The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Sun Sep 22, 2019 8:59 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 361 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 19  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 7:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:23 am
Posts: 2597
Location: Copenhagen
I have bought the Admiral Hipper in the 1940 version by Trumpeter. Without modifications the kit could be used only for a very early 1940 version. Already in April 1940 she had radar (and modified rangefinder to fit the radar to it. Trumpeter includes this part: C19) and 2 cm Flak 30 (army version) on turrets B and C.

The camouflage scheme with the dark grey pattern was applied in November or December 1940 - then she also had the MES-Anlage against magnetic mines (which is contained in Trumpeter's kit of the 1941 version). Therefore the 1940 kit can not be built with this camouflage scheme.

Therefore I have decided to built Admiral Hipper with this camouflage scheme:

http://www.admiral-hipper-class.dk/admiral_hipper/paint_schemes/pictures/1940/06_hipper_august_40_port_big.jpg

When Admiral Hipper had this camouflage? It is labelled with August 1940. Heavy Cruisers of the Admiral Hipper and the Prinz Eugen class (Kagero War Camera Photobooks 2) von Miroslaw Skwiot, Lublin, 2010 contains two photos with this camouflage - and they are labelled with end of June 1940. Did she had this camouflage from end of June (after Operation Juno) to early August (when she entered the yard)?

I have started a model with this camouflage:
Image

Image

Image
(with the USCG icebreaker Healy (scratch) and the italian destroyer San Marco (Niko Models))

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 8:31 pm
Posts: 892
Location: Flensburg, Germany
I never heard of Hipper being camouflaged prior to December 1940 - of course except for the June 1940 repairs at Wilhelmshaven where she wore a pattern of greens and browns on her upperworks. The only differences to her piecetime livery of RAL 7000 and RAL 7001 were dark grey, red or yellow turret tops.

Happy painting ~ Olaf!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 05, 2010 5:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:23 am
Posts: 2597
Location: Copenhagen
There is a problem with Trumpeter's hull of the Admiral Hipper!

It shows the hull not loaded. Compared to the fully loaded state it is 4 mm too high - which is clearly visible, if you compare the model with photos of the real ship.

The hull appears to be correct, if depicted in the full hull version, but the waterline is at the position of the waterline as designed (Konstruktionswasserlinie) - and therefore completely unrealistic.

In contrast the Prinz Eugen by Trumpeter appears to be correct, it shows the hull in the loaded state.

Olaf Held wrote:
I never heard of Hipper being camouflaged prior to December 1940 - of course except for the June 1940 repairs at Wilhelmshaven where she wore a pattern of greens and browns on her upperworks. The only differences to her piecetime livery of RAL 7000 and RAL 7001 were dark grey, red or yellow turret tops.

Happy painting ~ Olaf!


I have seen photos of this camouflage scheme the first time in Heavy Cruisers of the Admiral Hipper and the Prinz Eugen class (Kagero War Camera Photobooks 2) von Miroslaw Skwiot, Lublin, 2010 - and I have no others, only the linked drawing admiral-hipper-class.dk.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 05, 2010 12:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:23 am
Posts: 2597
Location: Copenhagen
I have added the waterline - indicating, that the hull is not deep enough in the water...

Image

Image

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 05, 2010 4:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2005 7:29 pm
Posts: 1144
Location: Tempe, Arizona
I agree with Olaf, none of my references show this camouflage and I've never seen it before. I'll send an email to a friend I know should have the answer.

_________________
-Abram


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 1:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 8:31 pm
Posts: 892
Location: Flensburg, Germany
ArizonaBB39 wrote:
I agree with Olaf, none of my references show this camouflage and I've never seen it before. I'll send an email to a friend I know should have the answer.


Abram, nice to read you here :wave_1:

Maybe that camouflage was very (very!) short-lived during one of the brief stays at Norway. Yup, your friend should know ... :big_grin:

Happy painting ~ Olaf!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 3:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 11:56 am
Posts: 208
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) Italia
Ciao all,

YES my friends, .... I know about it of course, ... it is nice to hear from you, .... thanks for letting me know about this, ...... :wave_1:

We are talking spring of 1940, just after the Norway invasion, ... on May 1940 the destroyers Z5 Paul Jacobi and Z6 Theodor Riedel anchored into Trondheim harbour for repairs.

Guess what .... they got camouflaged to hide them with the surrouding area, full of very green trees and woods, so with a green-brown type camouflage applied on top of the 2 tone KM base grey's.

On June 1940 Admiral Lutjens took the position of Adm Marschall and reached Trondheim area for a mission with the squadron anchored in there, composed by Gneisenau, Admiral Hipper and the light cruiser Nurnberg.

Guess what, ... sudddendly those 3 warships got camouflaged as well as the 2 destroyers in that harbour area, probably to try to hide them as much as possible with the surrounding area.

So, for a short period on late june 1940 Admiral Hipper was camouflaged with a green-brown camo on top of the 2 base KM grey's.

Miroslaw Skwiot knows about it precisely since we spoke of it on august last year in Gdynia, when we met while I was visiting the area, so he got the date right on his book.

