Calling all Royal Navy V-class & W-class fans

[Laurence Batchelor]

Are you sure that you want to stick to the 1941 date?

I only see one AA gun on the searchlight platform, by Jan 1942 she has 2 and in the 12pdr is replaced by them along with the associated structure.
You can see this A & A at the top of the page below, although by the time of that photo (1942) the camouflage appears to have remained the same:

http://www.navy.gov.au/spc/history/ships/vampire1.html

[ar]

Do you agree that the ships has the same configeration for your just put up photo and the one from the Australian site?

[Laurence Batchelor]

Do you agree that the ships has the same configeration for your just put up photo and the one from the Australian site?

Same camo and fit apart from what I mentioned, one less 2pdr gun and the associated structure.

[ar]

I can see that I am going to have to ask for help.
Would others please come forward with their opinions on the two views in question.
Would especially like to hear from Mr Stoneman. He will agree with me I'm sure, otherwise .... no free drinkies for him at Telford in november.
I hold myself in readiness for all replies before proceeding.

[Graham Boak]

Can anyone suggest what is aft of the rear funnel in either photo?

[Tim Stoneman]

Blurred grainy photos - don't you just love them - and as for AR's suggestion of bribery and corruption at Telford - I'm not sure I've got sufficient evidence to make him splash out with the single malt, but I'll have a go!
As I see it, the AWM photo shows 2 guns (2 pdrs?) in single mountings on platform(s) at fo'c'sle deck level, with no indication of a larger weapon aft of them - although there would be room for one, but from the angle of the photo it would be obscured by the after superstructure. Only one high-mounted weapon can be seen aft of the funnels in the photo posted on the previous page (taken in Sydney, perhaps - anyone identify the port?), BUT if the mountings were slightly staggered, then only one would be visible from that angle (I've seen photos of other V/Ws with the guns staggered). LB mentions an AA gun by the searchlight platform (between the funnels) - I can't see one there. Without knowledge of the origin of LB's info that the 12pdr was removed in the Singapore refit or the provenance of the statement in the AWM caption, I'd go along with the idea that it was left in place, and the 2pdrs were in addition to, not in place of, the larger weapon (after all, at that stage, any weapon was likely to have been considered vital - even though hindsight shows that it would have been almost useless without proper fire control).

Bottom line - I think both photos are in the same configuration - ie 3 torpedo tubes, searchlight platform moved for'd, single 12pdr on the iron deck in place of the after tubes, and 2 staggered single 2pdrs where the old searchlight platform had been. There would have been room for this, even with the 2pdrs staggered, since the 12pdr appears to aft of the tubes' centre of rotation (using space made available when the mainmast was removed).

PS - no idea what the object aft of the after funnel is!

[ar]

Thank you Mr SToneman.
A double Malt awaits you at Telford.
The object immediately aft of the second funnel is a canvas covered crew shelter for the 2pdr gun crews.
The location of the private photo (starboard broadside angle) was taken at Singapore of Trincomalee.


So now young man, are you sure that you wish to stick to the 1941 date?
The broadside view is dated march the 4th 1942. So specific a date suggests that it is correct.

[Graham Boak]

Aft of the rear funnel. The object sticking skywards in the faded view may be a tug the other side of the Vampire, rather than a stocky twin-barrelled weapon, but there's a small object (or two?) in the same place in the AWM view, which may be Oerlikon(s)? If not, what would be placed there?

The weapons aft appear to be too long-barrelled for the 2 pdr, but I shall bow to your assembled wisdoms if assured otherwise.

[Gernot]

Hi all, I bought the Vampire kit today for 1000 JPY, pretty nice detail for a DD kit and lots of variations possible I guess, even just for this ship.

Boxart

Painting instructions

I'll add photos tomorrow (just taken earlier but not transferred to PC), and hope there'll be some discussion then.

My interest is in building Vampire as should was after her final refit in Singapore, that is, post-December 1941. According to the A.W.M. she carried a couple of 2 pdrs, several Vickers and twin Lewis MGs, as well as the 76mm HA gun included with the kit. I also have a photo, from a PDF file named No. 205SriLanka2005.pdf on finding the wrecks of Hermes and Vampire, that seems to show a HA gun in place of the aft triple torpedo tubes. Other photos show that there were twin guns on the bridge wings, these are probably the Lewis guns. Can anyone confirm positions of the 2 pdrs, any other weapons (Vickers?) and what about the tubes and HA guns.

Another issue is camouflage, apparent in photos. The Tamiya kit clearly does not depict Vampire OOB for the time of the Force Z fiasco.

[Gernot]

Here the instructions scanned:

Steps 1-6

Step 6

[Gernot]

Here is a photo taken from the PDF file I mentioned earlier, which says on the bottom of the first page Report�Department of Maritime Archaeology, Western Australian Maritime Museum No. 205. It is undated in the caption:

A wartime photo of H.M.A.S. Vampire

The 12 pdr HA is visible in the position where the aft tubes used to be, I cannot clearly make out whether there are other platforms aft of the funnel. There does appear to be a larger HA gun between the tubes and the 12 pdr, different from the position it is shown in on the Tamiya kit (aft of the funnel). Since it is with a much ticker barrel than the 12 pdr, would that be a 4" HA gun? Very confusing....

In another photo on the AWM website the twin Lewis guns in the bridge wings can be clearly seen, and as was mentioned in this thread, probably two 2 pdrs on their respective platforms aft of the funnel and one set of tubes.

