The Ship Model Forum

All:

Going through the IWM website last night, I came across a film of HMS Kent taken in Far Eastern waters in July and August 1939. It shows some really interesting details regarding Kent which I will discuss momentarily. I sent the link to our Japanese friend Mitsuaki Kubota who added the link and screen grabs to his review thread on Twitter of the 1/700 Aoshima HMS Kent kit. A few points:

Here is a screen grab of one of the 4" HA guns amidships, which shows that the steel deck around it had a grid pattern on it (similar to the grid pattern often used on the non-slip surfaces on the forecastle decks of British cruisers). Would anyone know whether non-slip grid patterns were applied to steel decks elsewhere than on the forecastle deck on other British ships? Note also the slightly raised wooden deck at the top of the screen which is probably the platform for the aft 4" HA gun:

https://twitter.com/fake_johnbull/statu ... 13792?s=20

And here on the left is a screen grab of the forecastle deck which shows the non-slip grid pattern on the steel deck forward of the breakwater (the Aoshima kit erroneously depicts the forecastle deck forward of the breakwater as covered by wooden planks--as it was on other ships of the class). The screen grab on the right shows the bridge deck, and just beyond the wind deflector fence, you can see a few wooden planks on the deck atop the forward deckhouse and around B turret. It shows that this deck was planked, whereas the kit shows it as a smooth steel deck.

https://twitter.com/EnjakuHaruzono/stat ... 03041?s=20

I should add that I guess it is always possible that semtex was applied over the steel deck amidships as well as over the forward deckhouse deck around B turret during her early war repairs, so it is possible that the kit is not incorrect in that respect. Thoughts?

If you would like to review the entire film, it can be found here:

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item ... 1060009592

Most noteworthy for me were the segments showing the forecastle deck and anchor tackle gear at 10:05-11:00 and 15:27-15:42, and a panoramic view of the bridge at 16:00-16:21.

Finally, you can find Mitsuaki Kubota's wonderful Twitter review of the Aoshima HMS Kent kit here:

https://twitter.com/fake_johnbull/statu ... 90240?s=20

In short, a great kit, but with some unnecessary errors which will be a pain to correct (the wood-planked forecastle deck which should be steel with a grid pattern, and the deck atop the forward deckhouse which should be planked--but is smooth).

Enjoy!

Best,

Mike E.

_________________
Mike E.

Mike, a good find and very relevant discrepancies noted for those planning to build Kent.

On the subject of film reels, this extra find may interest yourself and others.
Captioned under `Operation Menace` containing 3 reels.
Third reel, unfortunately not correct for that operation, shows Norfolk taken from HMAS Australia in Aug 40 whilst both cruisers were patrolling around Bear Is for blockade runners.
It shows merchantman Ericus bailed up for inspection, I cannot find any recorded information on that Finnish ship.
At that time she wore 2 completely different schemes port and strbd, port side was the complex scheme worn 2nd qtr of 40, and her strbd pattern was something similar to that recorded in WSP Vol 1 for early 41 but a new addition to her collection.

Brett:

Thanks so much for sharing those! I always wondered if the scheme with the small warship profile superimposed on the port side of Norfolk was also on the starboard side. Now it appears that at least for part of her career, there were vastly different schemes on each side!

And here is the link for anyone interested: https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item ... 1060020157

Thanks!

Mike E.

_________________
Mike E.

In case it is of interest to anyone modeling the new kit of HMS Kent in 1940, she entered the Suez Canal 14 Aug 1940 on her way north to join the Mediterranean Fleet in overall light grey (507C) with clean wooden decks. Immediately on reaching the Mediterranean she painted over the light grey base a pattern of dark grey camouflage panels, some of which (see below) had thin medium grey edging strips.
This pattern was carried onto the decks but it looks (from film) like a stain rather than paint may have been used on the deck as there is not the same depth of colour (the caulking between the wooden planks still shows through once whatever is brushed on has settled). Note the chalk marks:
(The film MGH 2739 https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item ... 1060011105 is not available online but you can click the “Show more” button under the “Full description” heading to see where the dates for the above stills come from.)

Kent was therefore in this scheme when torpedoed on 17 September 1940. Confirmation of this comes in a photo of her, down by the stern, being assisted back into Alexandria by tugs on 19th September:
https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/ ... -162249759

It was originally possible to copy a better quality version of this photo. In that version it is just possible to discern the thin medium grey strip along both edges of the dark grey camouflage panel on the starboard quarter and to the rear edge of the centre hull panel. Forward of that it gets a bit fuzzy. Also I cannot make out whether this feather edging also existed at that time anywhere above the hull ie on the camouflage panels on the superstructure, turrets and funnels. My current interpretation is that it did not ie only hull (and deck given the chalk lines) camouflage panels had the medium grey edging. (Maybe someone has other images?)

She left the Mediterranean for full repairs in the UK in this scheme but during a stopover at Simonstown the pattern was repainted but with some adjustments. She arrived back in the UK as repainted at Simonstown:
https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item ... /205137112
https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item ... /205136932

Very interesting research you have done, Dick!

_________________
"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

Brett thankyou very much for those excellent pics from Oct17!

My model is now painted on the hull and what superstructure there is, looking resplendent in the China Station white with 507B upper. A very cool paint scheme, pun intended (the white hull to keep things cooler in tropical waters?) If anything, the only disappointment is my red hull came out a little darker once sealer coat on, could have been using a darker primer, oh well.

I have a further question now it's time to get into the superstructure and the scratchbuilding starts.

The back of the bridge structure: thank you for the pics of the rear of Australia's bridge. I am looking at the "second floor" - on the plan linked above it's the one with the words 'telescope' and 'FW Tank' on it. On the Australian ships it appears a single rectangular structure, viewed from the rear it is the same width as the level below it, and the level above.

