The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Mon Oct 22, 2018 4:46 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 250 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Nov 26, 2017 3:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:41 am
Posts: 172
Location: Laurieton , Australia
We have pretty much covered the DC arrangements of all 3 operators of the class.
The one omission on the topic has been HMAS Bataan.
Commissioned before wars end, but too late for any action, she was fitted with MK IV`s as built.

She appears to be unique in stowage fit, as 2 extra racks were fitted, port and starboard, presumably 2 canisters per rack.
These were present for only a short time, the blue circle identifies them, the red arrows show the rack and loaded MK IV thrower.

Maybe of interest, and not mentioned previous, the 6 canister Mk IV rack was positioned close to the thrower, the upper/outer canister was pushed straight into the thrower cradle, the racking mechanism them moved the next canister into the outer load tray for next reload, a bit like a carousel.
Cheers.


Attachments:
Bataan spare DC racks.jpg
Bataan spare DC racks.jpg [ 81.38 KiB | Viewed 1926 times ]
Bataan, June 45.jpg
Bataan, June 45.jpg [ 54.09 KiB | Viewed 1926 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Nov 26, 2017 9:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 1:00 pm
Posts: 582
Location: Bowmanville, ON, Canada
Here's a pic of HMCS MICMAC's Props in 1961. So far the only Tribal Prop image I can find.

Image

_________________
Darren (Admiral Hawk)
In the not so tropical climate of the Great White North.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Nov 26, 2017 10:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:41 am
Posts: 172
Location: Laurieton , Australia
Thanks Darren, a rare find.
I also managed to find this shot of Arunta, props are hard to make out, but I can just distinguish the blade pitch.
They appear to match the pitch in your photo also, but I feel there may be an anomaly here.

Both shots do NOT appear to match the blade pitch of the Haida display as presented, what do you think?


Attachments:
Haida props.jpg
Haida props.jpg [ 176.26 KiB | Viewed 1872 times ]
Arunta, Garden Is..jpg
Arunta, Garden Is..jpg [ 159.8 KiB | Viewed 1872 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Nov 27, 2017 6:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 1:00 pm
Posts: 582
Location: Bowmanville, ON, Canada
I think the Haida display is random. It was moved when the ship was moved from Toronto to Hamilton a few years back and I do not think they were side by side in Toronto, but I could be wrong.

_________________
Darren (Admiral Hawk)
In the not so tropical climate of the Great White North.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Nov 27, 2017 12:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:41 am
Posts: 172
Location: Laurieton , Australia
I had pondered awhile on the propeller orientation, and had contacted the museum about the display, unfortunately no response.
There is no question that the orientation of the 2 photos is correct, if the Haida display is actually as it appears on various sites, I am surprised they have made a fundamental error.

They have the props arse about, and the prop on the right is actually the port, the left is starboard.
So far, the Arunta shot is the only complete stern photo to show a tribal in drydock with props intact, here is an enhanced crop of the props, showing correct orientation and blade pitch.

Perhaps a small issue, but if someone is building a full hull model of a tribal, wouldn`t you want to get it right?
All the best


Attachments:
tribal props.jpg
tribal props.jpg [ 102.72 KiB | Viewed 1824 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Nov 27, 2017 7:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 1:00 pm
Posts: 582
Location: Bowmanville, ON, Canada
Brett Morrow wrote:
I had pondered awhile on the propeller orientation, and had contacted the museum about the display, unfortunately no response.
There is no question that the orientation of the 2 photos is correct, if the Haida display is actually as it appears on various sites, I am surprised they have made a fundamental error.
They have the props arse about, and the prop on the right is actually the port, the left is starboard.


I finally found a photo of the Props before they were moved from Toronto to Hamilton. They were indeed switched around when moved. The Shorter one is closest.

Image

Regarding making an Error, keep in mind that the only reason the ship was saved, is that a few sailors took it upon themselves to purchase and move the ship to Toronto. It was cleaned up and kept going by volunteers for many years. It had weapons and gear from WWII mixed with 50s and 60s mods. Even the number painted on the side was her WWII Pendant on top of the Postwar Grey. The guys looking after her weren't too interested in whether the props on display were oriented correctly. Heck, they weren't even the same height!

