Calling all Bismarck and Tirpitz fans

[Timmy C]

Revell indicates that their 1/700 Tirpitz will have a hull and deck different from Bismarck's, as those areas are in blue rather than white/grey, indicating they are parts done for Tirpitz: http://www.revell.de/en/products/model_ ... 05099&sp=1

Here's the link to the 1/350 Tirpitz instruction booklet (35mb PDF file!) for reference: http://www.revell.de/manual/05096.PDF

[Brian Miller]

Hi, I'm hoping one of the experts on this board can help me out on this easy question (I hope). I'm gonna build the Tirpitz in Paint Scheme L and my question is... Is the hull painted black or a very dark grey? I'm not a person who will go nuts about getting the exact color close is good enough. Also can someone give me a link to a model that sports this camo? Thanks.

[Olaf Held]

I'm not an expert but I think the hull was dark grey. It still stands to question if it was the "regular" dark grey they used for camouflage patterns ("Absatzfarbe Dunkelgrau" ~ Dunkelgrau 2 ~ RAL 7024) or if it was the darker boot-topping paint ("Wasserlinienfarbe Dunkelgrau" ~ RAL 7016, very dark but NOT black).

The superstructure was either light grey ("Deckfarbe Hellgrau" ~ Hellgrau 50 ~ RAL 7001) or the medium grey normally used for the hull ("Deckfarbe Dunkelgrau" ~ Dunkelgrau 51 ~ RAL 7000). A few structures of the superstructure were white, difficult to tell from photos.

All of the above mentioned colours are available from WEM and others. Even if you do not want to strive for 100% matches, all of them are a good starting point, maybe for toning them down for scale-effect.

Be careful with the RAL 7016; I was told the "AR G 08" in the WEM range (Armour > WWII Wehrmacht) is closer to RAL 7016 than its counterpart in the Kriegsmarine range (KM 05) which has a slightly greenish hint ...

Painted model:
Please have a look at this one:
http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... index.html

The dark grey deck (same as hull) is to my knowledge not yet fully confirmed. Maybe you can contact Antonio and ask him about this, he's a member of this forum as well.

Happy painting ~ Olaf!

[USN_Matt]

I have a question and I know its been talked about many times, but whats the closest, already mixed paints to the hull and superstructure of the bismark? I messed up on the Baltic camo, I made the black and white stripes WAY to thick.

[Michael Potter]

See the post in the Main Forum announcing a free presentation by participants (RAF, Luftwaffe, Norway) in the sinking of the Tirpitz.

[amiers]

i am just about to start my final build of the bismarck. over 30 years i have built 18, each better as my skill grew. however this is it.

Now first thing i need to get straight is the deck colour. there is a lot of differing opinions. Olaf and i have discussed it before, but noone has really come up with the answer. i am tempted to go with one of the KA wood decks, but i think its a bit too yellow.http://www.bnamodelworld.com/index.php? ... ts_id=4043.


So all opinions are welcome.

[Jumpy Bob]

Removed.

[Jumpy Bob]

Removed.

[rtwpsom2]

Bob, the decks were made of teak and were not stained. If you want to know what color they would have been, all you have to do is look up images of teak planking. Teak was very durable and it would have been holystoned every few weeks to keep it smooth, which is like sanding. It would have been the yellow of newly cut or sanded teak.

[amiers]

Amiers,

In reference to your Avatar that you have, for posting, is this the shield on the bow of Bismarck?

Let me know.

Thanks.

yes it is.

[navydavesof]

Good afternoon contributers!

Does anyone know if there are replacement turrets for 1/350 Bismarck and Tirpitz? I have not been able to find any yet either commented up on here in the forum or on the net. Thanks!

[rtwpsom2]

The hull plates on Bismarck were butt welded. There was no overlap and no riveting. There was sometimes some joint lapping on the really thick armor plates, but the resulting joint was always smooth surface to surface. All you would see of the joint is a weld bead. Please see AOTS page 60 and 61 for drawings of the cross sections which are fairly accurate.

