The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 4:40 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 332 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat May 30, 2020 6:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:41 am
Posts: 337
Location: Laurieton , Australia
Will, it is a quad Vickers, but it is Not Waterhen.
It is the strbd quad on the qtrdeck of Perth.


Attachments:
PERTH stern quads.jpg
PERTH stern quads.jpg [ 34.35 KiB | Viewed 3014 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun May 31, 2020 3:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 4:51 pm
Posts: 160
Location: Hill End, NSW, Australia
Brilliant thanks Brett, I thought I alread had all of Waterhens armament accounted for with my model then saw that captioned photograph,
Cheers, Will


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Aug 15, 2020 11:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 4:19 am
Posts: 128
hello everyone
I would like to know the types of craft present on HMS Vega in November 1942.
in advance, thank you for your help.
Best regards
Seb


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Aug 15, 2020 12:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 4:19 am
Posts: 128
Hello DavidP
HMS vega had a seaboat and a motor boat.
I am looking for the exact reference for each one.
Seb


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Oct 05, 2020 2:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 4:51 pm
Posts: 160
Location: Hill End, NSW, Australia
Hello Sebastien,
are you building HMS Vega?. I picked up a set of plans for that destroyer years ago to help with my HMAS Waterhen build, I can show you a proper image of it if you are interested, I will just have to dig it out from somewhere,
Cheers Will


Attachments:
IMG_5349[1].JPG
IMG_5349[1].JPG [ 197.97 KiB | Viewed 2642 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 04, 2021 11:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 8159
Location: New Jersey
Mike E. wrote:
And here are photos of HMAS Vampire from the film sequence mentioned in my previous email, in her dark hull/light upperworks scheme:

What color were her decks at this time?

_________________
Martin

"Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday." John Wayne

Ship Model Gallery


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2021 12:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:11 am
Posts: 6
Hello friends!

I have just came across this picture (see attachment) and I am trying to figure out what ship was depicted.
Attachment:
WWII at sea UK Destroyer Page105.jpg
WWII at sea UK Destroyer Page105.jpg [ 374.13 KiB | Viewed 2290 times ]

It is from The War at Sea in Photographs - 1939-1945 by Stuart Robertson, page 105. It was dated 1942 and attributed to a A-I class DD. However, the single capstan suggests V&W class, and as the book noted the roundel suggests an earlier date.

The argument for earlier day is also supported by the seemingly grey overall paint, the red corticene, and lack of modifications and refits.

I really want to learn more about the picture and maybe model it. But in general, I'd like to know when and where the roundel was used as IFF recognition. I had a hunch that it is likely a destroyer from the East coast or Nore command, as in coastal waters there are more needs for IFF and V/Ws are active in the area. But this is unsubstantiated and I'd really like to know what you all think.

Anyhow, I still believe this is a lovely pic to share and cheers!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2021 3:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:44 pm
Posts: 650
Location: UK
A CAFO of 2nd May 1940 refers to the decision to abolish roundels as a deck marking for recognition purposes with aircraft in the past tense ie it had happened by then. But I am unsure when these roundels started. I have photos which can be dated to late November 1939 and December 1939 showing such roundels.

As for where it is, few V&W’s were based overseas early war, but I think you could have found the roundel anywhere around the UK, and indeed further afield, not just off the East Coast. I have a December 1939 photo of the recognition roundel on a destroyer in the Caribbean. Puzzlingly though I also have a photo of the forecastle deck of an East Coast destroyer taken late November 1939 which does not have the roundel and another taken early January 1940 likewise!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2021 4:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:41 am
Posts: 337
Location: Laurieton , Australia
The short answer to the question of Vampire`s deck prior to Aug 40 when wearing dark hull light upperworks is `unknown`
Prior to Med deployment it is generally accepted that the RAN V/W decks were brown corticene. CAFO 200 issued Feb 40 posted several pages back in the thread instructs the removal of corticene and the application of Semtex when refit performed. Vampire was in refit at least twice before the application of camouflage scheme late July/early Aug.
Whilst it could be assumed her deck was painted grey sometime in 1940 it can not be proven. Given the obvious disadvantage of have a brown deck, a perfect target for high level bombing, there is no proof that the order was followed in any urgent fashion.
It is proven that by late 41/early 42 her deck was dark grey.
Another point to complicate this question is the painting done by Australian artist Frank Norton of Waterhen, whilst his paintings are contemporary and of accepted accuracy this painting has several anomalies which beg questioning, her decks are brown.
For the time period in question the application of either brown or dark grey can not be argued either for or against, it is impossible to distinguish what colour it was from B/W images.
As a perfect example if the colour image posted above is changed to B/W the brown is unable to be identified in any definitive fashion.
That particular image is unidentified and appears in IWM collection number TR94.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2021 9:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 8159
Location: New Jersey
Thanks Brett. Very detailed response!