When the ship was fixed up and taken to Hamilton, efforts were made to keep it accurate to the 50's, but still some mistakes were made. I doubt anybody knew which way the props were supposed to go.

_________________
Darren (Admiral Hawk)
In the not so tropical climate of the Great White North.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2017 12:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 08, 2013 12:17 pm
Posts: 34
Location: BC, Canada
Guys:
I've been struggling with RN colors to paint Haida in 1944 - Im sure this is common !

Munro plans states 3 colors:
'Off-white' - obviously RN off-white
'Mid grey-green' - which must be G20 ? Wouldnt be the 'warm grey' G45.
'Pale blue', - which must be B30 ? Or is it B55 ?

I know that these ships were painted 'Special Emergency Fleet Destroyer Scheme' which is typically G20, G45, B30 & white. Most models of Haida are painted in a 3 color scheme looking like G20 & B30 & white.
Question is, why was Haida painted in just 3 of these colors, not the standard 4? And what were the colors? Maybe her scheme was a one-off?
Any comments are welcome


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Feb 13, 2018 4:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:41 am
Posts: 172
Location: Laurieton , Australia
Going back, the Haida props orientation question may go someway to be answered, by the reply received from the museum.

The props are 10 ft 6" in diameter and have a pitch of 13 ft 1". The prop as it is on the jetty is seen from the hull side not the cone. Going forward, the tops would turn towards each other. Not entirely sure which position is on the dock for port or starboard.
Team Haida

Also, going back further to the DCT discussion, further investigation reveals my incorrect identification of DC stowage racks on Bataan.
These were in fact, squared balsa carley floats, to put the record straight.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 11:26 am 
Offline
Regia Marina
Regia Marina
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 2:08 am
Posts: 384
Location: Roma - Italy
Ciao to all,

For the HMS MOWAHK, the armament remained unchanged in 1941 or had it undergone modifications and had the radar on board?

Thanks
Giampiero


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 3:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 1:42 pm
Posts: 15
I am building the WEM Eskimo kit as HMS Tartar in mid 1944. I have several photos of the ship and it appears that the original fit rangefinder was replaced by an HACS director. Can someone verify that this was done, my research found no information. If an HACS was installed, what Mark director was used?
Thanks,
Doug


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 5:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:41 am
Posts: 172
Location: Laurieton , Australia
In 44 Tartar`s rangefinder turret was a MK II W, her fire control was the later Mk 285 array which consisted of 3 parabolic reflectors each housing 2 seven element yagi booms. If you look back in the thread I have posted a couple of shots of the array.
Her earlier 285 array in 41 consisted of 2 double and a single central reflector, they were a different setup.

The attachment shows her 285 array, and damage sustained in 06.44 action., by this time she had been fitted with lattice foremast.
She is fitted with a 291 X antenna atop the masthead, the smaller parabolic RDF looks like a 268, the image also shows a 253 IFF hourglass antenna.

If you are pondering what the circular objects are on the main yardarm?
They are lantern hoods fitted over the fighting/signal lights to help conceal their illumination from the air.
Many ships by that time had been fitted with these lantern covers, including lower shades, see the attached image.


Attachments:
TT 44.jpg
TT 44.jpg [ 126.65 KiB | Viewed 865 times ]
LANTERN HOOD.jpg
LANTERN HOOD.jpg [ 26.12 KiB | Viewed 865 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 6:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:41 am
Posts: 172
Location: Laurieton , Australia
Closer study of the 44 image reveals she was also fitted with a 242 IFF antenna.
Most ships by that time were fitted with several different IFF aerial array.


Attachments:
242 (2).jpg
242 (2).jpg [ 47.94 KiB | Viewed 858 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 02, 2018 3:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 1:42 pm
Posts: 15
Thanks Brett. I will make a director and radar array to fit on the rangefinder tower part of the kit.
Regards,
Doug


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2018 7:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2018 7:23 am
Posts: 1
Location: St Catharines, ON, Canada
While researching where to end the antifouling and paint waterline marks for my restoration project of a scratch built 1:72 HMCS Athabaskan, I dug these out of my father's drawing tubes. These are portions of drawing 3S Docking Plan specific to Athabaskan. Scale is 1/4" to 1'


