Calling all Royal Navy "R-Class" Battleship fans!

[JAPS]

Hi

Does anyone have some plans for R-class battleships. Body line etc
thanks

[JAPS]

I have the profile morskie books for the Resolution & Royal Oak, would that work?

I have also
I have also original body plan but only frames. I m looking for rest of thi drawing

[thekz]

Hello gentlemen!
I would like to discuss with you the mysterious variations of camouflage for another forgotten hero of the Second World War.
Here is an illustration from the book ANGUS KONSTAM NEW VANGUARD � 154 BRITISH BATTLESHIPS 1939-45(1) Queen Elizabeth and Royal Sovereign Classes:




the caption reads: For example, in the late summer of 1940, HMS Revenge was painted in the camouflage pattern shown here, which was known as the Unofficial Disruptive Camouflage Scheme - Home Fleet. She continued to sport it until the summer of 1942.
This coloration is confirmed by several not very legible photos:





The camouflage on the roofs of the main battery turrets is interesting!

Please note that in the photo the main mast has already been shortened and a type 279 radar has been installed. So they do not belong to the summer of 1940, but to 1941. I could not find the exact date of installation of the radar. If anyone has any advice, thanks in advance.


Further - even more interesting. Great photo, probably known to many:



Usually defined as August 1941. Probably, the same scheme is shown in this photo (IWM A 1512), in any case, it can be seen that the roofs of the towers are not camouflaged:



only IWM is sure that the date of shooting is 1940 :think:
The only photo of the starboard side that I could find:



Which of the two schemes it belongs to is not clear.

This repainting of HMS Revenge did not end here, here is a photo of 1942:



Interestingly, the pom-poms on the B and X turrets are already installed, but the type 285 and 273 radars are not yet. I also could not see Oerlikons in this photo.
In short, please help!

[Chargerman]

I just have a quick question on HMS Royal Oak. I'm trying to find without much luck what model aircraft she carried before her loss.

[Mr. Church]

It was a Fairey IIIF as far as I know.

https://naval-encyclopedia.com/naval-av ... ey-iii.php

[81542]

Chargerman,

A very good question!!

Notwithstanding Mr Church's answer, you may need to do a little more research. The aircraft, if she embarked one at the outbreak of war, is likely to have come from 701 (Catapult flights) Naval Air Squadron. The only authority that I know of on the matter will be a book by the late Ray Sturtivant ISO who wrote one on the history of Fleet Air Arm Squadrons some years ago. However, it may only give details of the types of aircraft and not which one was assigned to the ship. To be more precise would be a matter of finding any "log" of the squadron: if it still exists, and doing a search. I suggest that you contact the Fleet Air Arm Museum at Yeovilton for further help.

I am fairly certain that the aircraft was not onboard when she was lost in October 1939, however, if she had had one then it was probably flown off to Hatston, the naval air station at Kirkwall, in Orkney, when she returned to Scapa Flow.

It is known that ROYAL OAK's sister, HMS RESOLUTION did embark a Swordfish at the around the time of mobilisation for war but I can't speak for ROYAL OAK, sorry!

Best of Luck with the quest: as quick as the question was!

81542

[dick]

A lot depends on what you mean by "before her loss". Royal Oak carried various types of aircraft during her lifetime.

However if you mean during September and October 1939 then the official record is quite clear:

- In the list of FAA squadrons and their aircraft allocations to ships Royal Oak does not feature. (Resolution does with 1 x Swordfish from 702 Squadron.)

- In the listing of ships particular details about them were recorded including whether or not they carried aircraft. Royal Oak is recorded as not carrying aircraft.

[Mr. Church]

All very valid points lads. No doubt the sources you suggest will lead to a definitive answer. I had just automatically assumed the question related to the time between her 1934-36 modernisation and the time of her loss.

RA Burt's British Battleships 1919-1945 lists Resolution and Royal Oak as having training catapults on 'X' Turret and a Fairey IIIF Seaplane under their particulars for 1939. Of course that could simply be an 'on paper' capability and doesn't necessarily mean the aircraft were actually carried.

Come to think of it I don't think I have ever seen a photo of Royal Oak carrying an aircraft between 1936 and her loss in 1939. Suppose it was a relatively short timeframe. So not to say it never happened. And no doubt photographing military equipment became trickier as security tightened as the war drew near.

