The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 6:54 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Apr 18, 2022 3:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2020 12:46 pm
Posts: 38
This is an in box review of Triumph Models 1/700 waterline resin kit of the aircraft carrier HMS Glorious. Now I like aircraft carriers, but my stash rule limits me to ships that participated in Spanish Civil War neutrality patrols. The Royal Navy’s only carrier in the Mediterranean for most of that conflict was HMS Glorious so I was intrigued when this kit was announced. I was aware it had some problems with the lower flying off deck and some odd hull detailing but I thought it worth a go, those errors being correctable without too much effort.

The kit consists of a large single piece hull plus a flight deck with upper hanger deck moulded to it and 18 sprues, a PE fret and decal sheet. Well, I say 18 sprues but my kit was missing sprue H. However, most of sprue H are cranes or other stuff which has PE alternatives provided; annoying but not a major problem as I was going to use the PE and for the other missing stuff, I have suitable and probably better in the spares box. The instructions cover 5 pages of A4 and are adequate although one stage is repeated twice. There are no instructions for the PE nor any painting instructions. Overall, the kit is a very mixed bag frankly. Parts of the kit are superb, others, to be polite, disappoint. Really disappoint.

It is the hull that requires the work. Mine had a casting fault which meant the stern has dropped. Should be fixable without too much effort. I was aware the lower flying off deck is incorrect. It is modelled as overhanging the superstructure which stops at the forecastle. All the pictures I have seen show the sides were built up to the bottom of the deck around the gun platforms. This also makes the side profile of the piece that makes up the middle of the flying deck wrong, but the piece needs work anyway as the supports that rest on the forecastle deck are about 1mm short. I think these errors can be sorted relatively easily with filler.

There is some exquisite detail cast in the hull, which makes the clumsy wood planking on forecastle and quarter deck look poor. But most of these areas are out of direct sight so perhaps some careful painting will mitigate this. A bigger problem is the recessed plating and exaggerated raised lines that cover the hull. I have seen a couple of pictures that perhaps shows some raised lines but it is very subtle. The effect on this kit is not subtle. I have seen one photo which might suggest some of plating was recessed ever so slightly but this is really subtle. Quite why they decided to go to town on this recessing to the extent they have is beyond me. The effect, unaltered, is way too much and rather steampunk; quite a lot of careful scalpel work and some fine filler will be required but it’s going to be tricky and slow going to ensure you keep some of the other lovely (correct) fine detail.

Most of resin parts are very good, the island being a first-class piece of casting in my view. The 4.7” HA guns are very good as well, although the barrels on 3 had broken but they provide 20 and you only need 16. The boats are fine, I have seen better aftermarket 3d printed but hey are mostly hidden so I won’t replace them. The highlight for me are the wonderful crossbeams that support the upper hangar deck. But the few photos of hangar decks on 30s British carriers I can track down don’t show such beams so I am not sure how accurate it is. And the underneath of the resin elevators are also well detailed (but will never be seen) as is the lower hangar deck (unlikely to be seen). I was thinking you could model the two elevators in the lowered position to reveal some of that lovely detail but I hadn’t worked out what to do about the upper hangar deck which is just solid resin. Thinking about the hanger decks made me realise there are further major errors in the kit which has knock on impacts that will mean making an accurate model of HMS Glorious will be a lot of work.

A relatively minor error is that both Upper Hangar Deck (UHD) and the Lower Hangar deck (LHD) are set too high up. Both hangers were 4.9m high, which scales out to 7mm. The LHD was built on the old battle cruiser deck, and the UHD was at the same level as the lower flying off deck. Indeed, the UHD ran right up to the lower flight deck and there were doors which when opened allowed you to push planes onto that flight deck. As modelled the LHD is 6.5mm high (good enough for me) whilst the UHD is 7mm from the front elevator, which is where I suspect the problem has arisen. They have measured top down from the front elevator forgetting that the flight deck on Glorious was not level; it kicks up. At the rear elevator the UFD is only 4mm high, which is way too short.

The LHD should open up directly on to the quarterdeck post 1935 refit (which this kit depicts). Unfortunately the LHD is about 3mm too high for this. But prior to that refit the quarterdeck was one deck lower and there was a box like section of superstructure between the quarterdeck and the LHD. But it went when the quarterdeck was raised in 1935. Triumph models have added something like it back in one deck level higher than pre 35 to match the incorrect height of the LHD. This extraneous superstructure can be cut or filled away, but you need to replicate the quarterdeck wood planking and the rear 4.7” (I think) are now set to far back. All in all a right pain to correct. I certainly think that means an awful lot of work to model the Ship with the LHD shutter in the open position and/or with the elevator down.

Perhaps you could model the front elevator down – I doubt people will notice the hanger decks are too high – but you still need to reduce the negative visual impact of the solid UHD with some careful perspective painting or some very tricky grinding with a rotary muti tool. But that’s a lot of work and it could easily go wrong. Which leads me to the second major problem. The front of the UHD is the wrong shape. They have modelled the superstructure angling inwards like the bottom half of a capital A. In most photos this area is in deep shade and details are difficult to interpret. I also had a look at the model of HMS Glorious in the Fleet Air Arm museum. It is modelled with the hanger doors partly open which sort of mimics the kit’s configuration but without the joining piece of superstructure. So I can understand why they have done this but they are wrong in my opinion. If you search hard enough there are photos that show the UHD ended in two opening doors square to the ship’s side. And there are photos out there with one or both doors fully open (but never partly open like the FAA model). When open they seem to reach the crane uprights which makes sense to me. That odd shaped extension to the superstructure is just plain wrong. More delicate work with a razor saw beckons on both the hull and the UHD moulded to the flight deck.

