Calling all King George V-class (WWII) fans

[RNfanDan]

Lots of great people here with lots of useful information. Rich

Yes....and even a few of us miscreants

[Zack]

What colour's was Prince of Wales painted in when she was sunk?

Raven & Roberts BB book shows a 5 colour scheme that is different to the Force Z website which shows a 4 colour scheme. Which is right and what were the actual colours?

[Richard Durham]

The exact camo scheme and colors for POW at time of loss are frequently debated questions. I am no expert, but I did a little research for a POW build. There are two good pictures of POW pulling into Capetown South Africa on her transit to Singapore, showing both sides of the ship. It sure looks like POW is still in the 5 color scheme and has the white band on the aft funnel. Many say that the MS3 color was painted out prior to her loss, but the MS3 color appears to still be on the ship when she stopped in South Africa just a few weeks prior to her loss. Also, many builders get the stbd side camo scheme wrong (as did Tamiya in their POW painting guide) because it is hard to find good pictures of the ship's stbd side in the First Admiralty Disruptive Scheme.

I am currently building the 1/700 Tamiya POW kit and am using the following color mixes with Model Master Acryl paints:

MS1 Dark Blue Black: 4226:2+4241
MS3 Medium Grey Green: 4759+4256+4693:3
B5 Medium Blue Grey: 4761+4744
B6 Light Blue: 4202:2 +4788
507C Admiralty Light Grey: 4762+4766:2
Teak: 4720:5+4722:5+4846:1

4226 � MM Marine Sea Blue AN623
4241 � MM Marine #5-N Navy Blue
4759 � MM Acryl Light Sea Gray FS 36307
4256 � MM Marine Aircraft Carrier Type 21
4693 � MM Acryl Aircraft Gray FS16473 (G)
4761 � MM Acryl Dark Ghost Gray FS36320 (F)
4744 � MM Acryl Intermediate Blue FS35164 (F)
4236 � MM Marine #5-L Light Grey (early 1941)
4762 � MM Acryl Light Ghost Gray FS36375 (F)
4766 � MM Acryl Camouflage Gray FS36622 (F)
4720 � MM Acryl Sand FS33531 (F)
4722 � MM Acryl Radome Tan FS33613 (F)
4846 � MM Acryl Dark Earth ANA 617 (F)
4788 � MM Acryl Hellblau RLM 78
4202 � MM Marine Thayer Blue

All the Best, Rich

[OneThreeFifty]

Hello Everyone,

I've recently purchased this kit along with WEM's excellent "Ultimate KGV Class" PE set. Most modelers build her as she appeared during her loss, however I prefer her earlier appearance during the Bismarck chase. Since the kit represents the PoW in her final configuration, I need to backdate her in order the match the time period I'm after. My questions are :

1, Except for replacing the 8 barelled pom-pom's on the turrets with UP mounts (which I haven't purchased yet), what else need to be changed/modified ?

2, What are the correct hull/superstructure/deck colors for that time period ?

Your remarks/advise would be much appreciated.

[Guido]

To answer question No. 1 refer to Tannat's "KGV Class battleships". There is a comprehensive listing of changes given for each time she went to the docks.
Behind curtain number 2 should be "Dark Grey", if I am not all mistaken. (I can feel John S. and Alan R. breathing down my neck! )
Cheers,
Guido

[MartinJQuinn]

IIRC, the WEM set should give you some ideas as well - at least the 1/600 set has a plan view of the ships AA layouts during different times in their careers.

The Prince of Wales was 507B, Medium Gray, during the Bismark engagement. I've read conflicting data regarding her decks - some sources say natural wood for the wood and 507A for the steel decks, while others say 507A for all decks, both steel and wood. FWIW, I painted my 1/600 King George V - which is supposed to depict the ship at the time of the Bismark Chase - overall 507B with 507A decks.