_________________
Martin

"Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday." John Wayne

Ship Model Gallery


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2021 11:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 6:53 pm
Posts: 232
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Hi adsllyq,

Sorry, I do not know which ship this is but the IWM designation is: TR 94

Here is the link: https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item ... /205188235

Cheers,
George


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2021 8:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 4:51 pm
Posts: 160
Location: Hill End, NSW, Australia
Hello all,
does anyone have an opinion on the brown anti-slip paint used on the V & W's particularly in relation to HMAS Waterhen. I am applying the dark brown shade, having done the bridge, forecastle and rear superstructure and before I commit to painting the deck was wondering if anyone had any specific info on where the grey deck and brown antislip would have been put. There are alot of wonderful models with all sorts of deck paint. My model is the last two images so I am committed to the dark brown paint but where to put it down on the lower deck?
cheers,
Will


Attachments:
1-350-WW2-Destroyer-HMAS-Vendetta-V-Class-_1.jpg
1-350-WW2-Destroyer-HMAS-Vendetta-V-Class-_1.jpg [ 27.31 KiB | Viewed 2059 times ]
46405202_2407956912555024_8522831006514806784_o.jpg
46405202_2407956912555024_8522831006514806784_o.jpg [ 237.1 KiB | Viewed 2059 times ]
Model-5.jpg
Model-5.jpg [ 390.2 KiB | Viewed 2059 times ]
IMG_9405.JPG
IMG_9405.JPG [ 178.32 KiB | Viewed 2059 times ]
IMG_9403[1].JPG
IMG_9403[1].JPG [ 162.58 KiB | Viewed 2059 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2021 6:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:41 am
Posts: 337
Location: Laurieton , Australia
Will, given the current uncertainties concerning this topic, of particular between mid 40 to mid 41, it is unlikely you will get any opinions.
I will supply you with some prompts which may assist, but may also cause you extra heartburn.

As noted above, the reference to Waterhen`s painting by Norton has some anomalies. I don`t think he was there and has likely done the painting from memory and/or eye witness recollection.
He got the list wrong, has he got the deck colour wrong also ?
I would suggest you check the Gordon Hill collection, the ground tackle Foc`s`le was likely dark grey, but is it painted steel deck or corticene ? the centreline area was steel checkerplate.
The raised strips to my understanding not only aided the corticene attachment but would also provide foothold, so is their presence any guarantee that corticene is still laid ?
The decks would likely be all the same colour from the anchor Foc`s`le to just forward of X Gunhouse, from there the deck was a different colour, how far back that deck goes is unknown, it may possibly be bare painted steel. That layout was present on Vampire and also Vendetta so is likely to have been the same for Waterhen.
The prewar image of Vampire shows the X gundeck was the same colour, you must decide if it was still so in 41.
It is difficult to judge the DC rail qtrdeck area, was it corticene or painted steel decking through from the deck change forward of X gunhouse ? your call unfortunately.

Coconut matting was laid in traffic areas, what colour is wet coconut matting ?


