|
All:
Below please find my in-box review of the Samek 1/700 HMS Exeter (1942), which arrived in the mail yesterday.
First, a note about references used: drawings showing wartime alteration and additions for Exeter were lost after WWII, so there are no reliable shipyard's plans for Exeter as she appeared in 1942, and this obviously complicated the effort to create an accurate model of Exeter as she appeared when lost. References used for this review thus included: official as-fitted plans (for hull shape and overall proportions, as Exeter’s superstructure was greatly modified during her wartime repair/refit); Alan Raven’s drawing of HMS Exeter 1942 in Norman Friedman’s British Cruisers: Two World Wars and After (part of a set of detailed set of drawings of Exeter 1942 that have not been published), and numerous photos of Exeter found on the internet and in various books.
Overall, the kit is very cleanly cast in cream resin and very crisply detailed. Components are cast on thin wafers. There are not a whole lot of parts, as the hull is cast in a single piece, with the lower levels of the fore and aft deckhouses cast integral to the hull. There is a small PE fret, a small decal sheet (which includes two white ensigns), and instructions consisting of a ship’s fact sheet, a parts list, and several photos of the completed model, unpainted, which shows where all the resin and PE components go.
I was surprised to find that complete assembly instructions were not included with the kit. The parts list stated that full instructions are available online, but a check of the Samek website revealed that it has not been posted yet. Note to Samek: include the instructions with the kit next time. It is bad enough to have to go online to get users manuals for laptop computers, cameras, and our cellphones—but now for models?!
The hull is a beautifully cast piece of resin, which measures out perfectly, length- and beam-wise, and the taper of the hull, fore and aft, looks good when superimposed over accurate line drawings of Exeter. The bow sheer line is very nicely done. The stern, however, lacks any sheer, which is incorrect, though this can be fixed with a bit of effort. Proportions-wise, the hull is a mixed bag, as the breakwater, ‘A’ barbette, and forward deckhouse are located about 1/8” too far aft (which will probably not be noticeable to most when the kit is built up). The location of the aft deckhouse and X barbette, however, are spot on. Portholes pretty much correspond what can be seen in photos of the ship from the period of her loss, and seem to be in the right location. The knuckle line is delicately done, and nicely rendered. Hawse openings are depicted without lips, however, and I wish that Samek would start portraying hawse lips on their kits, though this can be corrected using individual links from a small chain, molded with pliers into the correct shape. The lower deckhouse levels seem to be about the right height, when compared to drawings and photos, as does the bridge. I have not had a chance to dry-fit the upper levels of the aft deckhouse, so I cannot judge how accurate it is—at least heightwise. As for the configuration of the aft deckhouse, it was a very complex structure, and we lack details about its precise configuration, so it is hard to judge the accuracy of the model in this area.
Samek made a glaring error in portraying the catapults in a Y configuration, with a turntable in the middle. They probably relied on the IWM museum model of Exeter by Jullian Glossop, which is incorrect in this regard. After the refit, Exeter’s two catapults remained separate as before. But this error should not be difficult to correct—the superfluous components just need to be removed. If you have the skills to build this kind of model, you have the skills to remove the offending parts. But this was an unnecessary error.
Deck details (hatches and vents) seem to be a bit random in places, as they don’t always correspond to the available documentation (which isn’t always clear either). Winches and hose reels are greatly oversimplified, and those who are inclined to do so, should replace them with resin and PE aftermarket parts.
The bridge is cast in several pieces, and looks like it should build up nicely, but the main block bridge structure is a bit too long (cut about 1/16” off the aft section of the bridge and you should be OK). However, the navigation deck platform, which is a separate piece, is a bit off in a number of areas: 1) the main gun director should be located a bit further aft; 2) the aft end of the navigation deck platform should not be straight, but should angle slightly aft toward the secondary director platform (which is right behind the main gun director) and the flag lockers that lined the aft edge of the bridge deck are missing; 3) the port and starboard lookout positions on the leading edge of the bridge deck wings added after Exeter’s wartime repair/refit are missing, and; 4) some of the details on the bridge deck appear to be a bit random or conjectural . My preference would have been, if you don’t know what was there, leave it out.
The stacks look like they are the right shape and height, and have nice, integrally molded funnel grills. But the fore funnel has a small structure cast on its aft side for which there is no documentation, as far as I know, and so it should be removed. Likewise, the small structure molded into the forward side of the base of the aft stack looks a bit oversized as well, and as far as I can tell, should not extend as far aft as it does. Again, a bit of surgery should fix this.
The aft section of the fo’c’sle deck is cast separately, which simplifies the casting of the hull, but complicates matters for the builder, as it will likely be difficult to obtain a seamless transition between the two sections of the fo’c’sle deck—though this probably was a reasonable design compromise by the manufacturer. There is, however, a small gap between the aft edge of the fo’c’sle deck and the aft deckhouse which will need to be filled.
The main gun turrets are way undersize (length and width-wise)—perhaps as much as 20%. This is a major shortcoming that is obvious when one compares the turrets to drawings or photos. It is hard to understand how this happened, as the difference is size is quite noticeable—at least to me—when one compares the turrets to photos or drawings. And the gun tubs on A and X turrets should be located a bit further aft, though some modelers will want to replace the turrets completely with turrets that are the right size.
The PE fret is very basic. The catapults and crane look good, and match up well with available photos. But many pieces that should have been included are missing, such as searchlight platform supports, funnel platforms, and radar arrays. Ships rails are also not included.
In sum, this is a very nice kit, that can yield, out of the box, a respectable model of HMS Exeter. And it can serve as the basis for a reasonably accurate model with some additional work.
If you are not a purist, I think you will be happy with how this kit builds-up out of the box. If you are are a stickler for accuracy, you will find a number of things to criticize in this kit, since it includes a number of major errors (in particular, the underscale turrets and the incorrect configuration of the catapults). But with some work, it can be built into a reasonably accurate model--though given that there will always be gaps in our knowledge of this ship, who's to say?
At $75, however, I feel that the kit is a bit overpriced, given the amount of corrective work required to turn out an accurate replica, the fact that additional PE (railings, radar, etc.) will have to be purchased to complete the kit, and the fact that you have to go online to get the instructions. But at least we have a reasonably accurate Exeter 1942… finally.
_________________
Mike E.
|
Login
Register
FAQ
