The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Fri Oct 19, 2018 11:10 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 86 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 11:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 9:41 am
Posts: 2051
Location: Monson, MA.
I know that there are already an E, H, class fans section. Lets do the rest of the class in this topic.
I am going to be converting using the Tamiya Electra kit into other ships of the class. I am planning on doing the Achates, Boadicea, Hurricane, and Icarus following the drawings in the new Shipcraft book on the A-I's.

Lets get the ball rolling. :big_grin:


Bob Pink.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 1:21 pm 
Offline
Starling Models
Starling Models

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 4:48 pm
Posts: 739
Location: North Wales
Hi Bob
I've said it before, but if there is another kit out there, maybe with the exception of the V/W kit, that could be made into more ships with just a little alteration then I'll eat my hat.

Good choice of ships there Bob, how about a Bulldog in overall Mountbatten Pink?

Hurricane in that camo scheme would look superb, I've been reliably informed that Codrington would have worn similar before her loss so that kills two birds with one stone for me.

Mike

_________________
Starling Models

http://www.starling-models.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 4:03 pm 
Mike/Bob:

Any thought about how one would convert the Tamiya E class destroyer kit to represent one of the an A-D, G-H class ships? Are there differences in length overall (I know the G-H class was a bit shorter overall than the E-F class), beam, and proportions (the interval between major above-deck features--deckhouses, bridge, stacks, etc.) for ships of these classes?

Looking forward to your thoughts on this matter.

Yours,

Mike E.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 4:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 5:56 pm
Posts: 1184
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Evening both and all,

I guess the lads are in a A-I DD models lately!!! :big_grin:
Myself working on converting an E class to a C class with Canadian flag (HMCS Ottawa I). The camo scheme is the 1940 Dazzle like the one used on Hesperus and other DD's during that time. Modifications don't imply much other then cutting the second funnel a bit; remove the second TT and put an AA platform for the 3'' AA gun; some minor changes on the bridge and usual stuff here and there. Nothing too fancy though the camo scheme is a small challenge indeed.
Bulldog is one of my faves as well...that 1944 camo scheme with her converted already to AS escort plus with the bow chaser...hmmm nice!! Though I would most likely have something in mind for her if I ever decide myself to which next A-I to build next!!!! :heh:
Regards,

Filipe

_________________
"Build few and build fast,
Each one better than the last"
John Fisher


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:23 pm 
Offline
Starling Models
Starling Models

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 4:48 pm
Posts: 739
Location: North Wales
@mike
I've only looked very briefly at proportional differences, the D, E and F classes (excepting leaders from all of this), were 6 foot longer, which is enough of a noticeable difference in 700 scale, the G-I went back to the same length (329 foot) as the A-C classes. So the E class kit would need a small reduction in size, don't ask me where it should be. Beam only varied by I think one foot, so not worth bothering with in this scale.

I'll be doing my next build of this model as Codrington, which was basically different to all the other ships and leaders of these classes.

@Filipe
Great to see Ottawa being built, I know you will do her credit. I think in terms of which ship to build, you just pick the sexiest name!

Mike

_________________
Starling Models

http://www.starling-models.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jun 09, 2009 1:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 9:41 am
Posts: 2051
Location: Monson, MA.
Don't forget to post works in progress Mike and Filipe of your builds. I would love to see them. :woo_hoo:

I have an old issue from SIG of Tim Stoneman's build of Icarus and Hardy. He used the Tamiya/Skywave O/P destroyer kit for these two builds. That will be a good starting point for myself when I build the Icarus in her minelaying role. I'll just use the E class hull instead of the Skywave one.


Happy converting everyone. :wave_1:


Bob Pink.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jun 09, 2009 8:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 3:17 pm
Posts: 860
Location: EN83
mike mccabe wrote:
@mike
...the D, E and F classes ...were 6 foot longer, which is enough of a noticeable difference in 700 scale, the G-I went back to the same length (329 foot) as the A-C classes.


