 48" spaced frames all have even numbers only, 26, 28, 30.... until the spacing changes back to 36" at the stern where the sequential numbering returns, 261, 262, 263... I don't know if this is typical British practice or not.

_________________
Steve Sobieralski
Tampa Bay Ship Model Society

Thank you for the input EJFoeth and Steve. I have the centerline profile drawing from NMM and noticed something odd. Around fr 3 the frames were not spaced on centers that were round foot numbers but instead we just short of three feet by a quarter inch or so. This continues for about 15 frames until all the frames normalize at three or four foot centers around frame 20. After that they all scale out to exact increments of 12 inches. I can only detect this over long distances but when I went to measure the distance from the front of the main superstructure to the front perpendicular it measured out to about 126 feet 5 inches and by my calculations it should have been at 127 feet. After some thorough checking I think my drawing scanned improperly when they made it and just wanted to confirm that this sounded right to others.

_________________
Josh

507a & 507C

I have Combrigs Hmas Canberra and the instructions are a bit vague on the masts. After six months trying to work out for myself what the dimensions are with no luck, can I ask if anybody here may have 1/700 scale drawings of Canberras masts.
Any help much appreciated
Cheers Callum

Hi all,
I intend to build Combrig 1/700 HMAS Canberra in her "as sunk" condition at Savo but I am lost about her final AA configuration.
From what I have read here I understood she has not been modified to the extend of HMAS Australia and that she still carried 4 of her 4-inch single mounts. Just today I found this photo http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/P02497.021 which (if labelled correctly) proves exactly the opposite. Also, what about her 2pounders, pompoms (?), oerlikons, MGs? And where have been her radars fitted (Type 271 & A290)?
Would anybody share any decent reliable drawing (I mean especially overhead, but also detailed side view would help) of Canberra in August 1942 - if available at all?
Thanks for any help!

Look here for Canberra profiles,
http://www.world-war.co.uk/Kent/canberra.php3
The photo from the awm is obviously Australia.

Thanks, Brett, happy to hear that http://www.world-war.co.uk/Kent/canberra.php3 is still considered valid. I thought the AWM caption was wrong, but I was not sure about the May-June 42 refit as later photos are either from a large distance or quite unclear so I could not tell what actually changed on the deck.
I have a couple more questions (all related to August 1942 fit):

Canberra's deck colour: wood (which?) or dark grey or ???
Canberra's Supermarine Seagull: colours/markings
Canberra's radars: I found how Type 271 looked like (http://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/T/y/Type_271_surface_search_radar.htm and http://www.hmcssackville-cnmt.ns.ca/tour/radar.html) but does anybody have an idea where was it located on Canberra? I have not yet been able to find how did A290 look like (and where it could have been located on Canberra).

Thanks for any help!

Here is what may be the last broadside shot of Canberra, taken July 42 leaving Auckland.
The deck colour is unknown, but I would consider it likely to be painted a dark blue grey, probably slightly darker that Chicago blue.

The type 271 lantern was mounted atop the bridgeworks, as seen in the photo.

Type A290 is an early, somewhat inaccurate unit, it is a single yagi element and usually mounted atop the forward mast.
If you check photos of RAN Tribal class Arunta and Warramunga as `built`, the 290 aerial can be clearly seen atop the forward mast, do not confuse it with the latter fitted SC arrangement.

Walrus colours are unknown to me, maybe someone else can provide this info.
If you do a search, there is a fine model of Canberra in the model archives, portrayed for this timeframe.
Cheers.

Thanks for all your answers! I found a nice photo of HMAS Warramunga showing the A290, cropped below.

Hi all,
the above 1942 photo of HMAS Canberra shows her lower row of scuttles removed, but is not clear enough to tell how was this done and whether there were some visible signs of overplating or so. Neither inspection of this photo showing Canberra in her final config http://mysite.verizon.net/resttsdu/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/1942_08_circa_img09_HMAS_CANBERRA_Slot_BJ_1200x.jpg does help - or it does as they have been removed in a way they became invisible?
Does anyone have any idea on this?

I just found a perhaps likely answer here http://www.navy.gov.au/sites/default/files/500px-Australia2-6.jpg. It shows HMAS Australia in Oct 1944 and the scuttles can be seen there after some zoom-in plated over by thin rounded sheets of metal. They are really almost invisible even on most close-up photos (like http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ef/HMAS_Australia_Kamikaze_damage_IWM_A_29381.jpg). It seems this modification was done to Australia during her 1941 refit in England while Canberra has been (much less) modified in early 1942, but perhaps this detail has been done in a similar way. I have not been able to find any proof of this, though.

Vladi, here is a shot of blanked scuttles on Australia, Canberra would have been identical.

Thanks, Brett, for supporting my conclusion!
Just the ever-lasting question popped up to me immediately "should this hard-to be seen feature be represented on a 1/700 model?". One would not likely see this from 200 metres distance... just like the hull plating etc. Tough questions

Hi all,

Has anyone here actually attempted to convert Airfix's 1/600 HMS Suffolk kit to HMAS Australia or HMAS Canberra?

I am aware that the main difference between the 2 RAN cruisers and the rest of the Kent class was the fact that the Aussie ships had their funnels raised 3 feet higher than the RN cruisers.

Still, I was just curious if anyone was able to pull this off using the Airfix kit.

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

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

The Suffolk seaplane hanger will have to go as well.

If you intend to portray Australia in 1941 wearing 2 tone camo scheme, just be aware.
The profile of Australia above, as excellent as it is, does have a couple of subtle inaccuracies in the scheme.
The ones I`ve noticed are the foot of `the ladies leg` on the port side, and on the starboard side the upward sweep of the 507A pattern, closest to the bow, did not extend that far forward to overlay the sheet anchor, from the reference photos I have.

Thanks guys for all your feedback.

I actually intended to portray Canberra, as she appeared at the Battle of Savo Island, instead of Australia.

I've been looking through the first two volumes of Alan Raven's Warship Perspectives books on the Royal Navy, but can't find Canberra anywhere.

I can see Australia's 2-tone camo is on pg 3 of the 1942 volume, but I can't find her sister.

----------------------------------------------------------------

If the above conversion proves unfeasible, I may just build an Airfix Suffolk kit as either Cornwall or Dorsetshire.

Speaking of these two, p. 35 of the first Raven book says that Cornwall sported overall medium grey at the time of her loss in April 1942. Would Tamiya's medium grey spray (AS28) suffice for this?

But for Dorsetshire, the Raven book only vaguely states on pg.22 that she wore camo, composed of 507b and 507c, from 1941-42 with no indication whether she sported it when she was sunk.

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

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

Hello Haijun watcher,
have a look at the previous page of this discussion thread, I was asking some questions re HMAS Canberra at Savo and I got some answers. However, Canberra was not camouflaged at Savo (and so was not Australia), as you can see on those many photos just before she sunk. See http://www.world-war.co.uk/Kent/canberra.php3 for some reference.
BTW there is a large scale model of Canberra (before she sunk status) at the Australian War Memorial but the only photo of it I ever saw is in "The shame of Savo" book by Bruce Loxton. Does anyone have some photos of it and would be willing to share them?

Dorsetshire is sort of 3rd generation Kent class (Kent group = 1, London group = 2, Dorsetshire group = 3). This photo is taken from Raven and Roberts, Man O War 1: County Class Cruisers. It doesn't leap out to me that it would be easier to make the Airfix kit into this ship rather than Australia or Canberra.