Picture from the Maritime Quest website. Caption states "PoW, probably during trials":


Picture from the Naval Historical Center website:

[OneThreeFifty]

Unfortunately, WEM's "Ultimate King George V Class" PE set does not include any information concerning the AAA layout of any of the ships, nor parts that are required for an earlier version (such as the UP mounts) - I was kind of surprised to find that out myself.

[MartinJQuinn]

The 1/600 and 1/400 sets come with something like this (image from a review on Steel Navy):

[David Gatt]

Some years ago I did the same with my Tamyia PoW, ie. backdate to the Bismarck confrontation. Pics of my PoW are on my website. I'm saying that she is exactly correct, however I'm pretty sure I didn't miss anything.

http://homepage.mac.com/davidgatt/modelsite/Menu10.html

[MartinJQuinn]

According to Raven & Roberts in British Battleships of WW2 (page 287), the only modifications to PoW post Denmark Straight were the removal of the UP launchers with and the placement of two pom-pom Mk VI mountings - one on B turret and one on Y turret.

Also, looking at the pictures in the same book, I stick by overall 507B Medium Gray with ALL decks 507A Dark Gray as the color scheme.

[mike mccabe]

To be completely accurate, PoW should be as Martin says but also omit the Type 271 radar between the high angle directors, this wasn't fitted until repairs after the Bismarck chase. Decks has been done to death, basically there is no conclusive proof (I have seen) to say that the decks were teak and not covered in some way, either paint or stained with oil. Anecdotal evidence says they were darkened with oil, I would say whichever you want go with it, nobody can as yet prove you wrong.

Mike

[Aidan]

FWIW, PoW was brand new and supposedly still had workmen on board when she sailed to intercept Bismarck, so it's quite possible that the decks were not yet painted due to the RN always having a gripe with dockyard workers for making a mess of the paintwork on their ships, so it would be logical to assume that the decks were not due to be painted until the work was finished, there again, they could have had some form of coating to protect the decks from the workers, so it's open ended really, personally, I'm going with the un painted decks when I get round to doing my Tamiya 1/350 model of PoW (not because I think I'm right, purely because I think they look better unpainted, I think natural wood finish highlights the ship better and makes the detail stand out more).

[mike mccabe]

I think with this one, as you say Aidan, you pays your money, you takes your choice. Seems no conclusive evidence one way or the other, but plenty of opinions!

Mike

[OneThreeFifty]

While I'm satisfied with the quality of the WEM PE set, its instruction sheet lacks many important details. The set includes 40 pieces called "5.25" Armoured Windows (Left Hingle)" and another 12 pieces of the same part called "Right Hingle". Since these parts don't appear on the instruction sheet, I have no idea where to place them - not to mention "Right" and Left".

[CWatson]

The drawings show only one UP Launcher on the rear main battery turret, I believe there were two, side to side on POW's and KGV's rear turrets. If you look closely at the pic you can make them out.

CWatson

The 1/600 and 1/400 sets come with something like this (image from a review on Steel Navy):

CW

[CWatson]

Here is one drawing of POW that shows the two UP mounts on the rear turret and one pic of POW or KGV that shows them.

CW

[Aidan]

Here you go, hopefully this should settle it, picture one shows PoW on 22/05/41, definately 2 UP launchers on "Y" turret, and picture two and three, Pow taking Winston Churchill to meet with F.D.R. Without a doubt, the decks are NOT painted.

[Aidan]

Whoops, got the picture's the wrong way round, silly me, the bottom one is No 1, the top pic is No 3.

[OneThreeFifty]

Aidan, that's pretty convincing, I'll go for the unpainted deck. By the way, the drawing shows no 40 mm AA on the aft. Is that correct for the time period of the Bismarck chase ?

[OneThreeFifty]

Sorry, silly question. Your third pics shows the PoW as she appeared on the 22nd of May, just two days before the battle of the Denmark Strait - with the 40 mm AA on the aft.