Calling all HMS Repulse & HMS Renown fans

[JCRAY]

Lots of pretty CAD. Not as accurate as R&R. Waste of paper. jc

[RNfanDan]

[JHS]

You are the man! Many thanks!

[KevinD]

Lots of pretty CAD. Not as accurate as R&R. Waste of paper. jc

Funny you should say that as John Roberts himself (one of the R's in R and R I believe) thought the artist had done a good job (save for the couple of errors I allude to in my first post).

Each to his own I suppose, but FAR from a waste of paper IMO, but no doubt to some of you experts it may be.

And no, I have nothing whatsoever to do with marketing the book, just a appreciative reader.

[JHS]

Did Roberts review this publication? If he did, I'd like to read the review. Where did he comment on it? If he liked it, maybe I'll get it.

[JCRAY]

Sorry to sound so harsh. I bought the book to rebuild the rear gun houses & help w/ the DG cable. I already had 1/500 sc plans in Profile Morskie. I feel the Artist missrepresented the port rear gun house in a wierd manner that does not appear anywhere else. I was dismayed that such a glaring error could reach publication without anyione looking at existing sources. Pretty CAD, a dissapointment considering available plans & photos, more "misinformation" into the public record, "who cares". jc

[KevinD]

Did Roberts review this publication? If he did, I'd like to read the review. Where did he comment on it? If he liked it, maybe I'll get it.

No he did not 'review' it per se. He looked at various excerpts from it and made personal comments to me that he thought overall it was well done although there were some mistake he noticed (that I alluded to in my first post).

[KevinD]

Sorry to sound so harsh. I bought the book to rebuild the rear gun houses & help w/ the DG cable. I already had 1/500 sc plans in Profile Morskie. I feel the Artist missrepresented the port rear gun house in a wierd manner that does not appear anywhere else. I was dismayed that such a glaring error could reach publication without anyione looking at existing sources. Pretty CAD, a dissapointment considering available plans & photos, more "misinformation" into the public record, "who cares". jc

Yes the rear deck house is one of the error items that was picked pick up on.

But as for "more misinformation into the public record, who cares". I do, and in spades!! If you knew any authors, artists or editors I have �worked� with they would tell you I am an almost unbearable pain in the arse when it comes to �getting it right�. But even so, mistakes still get made.

But, as I became involved with the artist on another 3D project (the wreck of Prince of Wales) after his Repulse book was already at the publishers, there was not much I could do about that. Beside I am no expert on Repulse, or PoW for that matter (although I am very knowledgeable with regards both wrecks). And yes you are correct that he could have had it reviewed by �experts� but not everyone has the access to experts or knows of all the forums that are out there (not that they don�t carry misinformation at times) or has the time to participate in them.

That being said, your points are valid.

However, although I do not know anything about the plan of Repulse from the Morskie books, the plan of PoW in them has errors. Sadly, no matter how hard we try, it seems we can�t always be perfect.

[JCRAY]

Kevin I'm sorry I came off like a jerk. I did not expect the dwgs to be so far off, in the area I bought the book for. I'm a CAD guy myself (way below the authors level!). I'm also a diver & I have the upmost respect for your work. Perhaps it (the book) will be revised in the future. I also agree there are faults with all refrences, it keeps me buying books. jc

[JHS]

Well,when all the smoke clears, the Kagero is just another popular publication with the customary perennial errors dating back 32 (!!!!) years to hoary old Raven/Roberts plans which were the gold standard of the time. Certainly not interesting enough to buy. One can fill your bookshelves with "stuff" or try to find "the goods"---I'll go for the goods. With all the current interest in REP, I have no doubt there will be some definitive or, near definitive, plans coming soon. The work of RNfanDan shown on this very thread clearly shows the hard work of getting the details right is being done and done magnificently. Pretty ain't good enough.

[angeleyes]

Hello gentlemen .I recently bought the trumpy repulse 1/350 and trying to come up with a version that needs the least amount of work to depict correctly.I have however one question regarding the kit no mmater the version : the forward 1st level deck area behind the second main gun tower shows in the instructions as painted basically as been wooden deck area.But in the kit the area does not have any wood planking molded as the rest of the deck but is plain as been steel covered.I am a bit confused here.Is it steel but painted same as rest of wooden deck or trumpy didnt bother representing the deck planks in that area altogether.For what is worth i think in the 1/700 Tamiya kit the same area is represented as been wood planks.

[Andrew F]

Does anyone have anymore information on the DG cable?

I'm at the point where I'll have to bite the bullet and just make something up.
The cable from the hood set will not work... so I was thinking of using 0.3mm wire.

The cable forward of the breakwater would appear to sit on the deck. However, U/W photos do not show it reaching the stem. Does any one have any idea about how it may have run?

U/W there was a large cable hanging down in about the correct position. Unfortunately at the time I wasn't interested in it and didn't film it other than to avoid getting tangled in it!


The thing on the left is the breakwater (the ship being almost upside down)



Andrew

[RNfanDan]

Andrew--

If I were asked to define a route for an external DG cable, transiting at some point from the ship's side to the foc'sle deck, I'd choose the very place where apparently the RN thought to do so---just forward of the breakwater on either side of the ship, where a "gutter" (apologies, but I am tired and cannot recall offhand the proper term for such a feature as I write this) terminates along the deck edge.

I believe this is why the DG cabling, in photographs where it can be seen clearly, seems to disappear at the forward end of its sloped run upward to the deck, from the armor belt ledge. Beginning here, the outer shell plating would conceal the cable and conduit, for a short distance forward toward the bow. A series of images taken while the ship was undergoing a refit in 1940, show the degaussing cables ran all the way to the bow, secured to the forecastle deck and gutter with omega clamps.

--Dan

[Andrew F]

Hi Dan,

Thanks for the reply... and I suspect you are largely correct,

But what "gutter" are you referring to?

Here are the plans for the forecastle:


Andrew

[RNfanDan]

...these gutters:

[Andrew F]

Ah!,

I see now.... page 210 R&R...



Another feature magnificently not modelled on the Trumpeter kit!!

(excuse the $.... its from a free scanner driver for the mac I'm trialling!)

Andrew

[Andrew F]

Just dragged out my Airfix repulse (unmade) and its WEP PE set. Interestingly in that they include the DG cable!! They have it as a double cable of a similar nature to the one on Hood and have it cross the bow from port to starboard just in front of the Breakwater. Wonder where they got that information from??

Andrew

[Andrew F]

I've made up two versions of the DG cable for the Trumpeter kit. One from .03mm wire (probably too thin) and the other using the GM Hood set PE DG cable.
They can be seen on the "Works in Progress page".

I'd be keen for your opinions as to which looks closer to correct. My "gut feeling" is that the GM one is better and will look OK when painted.

Andrew

[RNfanDan]

[WEP] have it as a double cable of a similar nature to the one on Hood and have it cross the bow from port to starboard just in front of the Breakwater.
Andrew

Newer information has since proven there were no HMS Hood-style "paired conduits" used aboard Repulse. The cabling ran all the way forward to the bow, held in place by omega clamps, and never did cut across the forecastle ahead of the breakwater.

This information is actually from dockyard photographs that were taken during the ship's 1940 refit. They were not available to me at the time this post was first made--DB.

[EJFoeth]

Here's a pic of such a double cable that ran double (only around the stern and bow) on HMS Hood, but many other cruisers as well. Just flip through R&R's cruiser volume.



HERE my degaussing cable construction is explained. I used styrene that a) gives it a better appearance than any PE set I've seen so far, b) gives me control over the thickness of the cable (Upper is thinner than the lower cable) and c) you can get it to move more fluidly over the model.