Calling all RN County-class fans

[Brett Morrow]

If you wish to portray Canberra at the time of her demise at Savo, she was dressed in `Chicago Blue ` overall.
There is a good colour profile of her, port and starboard, on the same cruiser site that the `Australia` profile appears, dressed in her previous worn camo scheme.
Not many photos are available of Canberra wearing this scheme, I have only seen one port photo and three starboard in all my searches, although I expect others may exist. There appears to be small discrepancies in the scheme between the colour plate and photos, perhaps the artist had access to better photo ref of was able to enhance the photos?

There are a couple of good shots of her on the `Kookaburra` Flikr site, which includes the very good starboard shot of her passing Fort Denison, dressed in camo.
I have seen the model at the AWM Vladi, you could contact them and they may send you a photo.

[Haijun watcher]

Thanks again all for the feedback.

I was already aware that Dorsetshire was already different from the Suffolk/Kent subclass of the County class cruisers to begin with. Perhaps the Airfix Suffolk kit's bulges can be sanded off?

--------------------------

Going back to Canberra, I take it if I used a Combrig 1/700 1928 HMAS Australia kit, it would be identical to her sister in the same period? Updating the 1928 Combrig kit to 1942 kit would be much more than just adding more AA positions, I take it?

[Vladi]

It would be easier to buy Combrig 1/700 HMAS Canberra kit if you want to build Canberra, it will then need just a few modifications as it is basically correct. If you already have Combrig 1/700 HMAS Australia it can be converted but it would need more work (bridge, mid section, aft bridge/catapult section...).

Canberra was actually much less modified since her launch than Australia, you can see the differences on these links:
http://www.world-war.co.uk/Kent/canberra.php3
http://www.world-war.co.uk/Kent/australia.php3

The Combrig kit in fact represents quite closely her 1942 status (same for Australia), not 1928 (that was the launch date, Combrig uses it to distinguish between different ships of the same name rather than to indicate the period their model corresponds to). See the kit review http://www.modelwarships.com/reviews/sh ... berra.html. Also page 8 of this thread for details of needed modifications (radars...).

There is a known problem with the Combrig Canberra kit that the deck aft (behind the C turret) should be parallel to the waterline but it slightly bends upwards in the kit. As I�ve heard from Jon Iverson (see his build at Modelshipgallery) it can be corrected by warming that part of the hull, bending it down and than sanding the waterline down, but I did not start with it yet. It will most probably be the same with their Australia kit as it seems to me the hull is the same in both kits. Otherwise I think it is really a nice kit with some very nice details.

Brett Morrow: I have seen the model at the AWM Vladi, you could contact them and they may send you a photo.

Thanks! I wrote them an email.

[Haijun watcher]

Thanks Vladi and all for the feedback. Vladi, your feedback below was the most helpful in helping me decide.

It would be easier to buy Combrig 1/700 HMAS Canberra kit if you want to build Canberra, it will then need just a few modifications as it is basically correct. If you already have Combrig 1/700 HMAS Australia it can be converted but it would need more work (bridge, mid section, aft bridge/catapult section...).

Canberra was actually much less modified since her launch than Australia, you can see the differences on these links:
http://www.world-war.co.uk/Kent/canberra.php3
http://www.world-war.co.uk/Kent/australia.php3

The Combrig kit in fact represents quite closely her 1942 status (same for Australia), not 1928 (that was the launch date, Combrig uses it to distinguish between different ships of the same name rather than to indicate the period their model corresponds to). See the kit review http://www.modelwarships.com/reviews/sh ... berra.html. Also page 8 of this thread for details of needed modifications (radars...).

There is a known problem with the Combrig Canberra kit that the deck aft (behind the C turret) should be parallel to the waterline but it slightly bends upwards in the kit. As I�ve heard from Jon Iverson (see his build at Modelshipgallery) it can be corrected by warming that part of the hull, bending it down and than sanding the waterline down, but I did not start with it yet. It will most probably be the same with their Australia kit as it seems to me the hull is the same in both kits. Otherwise I think it is really a nice kit with some very nice details.

Brett Morrow: I have seen the model at the AWM Vladi, you could contact them and they may send you a photo.

Thanks! I wrote them an email.

[Haijun watcher]

Hi all,

Has anyone here actually built HP models' 1/700 Sussex kit?

I assume all the cruisers in the London sub-class weren't too different?

So that one can use a HP's Sussex kit to built an HMAS Shropshire, circa 1944?

