Calling all HMS Repulse & HMS Renown fans

[EJFoeth]

HMS Hood doesn't have footrails for the funnels and I cannot recall any RN ship that does have footrails on the funnel There are a series of pulleys and wires from the bottom of the funnel to the top, so I suppose they use these to hoist boards to stand on during painting and such.



HMS Hood has a few rails on the quarterdeck bulkhead and on the forward superstructure, but that's about it. HMS Repulse doesn't have a bulkhead that spans two floors at that location and I cannot see footrails there either.

[rocketassistedkea]

Hey, thanks for that, and for digging out the photo, too;0)

Really? No footrails??
I have to admit, footrails ARE my sworn enemy....glueing them, after figuring how to make the little f*&%ers in the first place [cut down from a nice, soft Eduard 1/700 set]; is probably the hardest thing I've had to do, with any type of model. Some of the Udaloy is a bit of a mess, annoying; as I put a lot of work into getting rid of all the seams and the occasional CAD marks...then I get pva blobs everywhere-which you can't sand, and some wonky footrails! But I've figured it out [thanks to posts on here, mainly], and have tamed the beast! I just lay them on staunchions of masking paper, as with handrails, then glue [akwardly] with superglue, then thinned PVA. This combination's too fragile and akward for my liking though, so have put off all p.e work; 'till I get some Gator Grip, which I ordered the other day. If it works as advertised; then that should get rid of my remaining pe issues.
Thanks again;0) And long live Trumpeter! Back when I built models as a kid; it was the '350 ships you REALLY wanted-but couldn't afford [and there were only a handful of Tamiya battleships to choose from anyway]. By putting out so many nicely engineered kits, of new subjects too; I reckon Trumpeter now lead the '350 field, even if Dragon do have an edge in moulding tech [over everyone, except, perhaps, Hi-Mold?]. And the Repulse has slides in the moulds too. Nice.
Anyway, I'm rambling...
Love these wood decks too. Have one for the AFV club I-19, and besides one impediment [took seconds to remove, and is replaced by pe anyway]; it fitted perfectly. Astonishing.

Z

[phil gollin]

Just as a side note, I have a DVD of RN WW2-era instructional films, one of which is a review of the preparation required to take the machinery from cold up to full operational condition.

Part of this (shown on a destroyer) are a couple of sailors entering a hatch at the base of a funnel and climbing up the inside to take the canvas cover off the top of the funnel.

I've always wondered how often canvas covers were put over the tops of the funnels ?

.

[EJFoeth]

I'm currently working on the funnels of my model and noticed this system as well, with a walkway at the top of the funnel to reach all parts, just below the funnel cage that keeps the cover in place. I can't recall images of ships with those covers, except during construction and when mothballed. Images of funnel interiors are very rare, unfortunately, with one drawing in AOTS Dreadnought (which is a guestimate as well). I haven't good drawings and have reconstructed the funnel interior based on what few images there are and common sense.

[mifune]

Hello!

Happy New Year! I added a photo to the degaussing cable post on page 5. British pathe is always worth searching!

[Andrew F]

Wow!

thanks for that! It finally solves the conundrum of what happens to the coil and explains the cables I saw in 2007 draping from the bow.

Andrew

[Dave Martin]

Guys,
Sorry to dig up some old ground here, but was the question about whether or not Trumpeter got the hull parting correct for their 1:350 Repulse kit's waterline finally resolved?

Am looking at a waterline version for mine and wondered whether or not there was any actual need for dramatic surgery?

Thanks
Dave

[Andrew F]

From memory, the water line in the Trumpeter is as per the plans, but by 1941 she was sitting rather deeper in the water. The boot strap line is quite thick on her as well.

Andrew

[Dave Martin]

Thanks Andrew

[mifune]

Wow!

thanks for that! It finally solves the conundrum of what happens to the coil and explains the cables I saw in 2007 draping from the bow.

Andrew

I started wondering if the DG-cable on Renown was treated the same way...

Mikko

[mifune]

Wow!

thanks for that! It finally solves the conundrum of what happens to the coil and explains the cables I saw in 2007 draping from the bow.

Andrew

I started wondering if the DG-cable on Renown was treated the same way...and it seems like they did.

