The Ship Model Forum

Hi Ron,

You can find a good plan of HMS Sheffield here: http://navymuseum.co.nz/plans-maps-and-charts/, I believe a conversion of the Belfast model should be doable too.

Maarten

_________________
"I've heard there's a wicked war a-blazing, and the taste of war I know so very well
Even now I see the foreign flag a-raising, their guns on fire as we sail into hell"
Roger Whittaker +9/13/2023

Being partway through just such a conversion in 1/600 scale, I suggest that the key problems would be the removal of the bulges on the Belfast hull, the narrowing of the hull, and the differences in the bridge structure. I know that it can and has been done (if in 1/600, with the help of a Tiger hull) but it isn't as easy as it might seem at first.

Pretty sure Tiger had 4 shafts (Wikipedia) and IIRC the Airfix model had four.

_________________
Gernot Hassenpflug
Find out how it works, then functionality and limits

I spliced the rear of the Belfast's hull onto the Tiger - with considerable help from plasticard, filling and filing. Despite this, I feel that was better than cutting Belfast into three bits and removing all the bulges. Fitting the deck doesn't look too bad but I've yet to find the best way to alter the superstructures, where required.

[quote="DavidP"]Gernot, I know the real ship has 4 props but the model does not. I have 2 built tigers 1 that I modified into the helicopter cruiser version back in the late 70's early 80's & they both have 2 props each. instructions that show only 2 props as that area is shaped wrong for 4 props as in too narrow.
The bilge keels are missing, as are two of the four propellers. http://www.modelerjoe.net/shipmodellist ... irfixTiger

Whew, that is a blunder I would not have expected from Airfix (and my memory is faulty too, no surprise there!).

_________________
Gernot Hassenpflug
Find out how it works, then functionality and limits

I am modelling Sheffield as during her Force H days, 1940-41 and had a question about decks. In Conrad Waters' superb book on the Town Class Cruisers, there are some lovely onboard photos of Southampton when fitting out, showing the deck covering of B gun deck and the signal deck the next level above, as covered with corticene, fixed with brass strips (p 76). My question is whether cruisers like Sheffield would still have been wearing corticene in 1940-41, and if so whether it would still be brown, or whether it would have been overpainted grey (if it was possible to paint corticene). Recent pieces I have read on Hood's colours in 1941 are sure that that ship carried brown corticene in places up to the time of her loss. There is a series of IWM photos of Sheffield deploying paravanes looking down on the operation, dated April 1941, which seems to show corticene covering, but with the brass strips dulled (eg IWM A 3969 and 3972). Models of Sheffield I have seen all have these decks grey - but I am wondering in view of what we know about Hood, whether that would be correct.
Also on the subject of decks, there is a great series of photos by James Jarche, the Illustrated Weekly photographer taken on board Sheffield in October 1940. They show the two-tone camouflage nice and clearly, and there is an intriguing one of some officers taken on the quarterdeck by Y turret. This is interesting for showing that Y turret was painted in the darker hull colour, while X turret was in lighter grey. What is also interesting is the deck the officers are standing on, which is very dark in colour and not planks. Photos from 1941 show the quarterdeck in natural wood, so this could be a temporary covering. Does anyone have any idea what it was? The photos are on the GettyImages website at https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/ne ... 1275813556. There is another photo of Marines hauling a line also on the quarterdeck, which also shows that dark deck covering.

Thanks!

_________________
On the drawing board
HMS Gurkha (1/700)
On the slipway:
HMS Sheffield 1/600
HMS Lance 1/700

Martin,

Look closely (very closely) at the picture on the Getty site that you posted details of. You will see the seams of the deck planks! The wood covering of the deck has been stained. Please see posts on the Prince of Wales subject in CASF. This was also dealt with on the "R" class battleship threads and elsewhere: in fact, one Australian correspondent actually gave details of the official specification for the "stain."

Re: Corticene. Unless there were specific orders from "on high" to remove the covering completely I think that most ships would have left it in place until the next dockyard period. Don't forget that this stuff was actually glued to the deck in a semi-permanent manner. Otherwise, it might have been possible to paint it but I for one can't see the sense in doing so. It was of a matt finish and dull colour as it was so why would they have bothered? The brass strips are another matter. The metal will quickly go dull if let unpolished but some ships may have painted them. It depends how far the officer responsible may have wished to go in obeying the order to "cover the bright-work."

81542

Here is the likely mix for the deck stain:

Thanks, Dick.

81542

Many thanks! That 'stain' certainly looks laid on thick! Interestingly it didn't stay that dark, as photos from June the next year show the quarterdeck as much lighter, indeed looking like unpainted planks, though they are rather even in tone (there are two IWM photos of the captured crew of the Friedrich Breme being exercised on deck that shows this nicely, A4412 and A4414).
Sheffield was repainted before going down to Gibraltar, to the two-tone scheme out of the flotta scheme, though I don't think any refit was done at that time, so it's anyone's guess as to whether they bothered to remove the corticene then. It used to be said that it tended to be removed because it was a fire risk, but I'm not sure that is accepted as the case now. Sheffield still lacked its two forward HACS directors at that point, only acquiring them in August of 1941 when repainted into the first Admiralty Disruptive (which, of course, included another different colouring for the quarterdeck, now in camouflage!)