I have also found a drawing about the sinking of Hermes and Vampire where the latter shows quad 0.5" MGs on the bridge wings and platforms aft of the funnels. Very confusing to be sure!

I hope this helps,
Gernot

[Gernot]

(Thanks Martin Quinn for merging the topic for me)

Here are some views of the kit parts:

Overall parts view, including decals and polycap parts

Another view of kit parts

And a close-up view of the decals:

Decals and some small parts

[Gernot]

Below are further pictures of the kit parts. First, the polycap parts and the B and X mount platforms which look very nicely done:

Polycap gimmick and platforms for B and X mounts

Further close-up of the B and X mounts:

B and X mount platforms

And the deck detail, put together from three photos:

Deck details

[Gernot]

Last set of pictures of the kit. The hull side detail:

Porthole and hull detail

hull.jpeg (10.95 KiB) Viewed 3995 times

The funnel details:

Funnels

And finally the torpedo tube and 4" gun mount details:

Tubes and gun mount details

[Filipe Ramires]

Fine model indeed. I guess a diorama of HMAS Voyager is in my project list.

[mike mccabe]

I'll bet there isn't one single model with so much conversion, variation and alternate colour scheme. Anything from backdated to WW1, through interwar, early WW2 before modifications, short range escorts, long range escorts, wair, the list just goes on, not to mention the whole range of camo schemes, you could probably, if so minded, build at a guess 200 individually different models from this kit. Now there's value for money.

Mike

[Quincy]

It looks like she will build into a fantastic kit. I can't wait to get mine. I'm still deciding on whether to der her in her Force Z configuration or her date of loss?




Bob Pink.

[Laurence Batchelor]

LB mentions an AA gun by the searchlight platform (between the funnels) - I can't see one there. Without knowledge of the origin of LB's info that the 12pdr was removed in the Singapore refit or the provenance of the statement in the AWM caption, I'd go along with the idea that it was left in place, and the 2pdrs were in addition to, not in place of, the larger weapon (after all, at that stage, any weapon was likely to have been considered vital - even though hindsight shows that it would have been almost useless without proper fire control).

Bottom line - I think both photos are in the same configuration - ie 3 torpedo tubes, searchlight platform moved for'd, single 12pdr on the iron deck in place of the after tubes, and 2 staggered single 2pdrs where the old searchlight platform had been. There would have been room for this, even with the 2pdrs staggered, since the 12pdr appears to aft of the tubes' centre of rotation (using space made available when the mainmast was removed).

PS - no idea what the object aft of the after funnel is!

Sorry as ever there has been a little misintreptation.
When I mentioned the searchlight platforum I was speaking of the original location of the searchlight platform between the 1st & 2nd bank of triple torpedo tubes, not the new positioned one between the funnels.
Hope that makes my earlier point clearer.

Please Tim & Alan re-read my 1st post on page 1 of this thread.
As I said there I encountered conflicting A and A information in the Australian sources I briefly checked with 3 different researchers all saying slightly different things about Vampire's AA fit.

I disagree that 2 x 2pdr would have been added in addition of the 1 x 3pdr due to top weight, these V/W's were already harking about with a lot of added ASW gear, some of which can be seen just on the quartedeck of my photo if one zooms in.
I believe If the 2 x 2pdrs were present in the photo I posted you would be able to see them as the AWM photo shows them clearly slightly offset. Also if you could not see both guns (say the angle was positioning the stb. side one infront of the portside one) one should still be able to see the associated 'bandstand' structure which they were cited on.
I see neither in the photo I posted.

My interpretaion of the AWM photo is your right Tim if there was a 12pdr still located in place of the aft tubes if would be masked by the aft superstructure making it difficult to see.
However, look at the photo more closely and we can see there is a carley float stored there in a raised position right where the 12pdr circular bandstand ought to be. Would that not rather get in the way? On the wartime photo I posted we can see it resting more forward against the original superstructure the single 2pdr is on. Thus I suggest it was resited aft due to the 3pdr being removed and the new 'bandstand' structure constructed to house 2 x 2pdr.

Thus I stick with my late 1941 date ar, before those A and A's were done.
Thank you though ar for clearing up what was just aft of the 2nd funnel, ws just a blurr to me!

I believe the photo to most likely having been taken in Trincomalee or Ceylon as the scenery strongly resembles photos I have from my Grandad who was based there for 2 years.

If I get more time this week I'll put some more photo's of Vampire up here and also any more decent V/W close-up ones I can share.
Cheers
Laurence

[mike mccabe]

I think a bit of digital manipulation clearly shows an AA weapon in place of the aft tubes. Although there is a carley float there, and what appears to be a gash chute, the 12 pdr appears to be on a raised platform so the float would not interfere.



By the way, Trincomalee is in what was formerly known as Ceylon

Mike

[Gernot]

I'm reading this thread and it is a little bit difficult to figure out which photo which description and discussions pertains to. The one posted in altered form in the previous thread (same as I posted from a Australian government museum report) shows the 12pdr clearly, yes, indeed. So can someone confirm what are the items on the platform aft of the tubes (one or two thick-barreled things), and fore of the tubes (two in parallel?)? And also, is 3pdr a misspelling? I did not see 3pdr mentioned in any of the Vampire specs on the web....

Regards and hopefully not adding to the confusion,
Gernot