Calling all Illustrious-class & Implacable-class (WW2) fans

[Kazec]

For the two sisters of Implacable and Indefatigable, were they identical as built given their close completion date? Were there any major differences between them?

[iangazeley]

The rear boat deck arrangements differ between the two ships: Indefatigable's are in line with the crane boat deck, Implacable's are at a different level to the crane boat deck.

[Kazec]

The rear boat deck arrangements differ between the two ships: Indefatigable's are in line with the crane boat deck, Implacable's are at a different level to the crane boat deck.

Thank you. The difference is quite distinctive and really helps distinguish them from photos.

Is there a plan showing the location of the light AA guns as built? There were 21 � twin, 19 � single Oerlikon 20 mm anti-aircraft guns according to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, I can only locate about half of them at most. There are much less clear photos of 1944 than 1945 around the web. Would it be safe assume to the locations of 40mm single bofors were all formerly twin 20mm?

[Mike E.]

Friends:

Now that the Flyhawk HMS Formidable kit has been released, I was wondering whether this kit could be used "out of the box" to build an early war HMS Victorious?

I ask because the Naval Encyclopedia website published scans of the original builders plans for HMS Illustrious/Victorious and for HMS Formidable. I assume that if all three ships were identical, there would have been no need for a separate set of drawings for Formidable?

See here: https://naval-encyclopedia.com/ww2/uk/i ... rriers.php

Would anyone happen to know if there were any differences between Victorious and Formidable in their original fit? For instance, was the overall length of the two ships or their round-downs slightly different? Were there any other differences?

Please advise.

Thanks!

Mike E.

[Guest]

check out the armoured carrier site, they have plans for Formidable, https://www.armouredcarriers.com/hms-il ... ier-design
your link at the naval encyclopedia site has them for Victorious.
Hobbs, original builders plans Victorious, and those in above link seem (at first sight) to be the same
Ross, AOTS Victorious is not so clear
Both plans seem as planed, print and compare might help.
However, as they were built in different yards there could be changes.
Illustrious & Victorious were both built by Vickers-Armstrong, although again at different yards (Barrow & Newcastle), but the likelhood that they would be 'near-sisters' is highter. So could Flyhawks Illustrious FL1116(s) be a better starting point

maybe helps
good luck with the conversion, please inform us how you do it

[Mike E.]

All:

This is a preliminary "first look" at Flyhawk�s HMS Formidable�not a proper review.

Overall, this kit continues Flyhawk�s tradition of excellence in design, engineering, and molding. This is basically a reissue of the company�s kit of HMS Illustrious, with minor changes: a different flight deck, and an additional sprue with three new parts to account for differences between the two ships (the wrap-around platform for the front of the bridge, the forward deck elevator, and the telescoping radar mast). There are also two additional aircraft sprues in the HMS Formidable kit with Fairey Albacores.

Comparing the kit�s hull and flight deck to plans and photos of HMS Formidable, the basic outline looks fine (based on a quick eyeballing), though some of the portholes depicted on the kit are not visible in the plans or photos. At least some of these may have been plated over by the time Formidable joined the fleet.

Unfortunately, however, there is a major error in the execution of the kit's flight deck. On Formidable and her sisters (except for Illustrious, as-built), the catapult was mounted on a slightly elevated trapezoidal platform with angled/beveled edges that should run the length of the catapult. However, it appears that the Flyhawk kit designers misinterpreted the official plans for HMS Formidable. The kit�s catapult follows the outline of the light green area shown on these plans from the armouredcarriers.com website:

https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/cont ... rmat=2500w

In fact, the catapult platform should continue to the forward end of the catapult, where it flares out slightly (you can see this if you look carefully at the plans, as well as photos of Formidable).

Amazingly, the shape of the catapult platform is shown correctly in ALL the drawings in the kit�s instructions (including the painting guide/camouflage design artwork) as well as the CAD design image shown on these promotional photos published on the toylandhobbymodelingmagazine.com website here:

https://toylandhobbymodelingmagazine.co ... t-edition/

Likewise, the forward elevator that comes with the separate dedicated sprue for this kit is molded with the beveled catapult platform on its port side�but the deck lacks the raised catapult platform here. So the last minute change to the kit�if that is what it was�was not uniformly carried out. The raised port edge of the elevator will presumably need to be sanded down slightly to align flush with the flat deck.