It was NOT a grey type camo which does not make any common sense at all on that fjord on that month, exactly like happened on Tirpitz 2 years after on May-June 1942 on same situation on same fjord as well known.

Hope to have helped and sorry for our friend Maxim that shoud now repaint his model to make it right, ...... :cool_2:

Bye Antonio :thumbs_up_1:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 4:11 am 
...


Last edited by ingura on Sun Oct 31, 2010 6:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 4:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 11:56 am
Posts: 208
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) Italia
Ciao all,

@ Peter,

you do not have to refer to the only well known photo of Z5 Paul Jacobi in Trondheim on May 1940 to make that call, ..... look into Tore Eggan website about Trondheim during the German invasion and you will have a full set of Z5 and Z6 photos with your complete camouflage, ........... as well as Admiral Hipper too.

Than if you look around on Koop/Schmolke book you will see the Nurnberg camouflaged, .... and on recently surfaced e-bay photos you can have Gneisenau as well.

Of course to put together those infos it takes deep knowledge of every event and ship movements and NOT to confuse that Admiral Hipper camo with the one she had after being rammed by HMS Glowworm, .. as that is a different story, .. like for Gneisenau after the torpeding by HMS Clyde,.... as said it takes knowledge and competence, .. mostly a lot of time consuming historical research.

Bye Antonio :thumbs_up_1:


Last edited by Antonio Bonomi on Mon Sep 06, 2010 5:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 4:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 11:56 am
Posts: 208
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) Italia
Ciao all,

sorry, forgot the link.

http://krigsbilder.net/coppermine/index.php?cat=35

look into Z5 and Z20 collections and you will see the photos of Z5 and Z6 camouflaged.

Bye Antonio :thumbs_up_1:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 6:17 am 
...


Last edited by ingura on Sun Oct 31, 2010 6:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 7:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 11:56 am
Posts: 208
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) Italia
Ciao all,

you got it on the wrong way Peter, .... I only responded to your statement about Z5 being camouflaged/painted only on the upperwork, ... providing you the evidence of my statement.

Than I had to explain you why I was so confident about the whole situation and that is why I wrote you that phrase, ...... nothing personal of course.

That is my hobby and were I spend most of my free time, ... and I can tell you several times making also errors, .... :cool_2:

I am glad you know your " stuffs " too, .. but I have to admit I am almost ignorant on that area, ... unfortunately.

You do not have to " shut-up" at all, ... it is an interesting and intriguing discussion .... you can participate into with value add ... of course.

Bye Antonio :thumbs_up_1:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 9:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:03 pm
Posts: 183
Location: Plymouth UK
Peter,

I for one would love hear more from you on how your AF27 is getting on?

regards

Francis Macnaughton


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 12:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:23 am
Posts: 2597
Location: Copenhagen
Antonio Bonomi wrote:
So, for a short period on late june 1940 Admiral Hipper was camouflaged with a green-brown camo on top of the 2 base KM grey's.


How many colours were applied on the standard paint scheme? 3 or 4 colours? Which colours? And any idea which colour are darker on the black white photos?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 12:25 pm 
...


Last edited by ingura on Sun Oct 31, 2010 6:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 07, 2010 2:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:23 am
Posts: 2597
Location: Copenhagen
Again a question in regard of Hipper's camouflage:

for me the pattern is not similar to the other Küstentarnanstriche (coast camouflage schemes), but I am not an expert in this field.

Most similar is Gneisenau's pattern after she was damaged by HMS Clyde. This pattern is here also depicted as a grey pattern:

http://www.scharnhorst-class.dk/gneisenau/paint_schemes/pictures/1940/paint_gn_1940_11_25_june_en_route_to_germany_for_repair_st_big.jpg

Here is a photo of Gneisenau before she was damaged:
http://www.scharnhorst-class.dk/gneisenau/gallery/pictures/gallgneisejuno/gallgneisejuno03.jpg
and afterwards:
http://www.scharnhorst-class.dk/gneisenau/gallery/pictures/gallgneisejuno/gallgneisejuno06.jpg

For sure, it is the same source as the one I had for the grey pattern of Hipper - could be wrong too. But what is the evidence that is a brown-green pattern?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 07, 2010 4:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 11:56 am
Posts: 208
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) Italia
Ciao Maxim and all,

you are showing us a Gneisenau camouflage that was used when they moved the ship from Norway to Germany, so that camo was supposed to help on confusing the British submarines getting the ship right while she was sailing at high speed at sea.

http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=451

A complete different story is if you camouflage a warship in order to confuse her with the surrounding on a Norwegian fjord like Trondheim in June when is full of green trees and wood.

Would you paint your warship with grey patterns to do that ?

Of course you can paint your model the colours you like, .... it is a free world ...... I just told you what I know, ... you can make your call.

Bye Antonio :thumbs_up_1:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 1:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 8:31 pm
Posts: 892
Location: Flensburg, Germany
maxim wrote:
For sure, it is the same source as the one I had for the grey pattern of Hipper - could be wrong too. But what is the evidence that is a brown-green pattern?


