Calling all HMS Repulse & HMS Renown fans

[Chuck Bauer]

Excellent question...
I don't know what's all in the Lion Roar set or the Admiralty, but I suspect the Lion Roar has a lot in it based upon its price.
I'm using a combination of White Ensign Models, Gold Medal Models and Eduard--plus supplemental gun barrels, hatch covers, etc.

[mermaid]

It would be great to hear your more detaild comment on your proposed use of the three. Which one contains more parts, where parts are not interchangeable, please?

[Timhan]

Get WEM and GMM. Both very good. AMW also worth buying. Their set includes accurate rear accom. replacement, plus replacement
resin ships boats. Highly recommend all three.
Tim.

[Chuck Bauer]

There is a big difference in the number of parts they contain and in some cases I liked the details of the WEM set better. But, again, this may be a moot point since I do not know what is in your Lion Roar set or in the AMW set my colleague mentioned.

[Chuck Bauer]

It looks very complete!

[Andrew F]

There's also the Flyhawk set.... The Lion Roar one has quite a lot of inaccuracies.
http://www.flyhawkmodel.com/en/product.asp?code=350023
Andrew

[mermaid]

There's also the Flyhawk set.... The Lion Roar one has quite a lot of inaccuracies.
http://www.flyhawkmodel.com/en/product.asp?code=350023
Andrew

What exactly is inaccurate, please?

[Andrew F]

There's a thread on the picture post build section. The trumpeter kit quite inaccurate in a number of areas, particularly around the bridge and the rear deck houses. The build on this link show some of the issues and fixes:
viewtopic.php?f=60&t=44007&hilit=Repulse

From looking at the pictures on the LR box etc it would appear that they have followed the Kagero book. That book is quite inaccurate and follows an old set of plans / drawings that have been used many time but contain an number of faults.

Andrew

[mermaid]

I know that the kit does not correct the bridge and stuctures. I was going to use Admiralty kit with their corrected structures.
But could you point some lionroar details wich would be wrong to use and which I failed to notice?

[Andrew F]

The Admiralty kit corrects the rear deck house issues. These were modified for the Royal tour which never happened. The Bridge area needs a bit of work which is shown in the thread I posted previously. In particular, the ladder arrangements are wrong and the structures inside the lower bridge are wrong.

lion Roar

should be like this :


becoming this with only one rear bridge ladder on the port side:


In many other respects it looks like a good kit of parts
Andrew

[mermaid]

I've got the ladder issue. Thanks Andrew! Love you model.

[EJFoeth]

Does anybody know anything about "semaphores" that were located in front of the forward funnel?

Here's a picturee with a few images I found. Note the black/white colouring of the semaphores and the perforations.



The bottom left image is from HMS Hood, the rest of random ships to show the general shape (and how all etch parts I've seen so far are thus wrong).

[Chuck Bauer]

Interesting! Thanks for retireving these.
Do you have any idea of the dates on these photos? Could these devices have been in use in 1941?

[EJFoeth]

They certainly were in use on some ships in 1941. They are not always visible on some images, so I assume they could be stored.

[Chuck Bauer]

I have done a bit more research and believe they probably were aboard in 1941 but also probably were not used very much. If the semaphore paddles were a carry-over from the use of signal flags, the paddles could have been yellow and red, and thus could look black and white in a black-and-white photo. The White Ensign Models photo etch set does contain a reasonable facsimile of these units, although the blades are a little wide and don't have the perforations. In the WEM set they are positioned the same way as the ship plans show them, spelling out the letter "n."

[EJFoeth]

Interesting; I'll have a look at the colours as well... just assumed black and white as colour wasn't invented yet.

edit:

Most signal arms were either white or black, or a mixture of both. Depending upon the typical background against which they are to be seen. On the ship there were often two types, the Mast head version with arms nine feet to twelve feet length, and the "bridge" mounted version (Shown above) with arms of six to eight feet length? The fixed shore mounted devices, on docks, forts, Quays, etc. could be rotated through an arc or if the direction of a ship (or other station) was only possible in a narrow field of vision, then the apparatus could be static, such as showing from the dockyard, out of Portsmouth Harbour towards the Solent.

Seems Black & White will do, while most of the flags are red/yellow.

[okram12]

Please help again. I'm looking for drawings, plans, photographs catapulty D III H mounted on PoW.
A similar catapult as in HMS Repulse & Renown.

[Andrew F]

As requested:






Andrew

[okram12]

Very nice, but small. Maybe you could send me more to mail? I should be grateful. My email: okram@wp.pl

[dick]

Seems Black & White will do, while most of the flags are red/yellow.

Yes, black and white seems to be right. Builders' models are normally quite accurate on such details. Here is Veteran...