In the end of the day it is your model and your choice. I decided to add the aircraft to mine. Must have been a training exercise on the particular day the model is depicted in 1937!

[tjstoneman]

The only photos I have seen of Royal Oak after her major refit with an aircraft embarked were taken in June 1937 and show a de Havilland Queen Bee on the catapult on "X" turret - eg https://i0.wp.com/www.destinationsjourn ... .jpg?ssl=1

[Mr. Church]

Interesting photo tjstoneman, thanks.

Found this one on Getty Images, showing neutrality markings being painted onto Royal Sovereign's 'B' Turret in 1937:

https://www.gettyimages.ie/detail/news- ... /675158881

Preview re-posted for ease of viewing, copyright remains with original owner:

[pascalemod]

Did Royal Oak have grey hull bottom like Hood, Warspite, PoW et al?

Or no one looked into R-class for this yet ?

[Octopus]

Hello

Because I just started to design my HMS resolution card model in scale 1/200 I'm looking for plans for shell platting drawings for hull.
Thanks for any help
chris

[Tracy White]

Did Royal Oak have grey hull bottom like Hood, Warspite, PoW et al?

Going to start my foray into this thread by resurrecting this post and hoping Dick has an answer....

I've long been interested in Royal Oak and have the new Trumpeter 1/350th scale kit on order and arriving shortly. Past experience with Ark Royal, Exeter, and Hood has taught me that Ships boats are often hard to determine, and Micromaster's 3D printed boats are an exquisite addition that's an automatic given for me, so I have spent the time waiting in researching. Using the HMS Royal Oak 80 Survey (2018-2019) (44Mb PDF) and HMS Royal Oak 80 Survey Ordnance, Munitions & Torpedo Damage (3.6Mb PDF) I have the following list as per PDF pages 61, 90 and 166 of the first reference, working fore to aft:

Aft of B barbette on the shelter deck

• 13.5' Balsa raft port side

Port to starboard just aft of the funnel

• 27' whaler in 32' cutter

• 35' power boat (35' launch referenced on P240)

• 2 x 50' Steam pinnace

• 27' whaler in 45' motor launch

• 32' life cutter

• 2 x 16' Dinghy in radial davits at the aft end of the shelter deck

Forward of X barbette on Forecastle deck

• 2 x 30' gigs with a faint ghost of another boat that was potentially removed (page 96)

There are also Carley Floats shown as just aft of B turret (P.61) and in the profile on page 270 that I haven't tried to identify the type and size of yet.

An initial survey of the assembled test shot shows that the 50' Steam Pinnace's either don't match Royal Oak's (photo on page 185 of the first PDF) or were potentially assembled wrong (hard to tell from the kit photo) and that the port side stack of a 27' whaler in 32' life cutter only has one boat.

The initial question or problem I am having is that there are several types of boat of the same length, and I'm not sure which is the correct one in

"35' power boat" on the plans could at the minimum be a 35' Fast Motor Boat, 35' Admiral's Barge, or a Royal Navy 35ft Motor Pinnace. Likewise, there are a couple of types of 45' motor launches; however Micromaster only has one that would work with another boat stacked inside so maybe that's an easy problem to solve.

With regards to the 35' power boat, I can find no reference that an Admiral was aboard Royal Oak and given her age that is something I could easily argue myself into believing. That said, I am not familiar with the Royal Navy and would much rather be told I have made a mistake before I attach a piece to a build than after.

Are there any comments or corrections to the above list if I intend to represent her at the time of her loss?

[dick]

Did Royal Oak have grey hull bottom like Hood, Warspite, PoW et al?

Going to start my foray into this thread by resurrecting this post and hoping Dick has an answer....

Whilst her ship's book with her docking reports does not survive, I have found one bit of evidence that Royal Oak's bottom was grey during the early 1930's. Given the normal policy and practice of continuity of use of the same make of bottom composition throughout a ship's life, if I was modelling Royal Oak as sunk I would paint a grey bottom (unless the survey report says/shows different. Does it?).

[Tracy White]

I had done a text search for "paint" and variations of anti-fouling with no useful hits.