Attachments:
VENDETTA, VAMPIRE DECK.jpg
VENDETTA, VAMPIRE DECK.jpg [ 398.2 KiB | Viewed 1974 times ]
VENDETTA COCONUT MATTING.jpg
VENDETTA COCONUT MATTING.jpg [ 116.86 KiB | Viewed 1974 times ]


Last edited by Brett Morrow on Tue Mar 02, 2021 6:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2021 6:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:41 am
Posts: 337
Location: Laurieton , Australia
Here is Vampire prewar, the deck sections in question reflect what can be seen of the deck in late 40.
The tones presented look close both periods, excluding variables there is not much difference between dark grey and brown corticene on a straight conversion.
Here also an interesting image of this section looking forward from the corner of X Gunhouse, its date is unknown.
The section behind the gunhouse where the division starts caught my eye, at first I thought it may be semtex applied with a serrated blade but it is actually coconut matting, eyelets are visible on the edging.
All up your questions are difficult to answer, you may have to bite the bullet.


Attachments:
VAMPIRE DECK, Prewar.jpg
VAMPIRE DECK, Prewar.jpg [ 307.79 KiB | Viewed 1973 times ]
looking forward strbd X gunhouse.jpg
looking forward strbd X gunhouse.jpg [ 355.41 KiB | Viewed 1973 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Mar 03, 2021 7:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:44 pm
Posts: 650
Location: UK
Another way to tackle this question is to look at the As Fitted plans for Waterhen. These are available to view online at the National Archives of Australia. You can see which areas were originally steel deck, which areas had Corticene (“Linoleum”) laid on top of that steel, and which areas had coir matting either over the Corticene or over bare steel. (The arrangement varied a bit between different V&W’s.) This link may or may not take you straight there: Digital Item Page Gallery (naa.gov.au) If not, using their Advanced Search option input the Item ID number 32368745 at the relevant box and click search, then click through to the digital view copy. Unfortunately the resolution is not perfect but I have found that by saving the image to my PC I can zoom in and just about read enough of the writing to make out “Extent of Linoleum” (ie Corticene), “Extent of Coir Matting”, and “Extent of Coir Matting and Linoleum” etc but beware of confusion with “Extent of Catch Netting”. (Vendetta’s As Fitted’s Digital Item Page Gallery (naa.gov.au) (ID 4994340) are much clearer and may assist in interpreting Waterhen’s plans).

The As Fitted’s date back to the construction of the ships. A legitimate question would of course be did the RN or RAN make any ‘structural’ changes to the original deck covering arrangements during the interwar years prior to the ships joining the Med Fleet in WW2? I cannot see why they would have done so but someone with extensive access to Australian photo collections may be able to prove that they did. The arrangements were similar on RN V&W’s. The problem with the coir matting though was that it was impermanent. Coir matting was notoriously difficult to keep lashed down as a sea would rip the lashings. You see numerous photos of bare steel ‘iron’ decks (the central section of deck past the funnels and torpedo tubes) on V&W’s which according to the As Fitteds were laid with coir matting. Has the coir matting been swept away by a heavy sea, or disintegrated through wear and tear and not yet been replaced, or in calm, harbour or peacetime conditions has the coir matting simply been temporarily taken up and stored away to preserve it? In the Gordon Hill collection of photos of Vendetta you will find images of her with bare steel deck at exactly the same area of the iron deck shown in Brett’s photo above laid with a strip of lashed down coir matting. Likewise areas where the coir matting was supposed to have been laid over Corticene often seem in photos of V&W’s to be just bare Corticene. There is even a peacetime photo which appears to show coir matting lying half folded up on Waterhen’s B gun deck.
Attachment:
Waterhen coir folded.jpg
Waterhen coir folded.jpg [ 363.03 KiB | Viewed 1939 times ]


Different people will interpret the evidence re Waterhen in different ways. I would suggest that the “ground tackle Foc’s’le” was bare steel (painted) as per the As Fitteds. I interpret the sun ray of metal strips and other individual metal strips in that area as tread strips rather than (the continuous runs of) edging/holding down strips associated with Corticene. I think Corticene would have been quite impractical in that area. It became very slippery when wet which would have rendered things treacherous for the crew during anchor work. Nor can I see it withstanding the heavy wear and tear it would have got in that location. I am struggling to think of any RN destroyer that had Corticene in that area.