The raised, trapezoidal catapult platform is a conspicuous feature of the class, and this will be very difficult to fix for even experienced scratch builders.

The overall brilliance of the kit makes this error all the more glaring�and disappointing.

I suspect that most modelers won�t care about this flaw, but given that Flyhawk (apparently) initially got the design of the catapult platform right, but then went with an incorrect configuration when producing the kit, it is disappointing.

Best,

Mike E.

[pascalemod]

Thanks for the update. that's rather unfortunate.
Do you have photos of the actual kit you have to make the comparison to plans and highlighting the mistake a little easier to follow for those of us who are not as familiar with the class?

Do you mind explaining better what would be the "fix" - or how would you fix it yourself if you had to regarding the deck? Sounds like the bridge is more doable as a fix.

Can the Illustrious be used to help with these flaws or / not a chance as too different?

[Mike E.]

Dear Pascalmod:

Below please find a scan of the as-fitted plans. Flyhawk portrayed the catapult as coterminous with the green areas of the plan. But if you look carefully at the plan, you can see that the catapult platform should extend further forward and flare out slightly.

How to fix it? You would need to sand down the raised area of the catapult so that the deck is flush (doable), and cut a piece of of thin sheet plastic in the right shape, bevel the edges, and affix it to the flight deck as depicted here (not so easy in 1/700--see the white sheet plastic area in the photo below):

This is a nicely done effort to superdetail and modify the Heller 1/400 HMS Illustrious by Chris Smithers.

Unfortunately, you can't use the deck from Flyhawk's HMS Illustrious kit, as she had a different catapult configuration than her sisters early on in her career, which Flyhawk seems to have accurately captured.

So this relatively minor correction is doable, though bevelling the edges in 1/700 scale will not be easy.

Good luck!

Best,

Mike E.

[MartinJQuinn]

Unfortunately, I lack the ability to post photos of the model on the web, as I don't have a Dropbox or similar file sharing account.

Luckily, you don't need a file sharing account to post photos to this forum. Just follow these instructions and you can upload them right to your post: viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1261#p209271

[drasticplastic]

So how thick should the plastic be - .5 mm; 1 mm??

[Mike E.]

All:

After additional research, I need to apologize for an incorrect comment regarding the wind baffles on the wraparound platform on the front of the bridge on HMS Formidable in 1941 (which I have subsequently deleted from the original posting-ME). It actually looks like they got it right.

I came across this photo of HMS Formidable in Norfolk, Virginia, part of a well-known series of pictures. It shows that Formidable had simplified wind deflectors in 1941, which were later replaced with the more complex wind baffle arrangement eventually used on Illustrious, Victorious, and Formidable. See here:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/262701596991

As for the catapult configuration on Illustrious, Victorious, and Formidable, would anyone know if the catapult rig originally fitted to Illustrious was different than the catapult rig subsequently fitted to Illustrious (later in the the war), Victorious, and Formidable?

Please advise.

Thanks!

Mike E.

[Mike E.]

All:

Below please find a schematic drawing from the kit's instructions of the flight deck from Flyhawk's HMS Formidable kit. I believe that this is a correct rendering of what the catapult should look like for all ships of the class (Illustrious, Victorious, and Formidable) more much of their wartime careers.

Thanks to Martin Quinn for sending me instructions on how to post these photos. Sorry that they're a bit ragged....

[Mike E.]

Drastic Plastic:

I have no idea, but I suspect .5mm is probably close enough...

HTH,

Mike E.

[dick]

From the photos I have it appears that Flyhawk�s �HMS Illustrious 1940� kit correctly models her narrow raised catapult run at that time.

However 1942 and 1943 photos of Illustrious show a wider shallow raised area either side of the original raised catapult run (and the neccessary raised port edge of the forward lift well).

I guess this was fitted during her repairs at Norfolk Navy Yard. Looking at this photo the regular pattern on her flight deck either side of the catapult perhaps shows �foundation� mounting bolts being fitted?