I feel comfortable using grey based on your reply.

[81542]

Tracy,

Re: Your post of 5.31am Sun 09 Nov.

There was an admiral onboard ROYAL OAK at the time of her loss: Rear Admiral Henry Blagrove was lost with his flagship.

Concerning the boats. If the 35ft boat was the admiral's barge it is likely to have been a hard chine boat but at present I cannot advise as to what it might have looked like. However, the two images on Page 185 of PDF 1 should only be taken as a guide concerning what the 50ft Steam Pinnaces onboard actually looked like. My best advice would be to find a photograph of a common type of 50ft steam pinnace carried by one of the REVENGE Class and use that as an example. From what I know, that type of boat went through some changes in its superstructure during the time that it was in service.

Finally: from what I've read of PDF 1 to date, the Report was largely concerned with the wreck and it's state at the time of examination, though there was a lot of very useful interpretive material also in it. Because of that, the authors appear to have made no mention of the port and starboard seaboats (32ft "life" cutters) that the ship should have been carrying hanging from their davits.

I hope that this helps a little.

[dick]

Tracy,

I don't know if this will be detailed enough to be of any use to you, but at the Devonport Naval Heritage Centre there used to be a model of Royal Oak said (by the volunteer custodians) to be contemporary and said to have been made by dockyard apprentices. Compared to a builder's model it was quite crude. I don't know the scale but from memory it was maybe 4ft long. The port seaboat's forward davit had been knocked off.

[Tracy White]

Thanks 81542 and Dick. The mystery boat on that model matches up with the 35ft Fast Motor Boat, the other options that don't match in the configuration of the deck houses being the 35ft Admirals Barge and 35ft Motor Pinnace. That model does bring me to a question I had intended to get to, which is the appearance of the ship's boats during war time. The US Navy ordered ships boats to be painted in the same camouflage paint as the area of the ship they were outboard of, which caused some confusion early on.

Would Royal Oak's boats have been ordered into the same APC507B as the rest of the vertical structures, or would they have retained an appearance similar to what is shown on the Devonport Naval Heritage Centre model?

[81542]

Tracy,

To give you a "sort of answer" to your last paragraph: probably "yes" but. The last readily available information would be in Volume II of the Admiralty Manual of Seamanship (1932); which implied that local Fleet and Station Orders would lay down any restrictions on the colours of boats though ships were given a certain amount of latitude to follow their own tastes. Admirals barges, however, were exempt i.e. the admiral could do as he pleased as long as it did not clash with the scheme used for the C in C's barge!

From what I can tell from photographs, the boats of ships on the Home station in 1939, were all painted in the shade of paint applied to their parent ship; which was the grey in use (AP 507A) The larger "boom" boats in many cases seem to have had the bottom below the waterline painted white. Seaboats (the ones on the davits) were grey all over. HMS ROYAL OAK is likely to have followed suit. Admiral Blagrove's barge may have been in another scheme and if the Devonport Heritage Centre's model is near contempraneous with 1939 or was painted with someone having the necessary knowledge, one would not argue with the colours seen. One might argue with the type of barge shown though but proof as to what type of boat was actually being carried is currently lacking.

Whatever the case, because ROYAL OAK was sunk in mid 1939, it is unlikely that either she or her boats would have seen any changes in their colours schemes or in that of the ship any form of camouflage apart from the possibility of deception measures such as a false bow wave.

For your information though, have a look on EJ Foeth's "on the slipway" website: he has done a considerable amount of research into the ships' boats of the period and it is excellent, although I think he would admit that it is not yet exhaustive. I seem to recall that he also found a copy of the Admiralty Fleet Order giving instructions about the painting of boats but I could not find it when I last had a brief look: it may not have been published until 1940 though.

I hope this is of use?

[Tracy White]

I hope this is of use?

All information is of use, even if it doesn't immediately answer a question. I also recognize that we won't know the answers to all questions and past a certain point each builder will have to make some form of educated guess. But you have indeed given me useful information for my notes and I think you again! EJ's site was an early hit to see what I could learn. I'm sort-of working on a good mega post with lots of information and links, such as to EJ's site and specific pages, the Black Cat and Micromaster pages for specific sets, etc.