[Dick J]

I'm not familiar with the timeframe for the HP kit but there were some differences. When Sussex was bombed in 1940, she was rebuilt with the after superstructure and after mast transposed. Sussex and Shropshire had a bit more rake on the bow than London and Devonshire. (London had the same rake as the Kent group and Sussex had the same as the Dorsetshire group.) And of course, there were all of the little detail differences.

[Aekold]

Hi guys,
I've recently bought 1/700 Australia from Combrig, now trying to get all needed aftermarket.
I've came across RN boats by Admiralty Modelworks - so I wonder, which type and how many would I need?

[DavidK]

I thought the consensus was that the Combrig "Australia 1928" kit was actually an early WW2 fit, and that the '1928' was just to indicate the launch date (to distinguish this ship from the WW1 battlecruiser Australia); in which case, the boats in the kit would be the right boats (correct me if I'm off base on this someone).

WEM made a PE set for county class cruisers if you can find one.

[Aekold]

I thought the consensus was that the Combrig "Australia 1928" kit was actually an early WW2 fit, and that the '1928' was just to indicate the launch date (to distinguish this ship from the WW1 battlecruiser Australia); in which case, the boats in the kit would be the right boats (correct me if I'm off base on this someone).

WEM made a PE set for county class cruisers if you can find one.

Well, the original boats substantially lack details compared to Admiralty ones. Just wanted to know their type precisely.
WEM PE is on the way, but as far as I know, it doesn't include boat details.

[DavidK]

WEM made a PE set for county class cruisers if you can find one.

Well, the original boats substantially lack details compared to Admiralty ones. Just wanted to know their type precisely.
WEM PE is on the way, but as far as I know, it doesn't include boat details.[/quote]

I have the PE set. This may help answer your original question. The PE set includes 27' whaler davits (2 pairs), 36' pinnace davits (3 pairs), 32' cutter davits (2 pairs), 27' whaler chocks (2 pairs), 14' dinghy chocks (2 pairs), 36' pinnace chocks (3 sets), and 32' cutter chocks (2 pairs).

[Aekold]

I have the PE set. This may help answer your original question. The PE set includes 27' whaler davits (2 pairs), 36' pinnace davits (3 pairs), 32' cutter davits (2 pairs), 27' whaler chocks (2 pairs), 14' dinghy chocks (2 pairs), 36' pinnace chocks (3 sets), and 32' cutter chocks (2 pairs).

Thanks!
Do you think this kit makes sense: https://www.whiteensignmodels.com/p/WEM ... +739/5469/
?

[DavidK]

[/quote]Thanks!
Do you think this kit makes sense: https://www.whiteensignmodels.com/p/WEM ... +739/5469/
?[/quote]

I blew the WEM scan of the RN Ships Boats PE fret up to max for my browser, and I still couldn't read what boat sizes the inserts in the upper half were for. I don't have this set or know what size boats it was designed to fit. Looks like the bottom half are all boats equipped with sails, which I've never seen on cruiser model lifeboats, but I think the literal definitions of cutters and pinnaces include a sailing capability. I have one picture of a royal navy whaler (attached) for what it's worth.

[Aekold]

I blew the WEM scan of the RN Ships Boats PE fret up to max for my browser, and I still couldn't read what boat sizes the inserts in the upper half were for. I don't have this set or know what size boats it was designed to fit. Looks like the bottom half are all boats equipped with sails, which I've never seen on cruiser model lifeboats, but I think the literal definitions of cutters and pinnaces include a sailing capability. I have one picture of a royal navy whaler (attached) for what it's worth.

I've got Perth and Kent Profile Morskie magazines, while I know they are not 100% accurate, some of the boats listed are actually shown with sails on blow-up views.

[Haijun watcher]

Gents,

If one has a WEM Sussex hull, and wants to graft the superstructure and armament from a Combrig Australia to it, would it be hard to create a 1944 HMAS Shropshire?

The London class were slightly longer than the Kent sub-class that the Australia and Canberra were part of, so I assume the WEM Sussex hull alleviates that.

Other differences I've noted include the features bolded in the excerpt below:

source Wikipedia article on RN County class cruisers

The second group, the four ships of the London class (Devonshire, London, Shropshire and Sussex), closely followed the design of the Kents. The external bulges were not present, reducing the beam by 2 feet (0.61 m), and the hull was lengthened by 2 feet 9 inches (0.84 m); these changes translated into a � knot increase in speed. To remedy the loss of the bulge protection, there was a second skin of inner plating to provide the same effect. The bridge was moved aft to lessen the effects of muzzle blast from B turret when the guns were trained abaft the beam. They had heightened funnels as-built. The aircraft and catapult had been fitted by 1932.