However from the few photos I have its hard to tell if it flared (in plan) towards the bow in exactly the same way as on Formidable and Victorious. Maybe someone has some good photos that show this feature?

Flyhawk�s design team seem very good and as you have demonstrated certainly knew of the correct shape on Formidable. I�m not sure how them seeking help from someone who knew the ship well would therefore have helped in this case? They would have sent those same drawings/CAD images to whoever they were seeking advice from and they would have appeared correct. As it happens Flyhawk now seem to consult Jamie and I on the paint schemes (and deck markings) for their RN offerings and although we tend to generate outline drawings this end of the schemes to send to them, I do cast an eye over anything Flyhawk might happen to send us of their plans for a model ship�s structure. This is what they sent a couple of months ago when discussing the markings around the catapult and it looked OK to me then�.

[iangazeley]

Post Norfolk refit it looks to be the same as Victorious/Formidable as commissioned. The 1944 photo shows the modified shape well. The second photo was taken during catapult trials in early August 1940, and the difference at the forward lift port edge is especially obvious.

[Guest]

thanks for the infos.
perhaps this thread should be put into 'Calling all HMS Illustrious/Implacable class (WW2) fans' (viewtopic.php?f=46&t=23454) so that i doesn't get lost.
Looking forward to getting my Formidable

[Mike E.]

All:

Thanks to all those who have provided photos and analysis for this discussion.

So it seems that based on the photographic evidence that has been submitted thus far, the verdict is:

1) The depiction of the catapult on Flyhawk's HMS Illustrious kit is CORRECT.

2) The depiction of the catapult on Flyhawk's HMS Formidable kit is INCORRECT--and seems to be based on a misreading of the color-coding used on the builder's plans.

BTW, would anyone know what the green color used on the plans means? I have a lo-res scan that is unreadable, so I cannot tell.

What is interesting (as I noted in my initial review) is that Flyhawk seems to have gotten the configuration of the catapult for HMS Formidable right in their line drawings provided with the kit instructions and their pre-production CAD renderings, but somehow got it wrong with the kit.

Thanks all!

Best,

Mike E.

[Mike E.]

The "missing link" at this point is the absence of photos of Formidable's flight deck from the early '41 period.

Below please find a photo of Formidable (from the ArmoredCarriers.com website), timeframe unknown (but probably prior to her repairs in Norfolk, Virginia, as she seems to lack the 20mm AA positions installed on the port and starboard quarters of her rounddown at around that time IIRC) which shows the raised and flared catapult platform. (At least I believe it is Formidable--based on the apparent placement of the telescoping radar aerial and the simplified wind deflector arrangement on the wraparound platform forward of her bridge). Of course, it is possible that Formidable had a different catapult arrangement earlier in her career, and the full-length catapult platform was installed at a later date, as was apparently done with Illustrious. But this raises the question of why would you want to have a raised platform for only part of the length of the catapult, as portrayed on Flyhawk's kit of Formidable? From a functional point of view, it seems that you would want to have a consistent, level surface for the entire length of the catapult--as shown here:

https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/cont ... asset.jpeg

Would anyone have photos that could address the issue of her catapult arrangement in early '41, before she was damaged in the Mediterranean and sent to Norfolk, Virginia for repairs?

Thanks in advance!

Mike E.

[iangazeley]

Formidable in late 1940 or very early 1941, with a Blackburn Roc TT on deck. At the bow end it looks like there is flare on the print/negative, but the catapult appears to be full length/width.

[dick]

Mike, I date your aerial photo to Oct 1940. It shows the flare (highlighted on its starboard side by the slightly curved white line Flyhawk were asking Jamie and I about). Whatever the precise date it is certainly pre-USA repairs because, as you say, various structural A&As completed at Norfolk during 1941 are absent.

In addition to that photo and also Ian's, by way of further confirmation of the full-length extra width and forward end flare around the catapult pre the 1941 Norfolk repairs see the RN damage report illustration:

Difficult to know what happened at Flyhawk but having got it right late July, someone must have had a last-minute loss of confidence and insisted on moulding only what the As Fitteds show in green/blue. Pity.

Best wishes