Dan,
Upon looking at various online articles about the
C and D class destroyers, while comparing them to the
E and F class, it seems the former was not that different from the latter.
Both had the same length at 329 feet. In spite of the collage you posted,
I would insist that the main difference I observed among both groups of classes, other than the differences in AA suite, was the C & D classes had two portholes on their bridge/wheelhouse, while the E and F classes had 3 portholes.
The bridges of the D, E and F are pretty much identical save for the differences in portholes.
The C class is slightly different because of the small overhang above the portholes, but one can simply modify the corresponding part on the Tamiya E class kit to rectify that small difference.
Other than that, the bridge superstructures of all 4 classes were pretty much identical from what I can see.
This is after searching through pics of many class members in all 4 classes that had been transferred to the RCN.
Just thinking that I really can use Tamiya's E class kit not only to model the identical F class DDs, but C and D class destroyers as well.
To model the C class and D using the Tamiya's E class kit, one would have to replace part G23 from the kit's instructions. That part has the bridge wheelhouse front with the 3 portholes. If one can scratchbuild their own part which has 2 portholes, then you're home free to make any of the C and D class destroyers.
*On a sidenote, the
G and H class destroyers' bridge/wheelhouse were identical to the preceding E and F class since they also had 3 portholes, but they were smaller at 323 feet. If you wanted to make any G and H class destroyer from the Tamiya E class kit, you'd have to shorten the hull somehow.
RNfanDan wrote:
The C and D classes each had different bridge configurations than the E&Fs, as well as distinct from all others. This was especially true for the Cs, which featured separate director and bridge structures, with a gap between. The Ds also had a distinctive wheelhouse window arrangement. Other differences can be found in each class' "wing platforms" and deck extensions, support frames, and locations.
While it is best to research each of the earlier classes for details, I did put together a collage of the various groups' bridges, a few years ago. I have included it with this post. I hope it proves useful, but please bear in mind that my intent was to highlight the different features for the purpose of helping to identify "mystery ships" and/ or uncaptioned photographs---not modeling requirements.
Still, it should give you an idea how they differed from the E&Fs. Also noteworthy is that the "leaders" of some RN destroyer classes were noticeably different from their flotilla "regulars", so modeling those specific ships may require further and more significant modifications (fifth 4.7" gun mountings between the funnels, for example).
Regards,
Dan