Attachment:
Waterhen Norton.jpg
Waterhen Norton.jpg [ 235 KiB | Viewed 1939 times ]

Aft of that you are going to have to decide if Norton’s painting is evidence that when sunk Waterhen had some clean new golden tan-coloured coir matting (perhaps easy to procure locally in Egypt?) laid over large areas of her decks.The questioning of Norton’s depiction of Waterhen is partly because of the way he has coloured these decks but also because Norton painted her with a list to port. It is true that photos of Waterhen after the Army passengers had been taken off and she had been abandoned by her crew show her listing to starboard. But a couple of photos said to have been taken earlier (but after the bombing) with soldiers crowded on her decks seem to show her listing to port, as in the painting, and in the painting her decks are still crowded with khaki. The account of Waterhen’s sinking in “Scrap Iron Destroyers”, Lind and Payne, published by the Naval Historical Society of Australia in 1976 may provide the answer: After the bombing “The ship slowly lost way and stopped……WATERHEN was listing heavily to port and the stores began to slide down the sloping deck into the water. The troops on the exposed deck had shown great calm during the attack. They now assisted the crew to jettison the remainder of the stores on the port side and the ship slowly came on an even keel. However, the water pouring into her innards later caused her to list to the starboard.”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 10, 2021 2:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 4:51 pm
Posts: 160
Location: Hill End, NSW, Australia
Thanks gents for all of the info - invaluable.
.
Can I ask another question in relation to the hull camo - pls forgive if confusing. Brett, your wonderful model and digital image which have given me alot of inspiration, appear different to the photos of her sinking. From bow to stern it appears to me to be in this order: 507A, 507B, 507C with 507A below the B mount with 507C below that (with I22 in it), followed by 507B behind the 22, 507A, 507C below the whaler, 507A below the aft funnel, 507C below the quad vickers and torps, 507C, 507A below the 3 inch HA and up to the after superstructure and gun and the stern colours on yours look good, with 507A above and 507B below on the stern.
.
What do you think? Should I have another glass of beverage?
Cheers, Will


Attachments:
WATERHEN sinking.jpg
WATERHEN sinking.jpg [ 185.47 KiB | Viewed 1602 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 10, 2021 5:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:41 am
Posts: 337
Location: Laurieton , Australia
As we had discussed way back Will, the model was done in 2002, there was little reference available then and I had used a well known publication as reference which was incorrect.
The pattern on my model is basically correct but some colour swatches are not, there is also a waterline swatch of 50/50 aft of midships missing.
My interpretation of colours is per attachment although I feel the upper image has been enhanced, that of course is common in digital scans.
In 1941 507A/507B were one of the same, the 3rd colour is 50/50.
You have seen the port stern qtr image which shows in the first qtr of 41 the forward funnel had a 507A patch, that was painted out by April.


Attachments:
WATERHEN.jpg
WATERHEN.jpg [ 358.54 KiB | Viewed 1594 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 10, 2021 4:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 4:51 pm
Posts: 160
Location: Hill End, NSW, Australia
Thanks Brett, so is the 50/50 colour the same as 507B? like on your plastic and digital model?. That is what I have started painting it as on my model. I have changed my model so many times as I find more images, but it is enjoyable to update,
Cheers Will


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 10, 2021 6:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:41 am
Posts: 337
Location: Laurieton , Australia
A lot of research has passed since 2002 Will, there are several well written articles on Sovereign Hobbies webpage explaining the colours which you should read up on. Further research would suggest that no RAN ship was ever painted with 507B.
James may like to make comment as his description would be more precise, 507B before 1940 was a full gloss colour, A & B were the same colour but dependent on enamel content will present as a different tone/hue.
The colour I used way back in 2002 was the old WEM 507B. Dependent on how pedantic you are, if you had that colour it would be somewhere near 50/50. To be totally accurate you would use the Sovereign colour NARN 24. Australian distributor of Sovereign Colourcoats is Creative Models in Heathcote, the paints are enamel, Not acrylic.


Attachments:
WATERHEN COLOURS.jpg
WATERHEN COLOURS.jpg [ 8.98 KiB | Viewed 1688 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 10, 2021 6:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 4:51 pm
Posts: 160
Location: Hill End, NSW, Australia
Brilliant, thanks Brett, that makes a lot of sense now, I will go with those three colours,
cheers, Will


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 332 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 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

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