The A, B, G, H and I classes were 323 feet length while the C, D, E and F classes were 329. The class leaders Codrington (A), Exmouth (E), Faulknor (F), Grenville (G), Hardy (H) and Inglefield (I) were each somewhat longer than their respective flotilla "regulars", and each of these were fitted with a fifth main battery 4.7" mounting.



:wave_1:

_________________
:no_2: Danny DON'T "waterline"...!


Last edited by RNfanDan on Wed Jun 10, 2009 1:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2009 1:18 am 
Quote:
Duncan was also the only leader of the groups built with 4 main 4.7" guns instead of the usual five.
- all the sources I've read indicate that KEITH (leader of the 'B' Class) and KEMPENFELT (leader of the 'C's) also had only four 4.7" guns, and were the same length as their respective classes..


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:50 am 
Offline
Starling Models
Starling Models

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 4:48 pm
Posts: 739
Location: North Wales
Dan
Yes you spotted my deliberate mistake.... As Tim did yours!

Now if only Tim would post one that I could spot we are all even, but that never happens!

Mike

_________________
Starling Models

http://www.starling-models.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2009 1:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 3:17 pm
Posts: 860
Location: EN83
Tim Stoneman wrote:
...all the sources I've read indicate that KEITH (leader of the 'B' Class) and KEMPENFELT (leader of the 'C's) also had only four 4.7" guns, and were the same length as their respective classes..


I feex, yes? :Oops_1:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 14, 2009 11:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 5:56 pm
Posts: 1184
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Greetings everyone,

I was looking here at photos of HMCS Ottawa (I) and noticed that at some given time during the war she had her Depth-Charge Parachute Device removed and replaced by two normal DC racks. My question is when was this device removed from RN and RCN DD's? Early war photos of Ottawa still show the device but then the photos of the version I'm building (late 1940) show no more presence of the device.
Cheers,

Filipe

_________________
"Build few and build fast,
Each one better than the last"
John Fisher


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:15 am
Posts: 258
Location: Athens, Greece
After finishing my HMS Starling, I am preparing for my next builds, which will be the WEM HMS Glowworm and HMS Havelock. While researching the subjects, I have come up with several questions. I hope the resident RN experts (or those with better references than I :big_grin: ) can enlighten me!

HMS Glowworm All the pictures and paintings I have seen show her in a single colour, which should be light grey AP507C.
The WEM instructions also show her in that colour and with a single black band or the second funnel, also giving the time frame as "1935-1940". The new Shipcraft book "British Destroyers A-I and Tribal Classes", however, has a profile of Glowworm in page 45 showing her in an AP507A/AP507C camouflage with a red band on the second funnel stating the time frame as "1940".
Could this be correct? It's the first time I have seen her camouflaged.
Also, in 1940, did she carry any sort of radar or DF?

HMS Havelock The WEM instructions depict her with a dark hull and light superstructure (AP507A-AP507C), without funnel bands, stating the time frame as "circa 1940", with 286 radar and DF. Meanwhile, Alan Raven's "Warship Perspectives -Supplemental", on page 13 has a profile of Havelock in a "modified three colour WW1 design" (black/507B/507C), stating the time frame as "late 1940". She wears one white band on the fore funnel and three black bands on the after funnel. The profile also does not depict any radar. Raven (Perspectives volume 1) also does not depict radar in a profile (page 11) of HMS Hurricane ("Late 1940 - upon completion") while radar is depicted in the profile of HMS Hesperus (page 35) in 1941. Moreover, the dark hull/light superstructure camo is shown (page 15) on a number of ships (HMS Laforey, HMS Sikh, HMS Lance, HMS Zulu) stating the time frame as "1941"
Am I correct in thinking that the three-colour camo pre-dated the dark hull/light superstructure one and that radar was fitted after 1940?