_________________
On the drawing board
HMS Gurkha (1/700)
On the slipway:
HMS Sheffield 1/600
HMS Lance 1/700

Having searched all over for a Trumpeter 1:350 HMS Belfast kit without success, I have been informed by a distributer that it is no longer in production so none will be available unless it is relaunched
I'm wondering how often or if ever this may happen in the future?

No idea about re-release, but you could try finding an example from an overseas source such as HobbyLink Japan, which I have dealt with several times in the past. You will have to factor in the VAT charge on arrival, and the delivery/handling charge that goes with it.

No idea about re-release, but you could try Far East dealers such as HobbyLink Japan to see if they have one in stock. I have dealt with them several times in the past, and all has gone well. You will have to factor in the VAT and handling charges, and under the current international freight circumstances delivery may be delayed.

When HMS MAURITIUS was undergoing her refit at Singapore in Nov-Dec 1941, the trouble was said to be her fire mains having been corroded by her internal degaussing system...

1) What is the nature of the actual damage that caused her to have to go into the yard at this critical time?

2) When she departed, it is recorded that she had no gun power...Is this true? Did her condition preclude use of her main battery?

Hello Guest,

1. The nature to HMS Mauritius related to the lightweight copper piping used in fire main system, an expedient adopted to help her comply with the 1936 London Naval Treaty's 8,000 ton limit. A report on the resultant damage produced in early 1942 stated that it comprised of impingement attack to the copper piping and dezincification of the welds joining sections of piping together. The report does not state that the ship's degaussing system was the cause of the problem, instead referencing the poor resistance of copper to impingement attack, the high degree of aeration in the water system due to the location of the intake in relation due to the bilge keel, turbulence caused by sharp changes in direction and diameter of the pipes, high circulation speeds of water and the unsuitability of the alpha-beta brass used in the welding.

The practical impact of the damage was that sections of the firemain and its branches would fail, particularly when subject to shock from (e.g.) the ship's own guns. These would then have to be isolated, cutting off parts of the ship from water supply. Although some compartments had alternate supply, this would have significantly hindered damage control, particularly fire fighting, in the event of an action. This was demonstrated to practical effect during HMS Kenya's participation in Operation Archery at the end of 1941, fortunately without serious consequence.

2. Mauritius was certainly capable of using some of her armament when she departed Singapore. She had arrived in Singapore on 6 Nov 1941, completing de-ammunitioning on the 9th and with the bulk of her crew being dispatched to shore accommodation on the 10th. She had docked on 24 November and undocked on 2 December, the day Prince of Wales and Repulse arrived in Singapore (she was berthed aft of PoW in No 13 berth at the dockyard). It's not clear to what extent the fire main had been replaced at that stage but it's certainly possible much had been done given she had been in dockyard control for over a month. She subsequently re-embarked a limited quantity of close-range ammunition on 7 December - probably expedited by increased tensions as the clock ran down to start of the Pacific War - and used this to engage Japanese bombers when they attacked the city in the early hours of the following morning. The next week was spent in a scramble to re-ammunition and prepare the ship for sea prior to her departure on 15 December. She subsequently carried out a practice shoot from 'A' turret on 17 December (six blank and six full charge rounds) en route to Colombo, proving that at least some of the 6in armament was operable.

I think it is an open question as to what extent the firemain damage caused Mauritius' return to the UK at such a critical time. She had not been updated since commissioning for trials at the end of 1940 and was badly in need, inter alia, of additional radar and close-range weaponry. She was also assigned for oceanic convoy protection during her voyage back to the UK, a duty that one cruiser or other in the theatre would have had to undertake. It might be the case - and this is pure speculation - that it had always been the intention for her to return to the British Isles to complete modernisation around this time given Singapore would probably not have had the ability to complete the necessary radar upgrades.

Hope that this answer is of some help.


Conrad Waters

Conrad,

A splendid reply, if I may say so, despite the original question not being mine. Many thanks, it was a pleasure to read it.

81542

Thanks for the excellent reply. It is most illuminating & shows the value of not relying too strictly on internet sources. I couldn't quite grasp the relationship between her internal degaussing system and the corrosion of her firemains...

A postwar memoire by a (very young) crewmember of MAURITIUS also claimed they worked all night on Dec/ 10-11 to re-store the ship and then departed the very next day--the 11th, not the 15th--which struck me as rather odd, too. His recollection was that fears of losing the ship with her radar suite intact there at Singapore was an additional concern & prompted its swift departure, etc.

Thanks again.

Agreed.

I understand that this kit represents HMS Belfast as she appeared in 1942/43. Is it doable to build Belfast as she was in 1945 during her service with the BPF?


Darcy

Actually, I think you are in luck.

IIRC, the upper bridge (compass platform, etc.) is correct for a very later war or immediate post-war Belfast. It is NOT correct for any earlier wartime fits.

But I am not sure about the weapons fit. Get the Anatomy of the Ship: HMS Belfast. It has all the info you need.

HTH

Mike E.

_________________
Mike E.