[rtwpsom2]

If anyone is interested, the National Archives of Scotland have a bunch of really and truly amazing pictures of HMS Repulse during her construction. You can view them here, however DO NOT BUY THEM FROM THIS SITE! This site is a for profit partner of the archives. The cheapest scan you could purchase from there is �10. You want to get them from the archives themselves. You can send an inquiry to them at WSR at nas.gov.uk. From the archives themselves, the cheapest scans they have are 50p, but you need to make it clear you are a modeler and will not be using them for profit. You will be asked to make a �15 deposit towards the work involved and as soon as they have your materials gathered they will send an estimate of the total cost. The �15 deposit will be deducted from the estimate. The deposit is non refundable so if you order less than that they will charge you �15 and keep the balance.

There are 263 images of the Repulse under construction, during fitting out, and underway. Altogether they would cost �132. They also have some fine images of the HMS Hood, HMAS Australia, HMS Barham, and HMS Tiger. There are even a few good ones of Ramilles, Jupiter, and Terrible to boot.

[RNfanDan]

Bear in mind, these outstanding builders' images will best serve those wishing to model the ship, as well as HMS Renown, only about as far as the early 1920s. After that point in time, the numerous and divergent alterations made to each battlecruiser (at least one of which permanently eliminated their "twin sisters" status), render them progressively less useful.

They will be especially valuable, on the other hand, to anyone wishing to "retro" one of the current 1940's-era Repulse or Renown kits.

[phil gollin]

This was in the new injection kit releases section ;

http://www.hlj.com/product/PITW-131

Somehow I doubt it will be the "final" version minus 4.5" turrets, but it might be interesting.

Three (?) versions from one mould hopefully is a good sign.

.

[Chuck Bauer]

Hi guys, I've been reading your stuff for some time now, have learned a lot and avoided a lot of errors by doing so.

I'm building the Trumpeter 1/350 Repulse with a combination of WEM, Eduard, and GMM photo etch. Have found a comfortable level of detail and have a couple of paint questions:

Should I paint the foreward main turrets one color or do I need to have a slightly darker shade on their tops like the Steve Backer diagram and one of his B&W photos suggests?

Are the inside walls of gun tubs and other structures the same color as their floor or do I need to paint them the same as the hull/camo color on the outside surface of the wall?

Any advice is welcome,

Chuck B

[RNfanDan]

(deleted)

[Andrew F]

Hi Dan,

Do you have a photo of her with out shields?

Andrew

[Chuck Bauer]

Thanks very much for your reply Dan! I'm going to proceed with what you gave me. I'm really hopeful those gunshields were installed by the time of her sinking which is how I am building her, and I've already built the guns with PE pieces etc.

[dick]

The concentric inner gun-tub tiers were steel, and each tier was fitted with replaceable, non-metallic traction strips. Note too, that Y-turret's Oerlikons were NOT fitted with these.

OT: In case it applies to your build, also keep in mind that NONE of the Oerlikons aboard the ship were fitted with shields, when she commenced seafloor trials.

To your color question, as far as I've been able to determine, both A&B turrets' roofs were the same as their vertical surfaces and barrels by mid to late 1941, i.e., in an all-round off-white/grey camo shade.

With Y-turret, it does not appear that any changes were made in its color throughout 1941; if it were mine to model therefore, I'd paint it 507A on top, with 507B sides and guns. I hate to use the old cliche', but I don't think anyone could prove you wrong, no matter which way you went!

Despite the tardiness of my reply, I hope this helps...

Dan,

I'm curious to know why you think that:

a. The Y turret Oerlikons did not have the tiered platforms for their gunners to stand on.

b. The Oerlikons were unshielded.

c. Y turret was not the same dull black as the aft superstructure just forward of it and the hull beneath/either side of it.

And what are "seafloor trials" - do you mean when sunk?

[RNfanDan]

... is hereby offered, for posting erroneous information. I advise all concerned to disregard any 1941 HMS Repulse information I have posted, beyond common-knowledge issues, here at MW Forums.

As I indicated previously, my chief research efforts lie firmly within other time periods of the ship's lengthy service career.

I will not likely be posting any further 1941 Repulse research, nor providing references for same, unless and until better resources and factual verification become available.

Best Wishes to all,

Dan