Ouch ... looks like underwater wreck footage from Scapa ...
Thanks for that useful explanation. It seems that I still have to learn a lot when it comes to colours and paints ... but I'm pretty sure the procedures changed a lot for the KM-ships ...
has anybody a photo or plan of the antenna arrangement of sms K�nig in her 1918 fit? The excellent K�nig of JB is no real help as it shows the ship in her 1916 fit with the old foremast.
I have really a lot of K�nig photos but there is nothing to see between the masts.
these photos I have already, I search exactly the antennas between the masts. Best for sure a photo but a plan with the view from above would be enough. You know the view only from one side leaves enough possibiities to do mistakes.
Getting my interest into the German battleships I took out SMS K�nig from the loft stash. Well, this is certainly going to be a real beauty!
The kit supplies two versions of the bridge deck, one with and one without bridge wings. This really starts me wondering:
Were the bridge wings on all German capital ships, both in WW1 and WW2, swingable or what? When we look at the recent Revell Bismarck and Tirpitz this is obvious: the bridge wings were simply swung backwards by tackles, apparently they were only used when manoeuvering in harbour or, very obviously, through the Kieler canal, which had (and still has) some narrow bridge and lock passings.
Looking at detailed drawings (the dreadnought project) it seems that all capital ships had such arrangements. The extended bridge wings however were obviously very vulnerable when at sea: British battleships didn't have these at all to my knowledge.
So the question is: shouldn't have all K�nig-class models have the bridge wings, either extended (in harbour setting) or swung back (when at sea)?
And second: does anyone have details about the pivoting hinges and bridge wing supports on the K�nig class? These simple lips on the model (I already took off the offending bulwarks on them) only with a railing could never have supported the weight of a couple of men standing on them, so there must have been some form of support!
Thanks for your info, the war order makes definitely sense. That is: in case of imminent battle when these bridge wings might become an obstacle for the crew. Very similar to war orders (Royal Navy f.i.) to jettison all flammable materials in case of an imminent battle.
But for ships laying in harbour, with manoeuvering in view, like was the case in the major part of WW1, the measure does not make so much sense, as the Kiel canal had to be negotiated by many ships on several occasions. Not very handy if you just had thrown the bridge wings overboard, with no imminent danger at all...
If your analyis is correct then ALL German capital ships had their bridge wings thrown away in 1914, and we would have seen none of it during the rest of their lives... which is not the case.
So I'm still intrigued to find more photographs of ships with the bridge wings, either extended or stowed. The drawings of Friedrich der Grosse nicely show the arrangement: when stowed the bridge wings are hardly visible in side views of the ships. So it might be easy to overlook them and believe they are not there at all.
"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
Sincere apologies, I didn't intend at all to attack you! I appreciate very much your information, I believe I said so. Also sorry for using your nickname.
Well, I think many of us on this forum I striving for accuracy in our ship models, and sometimes achieving that is rather difficult, given the incompleteness of our sources. Interpretations can be made, and can be balanced against eachother. The interesting thing is that we are dealing with technological contraptions, and therefore that interpretations of sources also need to make sense in a technical way: that's why I made the remark about the weight on the bridges, and their vulnerability in a seaway.
Again, thanks for pointing out the structures on Friedrich der Grosze, I think they show very well what it should look like. Pity I haven't found any picture or drawing on the equivalent structure on one of the K�nigs yet.
Regards,
Maarten (with two a's, indeed)
"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
Thanks again Peter, these photographs are helpful! And I will certainly give those oil drums a thought, for the completeness of my model...
And I will certainly sudy your site too, soon.
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
We had a discussion of correct colors for WWI German battleship on previous page (page No.6 of this thread) and Olaf Held gave profound information on the subject. You will not find Tamiya paints numbers for that but you will find RAL codes.
If you want to know which Tamiya paint No. stands for a specific RAL code I offer you this link http://scalemodeldb.com/paintcharts/ral where you will see all RAL codes. Find a color you need (from Olaf's overview), click on it (according to its number) on the site above, click on 'Search similar colors' in a new opened window and the site will give you a closest match with Tamiya and other paints.
Hope this helps - sorry I did not paint with Tamiya so I do not know a straightforward answer. May be somebody else does but till then you have an alternative
Good luck with your Konig and do not forget to show the photos
My previous boss always asked me same question about my sales
Alas, my Grosser Kurfurst project is frozen as I got too tired of it (learning modeling working on it over 3 years) so I switched to a relax project in scratchbuilding (I thought it would be relax ). But I was slowly building up SMS GK here and there - it is 70-80% finished.
I got a good camera so I will make pics of Grosser Kurfurst on current stage and new hull of my scratchbuild V106 this week to sort of update myself on forum - it is nice to be here
Thank you for your interest - always pleasure to hear from you as well as to see your wonderful craftsmanship.
Cheers,
Yevgeniy
Last edited by Yevgeniy on Thu Jan 20, 2011 4:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Meanwhile I want to show a thread of Konig finished by one of my e-friends who was extensively using this Calling All Ship Fans thread and all the wonderful advice here: http://wmc.kvaksiuk.com/viewtopic.php?f ... 4&start=10
I am new to modelling and the ICM model of the Grosser Kurfurst is my going to be my second project. I had a whole raft of questions but this excellent thread has answered most of them. I bought the WEM PE set and thought "you must be joking" when I saw the torpedo net additions (all >120 odd davits and other bits). But then looking at some of the brilliant modelling go on here I thought I'd leap in at the deep end and give it a go and try and do her in her pre-Jutland form.
Anyway, I do have a question. I read that the second funnel was painted red whilst a ship was on its way to an operation and then re-painted grey on the way home for recognition purposes. Was this somewhat bizarre (to my mind) behaviour done throughout the conflict? i.e. would it be appropriate for a pre-Jutland form?
btw, my Grandfather served on the SMS Moltke throughout the conflict. That is a project for the future.
Heard that rear funnel was painted red directly before the battle so it would not be appropriate for pre-Yutland version. There are experts on Kaiser ships on this forum who will tell exactly.
Thanks for the reply. I don't think I expressed myself properly though. My question was whether painting the the funnel red when the ship was on combat operations (I believe it was done on occasions other than Jutland) was a practice carried out throughout the war and if not, when did it start?