TIA,
Anthony

_________________
Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything.
Wyatt Earp


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 8:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:20 am
Posts: 1358
Location: Warwickshire, England
Hi Anthony,

My great uncle served on Havelock from her commissioning, working up at Portland; off to Norway, came back with one of the very last convoys to leave; rushed back down to St Nazaire and therefore was one of only 2 destroyers there at the sinking of the Lancastria and helped by picking up survivors. He then spent the majority of his time afterwards based at Liverpool and attached to Western Approaches Command on Atlantic convoy duty. He left in 1942 to go on a training course shortly before Havelock departed to become based in the Caribbean/US East Coast to help supplement the inexperienced ASW forces over there.

Where to start with Havelock and the WEM kit!
The box art and instructions are plain and simply wrong.
I helped WEM develop this kit, however they failed to speak to me before finalising the kit, therefore errors have crept in.

Havelock either completed at Cowes, Isle of White in the unofficial 1940 dazzle OR she received it whilst working up at Portland OR somewhere else in home waters prior to going to Norway. None of her still-surviving elderly crew members I interviewed could remember when precisely she got it. Additionally I have seen NO 1940-41 photos of her in any type of dark hull and light superstructure (AP507A-AP507C). The photos of her launching, I have, show her in light grey overall. I have no photos of her final-fitting out during 1939-40, although some may exist. She only was in a paint scheme which resembles the one on the WEM box by 1945 (then of course her armament and electronics differed dramatically of course) and during her last duties when nominated for Air Target Ship duty in the summer of 1945.
As some of the G-class coming back from the Med started to receive some wild camouflage schemes whilst working up at Portland in late 39/early 1940 Havelock's may have been applied there, but I have been unable to find any photos of Havelock as 1st commissioned at Cowes or shortly thereafter working up at Portland, despite visiting and looking through the collection of photographs from her builders and speaking to everyone who served on her who was still alive that I could track down.

The earliest commissioned photos I have located of her are in Norway May-1940 with the following features:
- 1940 Unofficial Dazzle in place
- No Pendant Number allocated (she had to wait for Wakeful H88 to be sunk at Dunkirk before she was allocated her pendant number)
- No DCT fitted and therefore main armament could fire only in local control
- Tripod mainmast still shipped and D/F atop it
- Obviously No Radar
- 0.5 Vickers fitted
- Aft funnel bands in place, and they appear to be the correct marking for the flotilla she was first assigned. i.e. the 9th DF which was 1 black over 2 white.
- She had some sort of French army Mortar rigged up on her forecastle whilst in Norway, but I could find no photos of it. This was most likely fitted to give her additional firepower in offering fire support for the French elite Alpine Mountain troops she was carrying on board which she landed during one operation in Norway.

The next photos I have of her, which I've dated as most likely late 1940 show Havelock as follows:
- DCT fitted
- Tripod mainmast landed and a small mast added on the back of the searchlight platform with her D/F atop it
- Pendant number of H88 now in place
- Dazzle scheme still in place
- 3-inch fitted in place of aft torpedo tubes
- Only 1 dark funnel band atop the aft funnel visible due to the angle of the photo.
- She appears to have a bent stem, which should help me better date the photo I have, but I could find no record so far of when she would have sustained this collision damage.

I have further photos taken from abreast the fore funnel, looking aft, (possibly taken in 1940) which clearly shows the funnel bands for the 9th DF in place of 1 black over 2 white.

To summarise on Havelock's Camouflage, evidence which has come to light so far has her in the following schemes:
- 1940-41 Unofficial 1940 Dazzle
- 1942-43 WA scheme
- 1943-44? Undated photos I have show her in a light grey overall with surface radar in place therefore perhaps they are of this period.
- 1944 - I don't have any clearly dated photos for around D-day which would be nice to know what she looked like whilst operating with the 14 DF out of Plymouth.
However, I suspect she may have been light grey overall as the undated and unidentified photos mentioned above I believe show the sinking of U-767 along with HMS Fame as it is unmistakably Havelock and Fame (due to pendant numbers H88 and H-78 respectably)
- 1945-46 Dark hull light upperworks