In all ships bar Sussex, four 4-inch guns were added in single mountings abreast the funnels. The single 2-pounder guns were removed, and two quadruple mounts for 0.5 inch Vickers machine guns were added. Shropshire acquired an additional anti-aircraft fire control director. Early in the war, the additional 4-inch guns were removed, and the original 4-inch guns altered to the Mark XVI twin mounts. The octuple 2-pounder guns that had originally been designed in were also finally added.

Is there anything else that I missed?

[tjstoneman]

The Combrig hull is actually longer than the WEM one! However, the COMBRIG one correctly has the bulges which were not fitted to the London subgroup. Use the WEM funnels (AUSTRALIA and CANBERRA had funnels which were 3 feet taller than the rest of the class). AUSTRALIA's superstructure (in the period represented by the kit) was very different to SHROPSHIRE's - better to retain SUSSEX's armament and superstructure, but move the part of the after superstructure which is above shelter deck level forward to just abaft the catapult, and the mainmast aft so that the tripod legs are just for'd of "X" turret. Light AA varied from SUSSEX's fit; by the end of her Chatham refit in June 1943, SHROPSHIRE had two eight-barrelled two-pounder mountings, seven twin 20mm and seven single 20mm. Her aircraft arrangements were removed during that refit, and the SW RDF Type 273 moved to the former catapult base.

[Haijun watcher]

The Combrig hull is actually longer than the WEM one! However, the COMBRIG one correctly has the bulges which were not fitted to the London subgroup. Use the WEM funnels (AUSTRALIA and CANBERRA had funnels which were 3 feet taller than the rest of the class). AUSTRALIA's superstructure (in the period represented by the kit) was very different to SHROPSHIRE's - better to retain SUSSEX's armament and superstructure, but move the part of the after superstructure which is above shelter deck level forward to just abaft the catapult, and the mainmast aft so that the tripod legs are just for'd of "X" turret. Light AA varied from SUSSEX's fit; by the end of her Chatham refit in June 1943, SHROPSHIRE had two eight-barrelled two-pounder mountings, seven twin 20mm and seven single 20mm. Her aircraft arrangements were removed during that refit, and the SW RDF Type 273 moved to the former catapult base.

Can't do your suggestion since I was considering to buy the WEM Sussex hull on one ad advertised on our forum's trading post section. It was just the WEM hull that is available not the whole kit.

In order to make a Shropshire, I thought I could merge that WEM Sussex hull with a Combrig Australia being advertised on another ad on the trading post section.

[tjstoneman]

In that case, some scratch-building is called for! SHROPSHIRE's shelter deck amidships was nearly the full width of the upper deck (just enough space for boats at upper deck level each side except where guns were fitted), twin 4" HA were at shelter deck level with gun crew shelters each side between the mountings, only a single crane on a circular mounting to starboard, completely different bridge and after superstructure, rectangular platforms for octuple pompoms, searchlight sponsons on after funnel, rearranged LA and HA DCT positions. As always, close study of photos is recommended! Examples at https://www.flickr.com/photos/16118167@ ... 495291478/ and https://www.flickr.com/photos/41311545@N05/6646538921.

[Haijun watcher]

In that case, some scratch-building is called for! SHROPSHIRE's shelter deck amidships was nearly the full width of the upper deck (just enough space for boats at upper deck level each side except where guns were fitted), twin 4" HA were at shelter deck level with gun crew shelters each side between the mountings, only a single crane on a circular mounting to starboard, completely different bridge and after superstructure, rectangular platforms for octuple pompoms, searchlight sponsons on after funnel, rearranged LA and HA DCT positions. As always, close study of photos is recommended! Examples at https://www.flickr.com/photos/16118167@ ... 495291478/ and https://www.flickr.com/photos/41311545@N05/6646538921.

So I can't graft anything from the Combrig Australia kit?

[tjstoneman]

Funnels - if you shorten them; crane - if you're happy with the resin version; armament; DCTs; boats? - that's about all

[Haijun watcher]

Funnels - if you shorten them; crane - if you're happy with the resin version; armament; DCTs; boats? - that's about all

Nothing from the Combrig Australia forward superstructure or bridge can be used? Even if I just partially scratch built the different Shropshire bridge?