On the trumpeter kit, it is split into two structures, with the rear one wider than the floor below, when viewed from behind. There is a 'gap' between the structures where you can see through if viewing from amidships. I can see this on the builder's model of HMS Cumberland, and I reckon on one amidships pic of Cornwall. It's an area that is hidden away in many pics.

My question is, did the British ships have a different bridge plan? If they are the same as the Australian ships in 1927-32, then I have some scratchbuilding to do.

Also, can someone tell me the correct names for all the deck levels, it might make questions easier.

Thankyou,

J

Three further kit questions:

Does anyone have a wood deck out for the kit yet?

Could you use the Infini-model Exeter brass pole masts on it to capture a County as built?

https://www.bnamodelworld.com/aftermark ... 524e71ee40

And, the wooden deck around B turret, was this actually wood as built, or should it be done in dark grey?

Hi Jack,

I'm not really sure about what you mean, but this plan of "Kent - as fitted" is maybe helpful, although at low resolution. You may indicate by adding arrows or so what your precise question is.

_________________
"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

KENT's "as fitted" plans dated 1928 show the structure on the Lower Bridge* is not a straightforward rectangle (but with no "see-through" gap when viewed from abeam). The attached scans (poor copy of the original plans) show the plan and (in red on the second) my interpretation of the sides of the structure.
* The plans label the decks as "Upper Deck" (ie the one running full length from bow to stern), "Superstructure Deck", "Lower Bridge", Upper Bridge" and "ADO's Platform".

Thankyou Maarten and tj for the replies. I think that may be a plan of Kent post-reconstruction? It seems to have the twin 4" AAs.

I will try to link a couple of pics to show you the area I may have to modify. TJ I think it's the floorplan of the lower bridge, as per your plans. Interesting that the plan of Kent extends back in contrast to the Aussie profiles.

And here from the back of the bridge. In both pics I'm pointing at the area with my scraper.

Unfortunately Jack, it appears you have some scratch building to do.
Your earlier question concerning B gundeck, it would have been timber decking.

Cheers again for the pics Brett! I don't mind a bit of scratchbuilding (Maarten's work initially on this thread was excellent, how do you get the evergreen strip so precise and straight?!) I think I'll take a good look at the '32 Kent pic - great angle btw - and, the builder's model of Cumberland and the plans/pics of the rear of Australia's bridge to work out how I will do this level. For a short while last night I dug up the pics of Canberra fitting out and thought I could see a gap in this level as well - were my eyes playing tricks? I'd imagine if you were trying to tie up alongside a pier with one of these things, they'd have a junior officer out on the lower bridge wings calling the distance, and maybe having a gap in the superstructure might allow the officers to easily call between port and starboard... Nevertheless, the '32 Kent pic looks solid there.

As I go further up the bridge, more mods will need to be done. The deck plan of the lower bridge will need to be trimmed in aft as well - different shape than molded in the Trumpeter kit. It would be more simple to produce a 3d file of the early 30's bridge, however my printer doesn't seem to print to the quality I'd need.

Hope you guys were OK in all the fires up that way Brett. We usually come up your way to surf the points and backbeaches just before Easter.

_________________
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).

Hi Willie,

Welcome joining us here on this topic!

As for the hull plans of the Norfolk and London classes, you only have to turn back to page 15 of this thread: http://www.shipmodels.info/mws_forum/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=6188&start=280 A little below the middle of the page. And see: these latter sub-classes have a very different hull structure - no bulges and vertical sidewalls! So before starting on the upperworks of the Norfolk or Dorsetshire, you'll first have to fix the hull difference. When done I can help you to plans of the different superstructures.

Regarding your second question, it is pretty hard to tell the ships apart in that period, but the colour is almost certainly light grey overall, as became the standard for all Mediterranean and Asia based ship at that time.

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

The o/h qtr image posted is rather poor resolution, but appears to be that of LONDON, or SUSSEX.
Whilst these ships were under constant changes, there are markers which can aid in identifying individual ships.
Among others one marker is the structure between the forward and central funnel.
It is difficult to see if what is seen on the aircraft barbette is actually a catapult or rails for the aircraft to be mounted.
If no catapult is fitted the date of the image is approx. 1933 early 34.

_________________
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).

Dear Willie,

Thank you for your kind comments.

As per my post viewtopic.php?f=48&t=6188&start=280#p760675 I am happy to confirm that according to all the documents I have seen, from the summer of 1935 the new China Station colours for cruisers, destroyers and aircraft carriers was overall light grey 507C. The relevant instruction was China Station Temporary Memorandum No. 567 which stipulated that the repainting was to be completed by 1st May 1935. This instruction was subsequently confirmed in China Station General Orders Chapter IV para 92a and reported back to the Admiralty in London in 1936. The painting scheme was then included in subsequent immediate pre-WW2 ship painting AFOs such as this 1937 one:



There is plenty of photographic evidence of RN ships in Hong Kong immediately pre-WW2 to confirm this was the case. Also, given your interest in Kent, if you have not seen it yet, you might enjoy this: https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item ... 1060009592


Best wishes

_________________
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).

Willie, that's a great question, and one I was going to ask as well.

Were the ships completed with Teak all the way to the bow? And when was it replaced/plated over?



*Also, if anyone wants to modify the hull to make a non-bulged County, good luck! Maybe it would be possible to infill the trapezoidal shape of the hull with straight outriggers, then infill this with a foam you could sand back. Once done, all the detail has to be added. After what I just went through removing the armoured belt, I won't be the first to try the straight hull!