Her funnel band arrangement also got altered in 1942 when she was in the WA scheme as she became leader of B5 escort group in March.
The fore funnel quite expectantly got a large black band towards the top in order to denote her senior officers ship B5 / leader status, however the rest of the funnel below is further painted in 2 other different colours. I.e. the whole fore funnel is split into 'thirds': black top, unknown colour mid section, a lighter colour lower section. The mid funnel colour looks a medium tone, and the lower one looks a lighter tone.
The aft funnel is split into 'halfs' with what looks like the the same two mid and lower colours on the fore funnel used. I am uncertain what these colours were although the colour artwork in Hesperus profile hints that WA green and blue may have been used on the funnels of these 'Havants' when in the WA scheme and leaders of escort groups. Also note in that same Warship Profile by Peter Dickens that the colour artwork for Hurricane includes green which is different to Alan Raven's interpretation for this 1940 unofficial dazzle which he states is Black/507B/707c.
In terms of radar I believe Havelock got 286 some time in early 1941, I have the date written down somewhere, but don't have it to hand. A clear and rare photo I found of her in the NMM with Bob Todd is dated May 1941 clearly showing it is in place by that time.

In terms of Glowworm.
Note on this photo taken from the Glowworm website in the link called 'The Story in Pictures', she appears to have a dark grey hull by May 1939 at Alexandria:
Image
I have no way to verify though the websites claim about which ship it is and what date it is. It would appear she also suffered collision damage at another early war time period. I have another undated photo which is stated to be Glowworm in dry-dock with bow collision damage, and again her hull looks dark grey.
There is also another strange photo labelled Glowworm here:
Image
No idea if that is her as I haven't really studied the photo, but note immediately around the bridge and forecastle it looks rather peculiar.
For example, I see no A mount, B mount looks too close to the bridge and the bow looks too short. Perhaps she has temporary collision damage repairs and is in some sort patched up state and being towed by the destroyer behind? Anyway I digress.

Someone mentioned on Steelnavy about the Glowworm artwork in the new Shipcraft book, therefore I managed to pick up a copy cheap so I could take a look.
There appears to be numerous errors in the book, for example, the widely circulated colour photograph of Hesperus on p48, from the Canadian archives, this book has reproduced full-page and labelled as Harvester!
I could forgive the author or editor if no pendant number was visible or if the photo was of poor quality, but H57 is clear and unmistakable as is the quality of the photograph in general!
Another I noticed was for the only photo in the book which was new to me, namely top left on p55 and stated to be Ardent in camouflage worn during 1939-40 whilst on Russian convoys, courtesy of Deans Marine.
Strange I thought....Russian convoys didn't begin until well after she was sunk in Sept-1941! However it may well be Ardent in an official 1940-dazzle type, but the photo is reproduced so small it is hard to verify.
I have subsequently noticed the same photo has been posted here by a relative, confirming it is Ardent, but of course the Russian Convoy caption in the book is an error:
Image
Such errors therefore cast a large doubt in my mind if other similar errors haven't crept into the book including the Glowworm camouflage. The plans and colour artwork is attributed to a George Richardson.
Who is he please? Can anyone say what his background is? Did he base his artwork on good photographic evidence?
I know Les Brown use to work for Vosper Thorneycroft and have met him at Telford, but the artist is new to me.