For aircraft there are 3 Hurricanes, 3 Swordfish and 3 Sea Gladiators. Quite a few were damaged, mainly broken undercarriage but there are PE replacements provided. The Hurricanes are late war with cannons and underwing rockets so not correct for 1940. All 3 Swordfish suffer from drooping lower wings and I have seen better Swordfish in this scale. The Sea Gladiators look nice though.

The PE fret looks good but is slightly eccentric. You can make the 4.7” HAs from PE but you only have enough to do 8 and not the 16 you need. On the other hand you have enough PE for 8 octuple pom-poms but you only need 3. And you get 38 aircraft propellers and enough undercarriage legs for 30 planes. Nor do you get the observation and pilot platform either swung out or against the bridge. I think Triumph Model have launched a supplementary PE set recently which includes this but the rest of that PE sheet doesn’t interest me so looks like I will be scratch building it.

On whole the kit has some excellent details let down by some basic mistakes, the odd piece of clumsy detailing and mediocre quality control. I get the impression that it was released too soon and needed more development. But I like it despite it’s faults and it has leap frogged to the top of the stash queue. It just needs lots more work than I hoped. If I can be forgiven for this, I would say a courageous effort but one that falls short of being glorious.


Attachments:
20220303_160616_resized_1.jpg
20220303_160616_resized_1.jpg [ 27.52 KiB | Viewed 1298 times ]
20220303_160659_resized_1.jpg
20220303_160659_resized_1.jpg [ 22.55 KiB | Viewed 1298 times ]
20220303_161213_resized_1.jpg
20220303_161213_resized_1.jpg [ 33.67 KiB | Viewed 1298 times ]
20220303_160537_resized_2.jpg
20220303_160537_resized_2.jpg [ 136.16 KiB | Viewed 1298 times ]
20220304_082936_resized_1.jpg
20220304_082936_resized_1.jpg [ 35.67 KiB | Viewed 1298 times ]
Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Apr 18, 2022 6:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 8159
Location: New Jersey
Gcj wrote:
I would say a courageous effort but one that falls short of being glorious.

LOL.

Thanks for the review. I was tempted to get this kit, but will pass. Hopefully Flyhawk will put it into their queue someday.

_________________
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


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Apr 18, 2022 6:21 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:00 pm
Posts: 12138
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Perhaps sheets of styrene cut to size might be a quick/easier solution to fill the recesses than using putty?

_________________
De quoi s'agit-il?


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Apr 19, 2022 10:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 10:56 am
Posts: 8561
Location: New York City
Thank you for the review. A solid effort.

Quote:
I would say a courageous effort but one that falls short of being glorious.


A concise summation :-)


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2023 11:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2018 4:03 pm
Posts: 2
Location: Reno NV USA
I too took the bait after reading the story about the sinking of HMS Glorious in Summer 2022 MHQ's Ghosts Of Glorious article. My first impression was jut like Gcj's - a lot of detail in an ambitious resin molding, but many negatives. I had a spinner - the long hull was warped front and back, and am still trying to find the right combination of heating and cooling to keep it from returning to HMS Banana. I also had numerous mold release marks that looked like scars all over the hull and parts. Worse, test fitting the flight deck led to broken forward corners, likely because of the hull warpage. After setting it aside to finish an IMPSUSA review, I started again for an IMPSUSA paint set review.
Noticed that the resin pieces are very brittle and soft, a bad combination for handling.
Triumph Swordfish aircraft scaled out to 90% of actual dimensions, and looked small compared to old Aoshima Swordfish, which scaled to 96% length and 109% wingspan of actual dimensions. Gladiators and Hurricanes were 93-95% of actual scale dimensions. Detail of aircraft was excellent, and the tiny decals looked fine, except they were not the proper two-color for upper wing roundels. Be sure to cut out and cutoff extra backing on the decals - the whole sheet is a single decal. The biplanes had very thick wing supports. but am keeping them to show the incongruity of the details.
The bridge did not have the 1940 deckhouse, which is easy to scratchbuild.
Not looking forward to painting the decks under the overhanging flight deck - finally found a use for that bent-tip paintbrush.
Work in progress.


Attachments:
File comment: Starboard Forward Hull Mold Marks
HMS Glorious CV 299a020 1940 Triumph TM70001 Bucci Stbrd Frwd Mold Marks.jpg
HMS Glorious CV 299a020 1940 Triumph TM70001 Bucci Stbrd Frwd Mold Marks.jpg [ 181.77 KiB | Viewed 693 times ]

_________________
CaptainBringdown
Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jun 02, 2023 7:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 8159
Location: New Jersey
lukebucci wrote:
Work in progress.


Feel free to start a WIP thread over in the Picture Post forum. We have a section under there just for that type of stuff.

_________________
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


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2023 2:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2018 4:03 pm
Posts: 2
Location: Reno NV USA
Update on Triumph HMS Glorious by lukebucci:
Solved the bent resin hull by leaving it on a metal railing with two 20 pound dumbbells (one on each end carefully placed bow and stern with padding). That kept the hull flat. After a week of Northern Nevada sun and heat, it stayed flat!
Have some reviews to finish before getting back to it.

_________________
CaptainBringdown


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 6 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