Calling all October Revolution / Marat / Gangut class fans

[Timmy C]

The Marat? No.

[henk]

Did Zveda gave a new release date or is it going to compete with the Dragon 1/350 Atlanta in when not to be released?

Henk

[biercemountain]

Revell of Germany is releasing a 1/350 kit of the Gangut in WWI configuration.

Paul

[Timmy C]

It's from the Zvezda Sevastopol mold, though unsure whether it incorporates any new parts to reflect differences between the ships.

[biercemountain]

It's from the Zvezda Sevastopol mold, though unsure whether it incorporates any new parts to reflect differences between the ships.

I had a feeling about that. Perhaps the Revell offering will be cheaper than Zvezda's.

Paul

[lejnev]

Good day!

The difference of the Russian Baltics dreadnoughts ( Sevastopol type) soon after commissioning.

Due that all sister ships have built on the different shipyards, they had some difference in constructions.
�Sevastopol� and �Petropavlovsk� were built by Baltic shipyard . �Gangut� and �Poltava� � on Admiralty shipyard. The both shipyards are located in Sankt-Petersburg.


1.Aft funnel

GANGUT and POLTAVA :
There were the inclined ladders from the main deck up to the searchlight platform with the hatches .
In additional there were spar ladders, but without hatches on the searchlight platform ( see photo 1) .




Photo 1

Sevastopol and Petropavlovsk :
There was only spar ladder with hatch on the platform ( see photo 2).



Photo 2

Sevastopol and Petropavlovsk :
there were nettings in front on , and behind atf funnel ( see parallelepiped construction between big ventilation hatches on the photo 3)



Photo 3

There were no netting on the Gangut and Poltava ( see photo 4)



Photo 4


All ships had a different places for deck-mounted winches which operated with coal derricks


Bow area
� There were ventilation tubes near anchors hawsehole on Sevastopol and Poltava ( on the direction to the stern) ( see photo 5)



Photo 5



1. Afterdeck

Sevastopol and Petropavlovsk : there were skylights on the afterdeck ( see photo 6)



Photo 6

Gangut and Poltava : there were two additional portholes on the port side and star-board side (see photo 7)



Photo 7

Aft conning tower
Gangut and Poltava : the boxes for signal flags were installed inside the bridge rail ( see photo



Photo 8


Sevastopol and Petropavlovsk : the boxes for signal flags were installed inside and outside the bridge rail ( see photo 9)



photo 9

2. Net defence booms .

� - �Poltava� and �Gangut� : the blocks for boom topping lifts were fixed on the top of main armor belt (see photo 10)



Photo 10

� - �Sevastopol� and �Petropavlovsk� : the blocks for boom topping lifts were fixed on the middle level of casemate ( see photo 11)



Photo 11



3. Upper ( main) deck near aft conning tower: All ships had a skylights on the left and right sides of aft conning tower ( please note : there weren't ventilation mushrooms) (Photo 12)



Photo 12

4. Upper (main) deck near crans

� - �Poltava� and �Gangut� : the ladders from upper deck to lower deck were parallel of center plane.
� - �Sevastopol� and �Petropavlovsk� : the ladders from upper deck to lower deck were perpendicular of center plane.
�

5. Upper (main) deck between aft conning tower and aft gun tower.

- the torpedo loading hatches were installed parallel of center plane on all ships.




6. The hatches on ventilation trunks
� �Gangut� and �Poltava� : hinges line is perpendicular to the center plane ( see photo 13).



Photo 13


� �Sevastopol� and �Petropavlovsk� : hinges line is parallel to the center plane. ( Photo 14)



Photo 14


7. Additional platform on the back side of the front funnel.
� - �Poltava� and �Gangut� : there were no platforms.
� - � �Sevastopol� and �Petropavlovsk� : there were platforms with vertical spar ladder.


Individual features of the ships.
1. �Poltava� � the holes on the tops of funnels
2. �Petropavlovsk� �has 7 portholes between the two stern guns on starboard and 6 portholes on the portside. Other sister ships had 6 portholes from both sides.

3. �Sevastopol� � unusual shape of the second level of forward housing near the funnel ( compare with other sister ships). See photo 15



Photo 15


4. Differences in the rails on the bridge superstructure and on the platform on the aft funnel.

Bow superstructure Aft funnel Aft superstructure
�Sevastopol� three lines two lines two lines
�Petropavlovsk� three lines two lines three lines
�Gangut� three lines three lines three lines
�Poltava� three lines two lines three lines



Alexey Lezhnev.

[DariusP]

Excellent post Alexey! Thanks!

[Tim Jacobs]

I see North Star has produced an extensive PE set for the Zvezda Sevastopol. Has anyone used it and have an opinion of it they can share?

http://freetimehobbies.com/1-350-north- ... p-set-pro/

[William]

Greetings! I am new to this thread. My local hobby shop has the Revell 1/350 Gangut. I am interested in this kit but have read few reviews. Does anyone here have any insights?

Thanks!

Bill Morrison

[Miguel]

Greetings! I am new to this thread. My local hobby shop has the Revell 1/350 Gangut. I am interested in this kit but have read few reviews. Does anyone here have any insights?

Thanks!

Bill Morrison

Is a reboxed version of the Zvezda Gangut ,so no fear, is a good model,here is the review.
http://www.modellmarine.de/index.php?op ... tid=58:rev

[William]

Thanks! I went ahead and bought it. It does look nice OOB.

Bill

[William]

New question . . . I see that Zvesda had released kits of each of the ships of this class. Are they all the same molds or do they differ in any way?

Thanks!

Bill

[Miguel]

AFAIK are the same in case of Revell Gangut ,Zvezda Poltava and Zvezda Sevastopol ,the only different is the Zvezda Marat which BTW is very nice and is a modernized version of the Petropavlovsk

[William]

Miguel,

Thank you for your responses! I appreciate your help!

Bill

[Miguel]

Miguel,

Thank you for your responses! I appreciate your help!

Bill

Most welcome and very glad

[Mr. Church]

Some pictures of Marat in different years from tsushima.su

(Photos of Marat on Page 1 of the thread)

Interesting aerial recognition symbol in stretched fabric visible in the second last photo there. Any ideas what colours it was or what campaign it was from?

Photo in question: download/file.php?id=46899&mode=view

[drdoom1337]

How much change is needed on the 1/350 Marat kit to turn it into the October Revolution after the 1941 Kronstadt refit. I won't pretend to be an expert on this class of ship, but I really like the way they look and will be ordering the Marat kit.

[Dan Banks]

Looking to convert the Zveda Sevastopol 1/350 to the Pariskaya Kommuna in 1930. The major parts needed are the clip on bow, that was fitted in France on the way to the Black Sea, a slightly curved fore funnel, and the catapult that was fitted to number 3 main turret. Other than a main director on the forward superstructure, that will about do it. I remember seeing a post about someone attempting this but I can�t find it. The catapult was a Heinkel K-3 air powered that looked a lot like catapults on Japanese ships. In 1/350 the total length would be 2 3/8�. Anyone have, or know of a model that would have this catapult?