In case of Gneisenau: Wolfgang Kähler states in his book, that on July 4th the sailors began to apply a camouflage on all surfaces of the ship (I assume excluding decks) in order for the ship to blend into the surrounding dark, hilly and forested scenery.

With regard to Hipper, I just read in the Brennecke book that they started painting the ship's superstructure according to the scenery (esp. oil tanks) near Trondheim on April 10, 1940. Brennecke describes that one 'fool' painted on ONE brushstroke of red, then one green, then one yellow here and there - much too small to be effective (I think that one particular sailor was just a bit over-enthusiastic, I wonder about those colours, really, I would have thought greens and browns ...). I think they applied it in larger patches later on. Brennecke did not go into detail how it really looked but he later describes that an Arado from Scharnhorst arrived, bringing some news, and that Hipper is to leave the fjord and break-through to Germany, making the new camouflage obsolete. It could be that they overpainted everything with light grey and grey again for the break-through. I don't know, Brennecke does not mention anything ...

The Kriegsmarine seems to have been more colourful than we thought ...

Happy painting ~ Olaf!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 2:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 11:56 am
Posts: 208
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) Italia
Ciao Olaf and all,

@ Olaf,

as usual very precise and value add infos from your side, my personal congratulations my friend.

We have to progress with a pragmatic approach here about the 2 ships and related calendar dates.

Adm Hipper got rammed by HMS Glowworm on April 8th, 1940. The " crazy painter " Brennecke correctly refers to did that job just before she sailed back to Wilhelmshaven in Germany to be repaired, photos of Adm Hipper into the drydock there shows that partial upperworks camo I have released on my drawings made with Abram years ago, if you check correctly April 1940 ones.

http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopi ... 8&start=15

Than the Adm Hipper went back to Norway on her usual 2 tone KM grey's and formed a squadron in Trondheim with Nurnberg and Gneisenau.

Those " full camouflage " with the surrounding area in Trondheim Fjord were applyed as said on Adm Hipper, Nurnberg and Gneisenau between June 10 and June 20 as far as I can realize currently. Your descriptions of the real intentions of the ship crew to try to hide the warships with the surrounding fjord area with reference with the colours leave no doubts in my opinion about the camouflage patterns, just like Tirpitz on june 1942 on same situation, but there we have colour photos to prove it.
There are photos of German tankers in Trondheim Fjord ( ref. tanker Biwi ) and they are camouflaged with brown and green patterns of course, as logic and obvious, just in line with Brennecke and Kahler references.

A different story about Gneisenau after being torpedoed by HMS Clyde on June 20th, 1940, as I wrote above that was a particular camo done for her return voyage, just like Prinz Eugen during Op. Zauberflote on May 1942.

So back on the original matter, the model Maxim is making shows Adm Hipper on June period with full camouflage on her, so not the one after being rammed by HMS Glowworm on April 1940, but the one Adm Lutjens ordered to be applyed on the 3 warship squadron while at anchor in Trondheim fjord between June 10 and June 20 of 1940.

He probably gave an order similar to the one he delivered from Bismarck to Prinz Eugen during Op. Rheinubung while approaching Grimstad Fjord on May 1941 : " ... in case of a longer stay in the Grimstad Fjord get ready to paint the ship with camouflage to hide them into the fjord ... " but we know it was not necessary as they sailed away immediately and they only removed the Baltic camo.

In this case Adm Hipper, Gneisenau and Nurnberg remained as said at anchor for 10 days in Trondheim, .... plenty of time for the KM sailors " high performance painters " to paint over the warships a couple of times as they did in fact.

As you correctly wrote : " The Kriegsmarine seems to have been more colourful than we thought ... "... and I fully agree here.

But if you had been 3 times in Trondheim Fjord as I did on june-july period, than you will realize immediately that it is so green that a grey warship anchored will be a "sitting duck" in there, ... as you can see her from 50 km far away approaching,......... that is why camouflage does exist at all, ...... :cool_2:

Bye Antonio :thumbs_up_1:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 10:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:23 am
Posts: 2597
Location: Copenhagen
Antonio Bonomi wrote:
you are showing us a Gneisenau camouflage that was used when they moved the ship from Norway to Germany, so that camo was supposed to help on confusing the British submarines getting the ship right while she was sailing at high speed at sea.

http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=451

A complete different story is if you camouflage a warship in order to confuse her with the surrounding on a Norwegian fjord like Trondheim in June when is full of green trees and wood.


For sure - but I was asking for the evidence that Hipper's pattern was a coast camouflage scheme. It is obvious that there were different camouflages to hide in fjords and to confuse submarines. But it is also obvious that British submarines were very successful in this period (in striking contrast to German submarines, which torpedoes failed in most cases) and a camouflage scheme to confuse submarines could have been considered necessary. For sure, it would be only useful if the ships got the scheme before they left Trondheim - not during their stay in Trondheim.

You mentioned an order to camouflage the ships in Trondheim in your latter posting - do you have evidence that the photo show the camouflage applied during the stay in Trondheim?

And if you have evidence: what kind of colours were used? As far as I understand this there were (at least) two different green and two different brown colours used. But which colour is for example the colour I depicted as dark grey?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 361 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 19  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MoriyaSuwako and 22 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

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group