As I stated on the Steelnavy board without photographic proof it is hard to back up this Glowworm artwork, although what has been drawn it perfectly feasible as is the colours used at this early war time.
She is such a famous ship I would be surprised if she was in camouflage and yet no photo has been published, to my knowledge, confirming this.
Furthermore other G's received unusual camouflage schemes upon returning to the home fleet at the beginning of the war, so again it is quite possible. However, I have only seen her in a dark grey hull light upperworks and the various photos of her sinking, as taken by Hipper are of too poor quality to be certain as to how she is painted.
In terms of her radar, no none present at time of loss. D/F I am uncertain. Really need better photos than I've seen.
Red funnel band on aft funnel I can confirm there was 1 funnel band on her aft funnel when sunk which was also there pre-war.
Pre-war she was with the 1st DF Med which according to my Jane's 1939 had 1 red funnel band.
She then transferred to the 22nd DF in Nov 1939 which was not in operation pre-war so I'm uncertain if they wore a funnel band and what it was. I have extensive notes on funnel bands somewhere, but cannot at present locate it and as there was many flotillas I can never remember them off the top of my head.
Glowworm then transferred back into the 1st DF in March 1940, after repairs from collision damage.
Remember on the whole the whole pre-war flotilla organization and funnel markings system started to get discarded as destroyer losses increased, camouflage was applied and flotilla's got broken up and highly dispersed. However it would appear she still had 1 funnel band at the time of her loss.

My apologies for a long post, but obviously, with Havelock especially, this is something close to my heart.
Alan Raven is correct when he keeps bleating on that RN destroyer wartime appearance is a treasure trove yet to be properly researched!
Time for lunch!
LB

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 10:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:38 pm
Posts: 257
Laurence
Thank you for your response and for taking the time to prepare it. I have the A - I Shipcraft book and will be doing a WEM G or H as one of the RCN vessels represented in each of these classes. As always I appreciate your very informed comments.
Best Wishes, George


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 11:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 10:26 am
Posts: 1684
Location: The Netherlands
Laurence, regarding the 'peculiar' photo of Glowworm, I think we're looking at pre-WWI Torpedoboat No 7, with a turtleback bow and an 'flying' gun platform, with tarps covering the sides of the bridge structure. Jane's lists her as Thornycroft Torpedoboat no 7, originally called Glow-worm. Built 1906.

_________________
If all else fails, a complete pig-headed refusal to see facts in the face will see us through. - General Melchett


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 2:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:20 am
Posts: 1358
Location: Warwickshire, England
Thank you all and thank you Michel for clearing up that little peculiarity.
As soon as I am more settled and financially more stable I hope to publish some bits n bobs on various A to I's.

George one area which seems to be elusive to find information on for the RCN A to I's is deck coverings!
Filipe is doing Ottawa as per 1941, in one of these 1940 dazzle schemes, and between him, me, Alan Raven and Darren Scannell no one seems to have information what was present when/if it was used.
Do you have any good information on semtex usage on RCN A to I's for example? In the RN it seems to have been applied when first building the Tribals and I-class.
LB

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 7:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:38 pm
Posts: 257
Laurence I do not know anything about semtex use in the RCN but will keep a look out. My RCN resources are mainly published history such as Marc Milner's books, the recent official RCN history series now under way (Vanwell publishing), several MacPherson books, and much corvette material. All in all, I have about 30 books in total covering the RCN and modern naval CF. Darren may have these as well but I may be able to fill some gaps just the same. I just checked the indices of the most likely books for "semtex" and came up empty. I will keep a lookout in any case. Best Wishes
George


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jun 17, 2009 5:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:20 am
Posts: 1358
Location: Warwickshire, England
Cheers George,
I have many of the MacPherson books, who I would have thought would have been the most likely Canadian author to outline deck coverings usage in the RCN as his books tend to be about the warships themselves, whereas I find what Milner, Douglas, Sarty, and Whitby write is more WW2 operational stuff.
Thanks
LB

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 5:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:44 pm
Posts: 439
Location: England
Laurence,

To my mind this photo is of good enough quality to confirm that Glowworm was in light upperworks/dark (prob medium grey) hull scheme in 1940....


Attachments:
Gloworm.jpg
Gloworm.jpg [ 112.7 KiB | Viewed 4433 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 6:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:20 am
Posts: 1358
Location: Warwickshire, England
Hi dick,
That is a clearer copy than I have and yes I am happy that is how she was painted when sunk.
I'd be interested to see where this 'evidence' for Glowworm in camouflage is.
Is it implied she wore it only in the winter of 1939/40 and then repainted?
Cheers
LB

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 86 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 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