Attachments:
File comment: Portion of drawing 3S Docking Plan
IMG_20180719_074214.jpg
IMG_20180719_074214.jpg [ 51.53 KiB | Viewed 524 times ]
File comment: Portion of drawing 3S Docking Plan
IMG_20180719_074230.jpg
IMG_20180719_074230.jpg [ 75.19 KiB | Viewed 524 times ]
File comment: Portion of drawing 3S Docking Plan
IMG_20180719_074455.jpg
IMG_20180719_074455.jpg [ 48.01 KiB | Viewed 524 times ]
File comment: Portion of drawing 3S Docking Plan
IMG_20180719_074529.jpg
IMG_20180719_074529.jpg [ 81.28 KiB | Viewed 524 times ]

_________________
HMCS Athabaskan G07 1:72 Scratch built
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2018 6:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:41 am
Posts: 172
Location: Laurieton , Australia
The bow drawing is of interest, I had previously pondered the circular equipment.
Separate to the retractable 144Q Asdic pod, some Tribals were fitted with them, while others were not.
The Australian ships Arunta and Warramunga were not fitted, but Bataan was.
The use of the word `Oscillators` would indicate `Fessenden` diaphragms, and A/S could pertain to `Acoustic sweep` for acoustic mine sweep.
But A/S could also relate to Hydrophones, Can anyone provide more detailed information?


Attachments:
WARRAMUNGA.jpg
WARRAMUNGA.jpg [ 113.13 KiB | Viewed 482 times ]
BATAAN.jpg
BATAAN.jpg [ 43.09 KiB | Viewed 482 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Sep 01, 2018 2:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3169
I have a question about what camo scheme (paint) that HMS MATABELE was painted with in this photo. From what I can find on her war record, this image (pardon the miss spelling of her name) was taken prior to her refit starting in May 1940 and lasting to early August 1940. At that time her her #3 twin 4.7-in mount was replaced by a twin 4-in mount and she had a Type 286 radar installed. It appears that at the time of this photo, she has a HFDF array installed at the top of her foremast.

The paint in this B&W print appears fairly light, but that can be deceptive.

I read through this thread and found no clear reference to her camo for the pre-May 1940 period.


Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Sep 01, 2018 7:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:41 am
Posts: 172
Location: Laurieton , Australia
Rick, as you correctly pointed, pre May 40.
X turret still 4.7, 6th flotilla band, I believe 507A overall.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3169
I'm not very familiar with RN camo paint (too many paints and apparently little agreement on what colors a particular ships wore), but isn't 507A suppose to be quite dark?

HMS MATABELE in this photo looks more like a lighter shade. I was thinking 507B or 507C or a light-medium blue.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2018 1:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:41 am
Posts: 172
Location: Laurieton , Australia
Yes Rick, she does look a lighter shade, but we have been down this road a number of times about how variables can greatly influence our visual perception.
I know you have your finger on the pulse, but have you read James Duff`s latest work on the 507 series?
507A & B were apparently the same colours, with the enamel omitted from 507A, both were listed as Home fleet Grey.
The colour debate on RN/Admiralty colours has become quite contentious, if not at times a little confusing, and I prefer to step cautiously when partaking discussion.

My understanding is, in 1940 destroyers of the 6th Tribal flotilla were Home fleet grey 507A, some shots of Matabele around this period display her somewhat lighter while others present her dark, even after returning from refit she still appears quite dark overall.
It all comes down to the variables, which can also include image manipulation, original photo exposure plus all the others combined.
I don`t think anyone is in a position to say without question that she is one colour or another.

The attachments show her early 39, she wears the band of the 2nd Tribal flotilla, she looks somewhat lighter than 507A.
The second attachment shows her early 40, she wears the band of the 6th flotilla, she presents quite dark.
All the Best


Attachments:
MAT early 39.jpg
MAT early 39.jpg [ 91.01 KiB | Viewed 192 times ]
MATABELE, early 40.jpg
MATABELE, early 40.jpg [ 126.46 KiB | Viewed 192 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2018 9:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:12 pm
Posts: 1920
just the background of those 2 pictures nevermind the destroyer in both are not the same color wise.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 250 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Flying Toaster, Google [Bot], Maarten Schönfeld 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