[Olaf Held]

I'm not quite sure about the destroyers. I think they did not weigh anchor with the two capitals. Did they even stay overnight there? Hmmm ...

Camouflage and air recognition ~ Yes, the b/w stripes of the superstructure were painted over on transit to Norway. The rest (on the hull plus the dark bow and stern plus the false stern wakes) while at anchor in Grimstad fjord. Right, only thing that remained were the false bow waves - they changed their forward curve a bit, at least that's what I believe.

It's not only the red, white and black of the swasticas on the poop and f'c'sle that you see on the wreck, you even see the grey paint they used to paint it over. It's not quite clear what you're referring to with "homeland" ports. In fact, those air recognition signs (where there are two types of them, btw.) - were used as long as the ships where in range of the Luftwaffe air cover.

Hull welding ~ See above answers. Be careful, if building such a huge model, keep an eye on those portions of the hull that were riveted...

What time window will your model reflect? The morning of May 22nd?

Happy modelling ~ Olaf!

[Olaf Held]

Time line wise, the Bismarck was only in Grimstadfjord for roughly 12 hours. 0800 hours to 2000 hours, May 21, 1941.

I was referring to the destroyers anyway...

I originally wanted the Bismarck build to reflect Wednesday, May 21, 1941. I believe this to be the second last repaint order that was given.
The argument is to build him to reflect May 26, 1941, when the last order was given to repaint the top of the turrets a yellow. Only the yellow paint held on the main turrets, the others were washed out by the sea.
However, in order to do that, we would have to add all the damage that Bismarck had suffered, in those 5 days. All that information will never be available.
It would be wrong to build the Bismarck as of May 26, 1941, without reflecting all the damage. If it was up to me only, I would like to build him as he left Grimstadfjord, on May 21.

There were and there will be heated discussion about those yellow turret tops during the ships�s last battle. If nobody comes up with a great masterplan on how to lift one of the main turrets off the seabed in order for us poor modellers to see if there is yellow or dark grey, then this issue will never be settled. When thinking about yellow, don�t limit your thinking to the last two days of her life.

Btw, if I were to build a model representing the ship on May 26th, I would leave off the damage (well, there wasn�t really THAT much damage on the ship)...

Happy modelling ~ Olaf!

[Olaf Held]

Although he did not sink from the British relentless attacks, ( even after the guns went quiet ), accounts of his condition, does reflect a fair amount of superficial damage. To all areas.

Bob (is this your name?), there must have been a little mis-understanding. You wrote about May 26th. The ship was badly damaged and eventually sunk one day later.

You are now just having some fun with me.

No, not at all. In fact, I'm very interested in your research results, e.g. maybe another survivor beside Mr. Maus reported yellow turret tops?

Best ~ Olaf!

[Thomas E. Johnson]

Bob,

do me a favour - the BISMARCK should be referred as a "she". Thank you.

Peter.

I believe he is going by the fact that Bismarck's Captain declared that the ship was a "He."

[Olaf Held]

I will get back to you about the whole turret, and war grave, subject.

No need to do so. She is a war grave and it's good the way it is. Btw, since the issue of gender came up, (@ Peter) I guess you know that it is said Lindemann himself suggested to refer to the ship as "he" because of its power, strength, yada-yada. On the other hand, I never heard that they actually did so. I talked to one survivor recently, and although I didn't ask this particular question, he always referred to his ship in the feminine gender. I think the only ship that was a "he" in the KM was Prinz Eugen.

A damaged battleship?
Bismarck received three shell hits off Iceland. Of course, they forced the ship to head for France, but since we were talking about model building, I thought you were referring to damages VISIBLE. There was a hole on either side of the bow (penetration on port, exit whole on stb), then one penetration hole on port side (I think amidships, have to look this up) and then ... well... one of PoW's shells went through (the bow of?) one of the boats on the main hangar.

Torpdeo hits ~ Well, the fatal hit into the rudder area aside, I don't think there was much damage VISIBLE from the outside on May 26th.

Happy modelling ~ Olaf!

EDIT: changed port to stb and vice versa... stupid me...

[navydavesof]

To the German contributers, it sounds like you have already answered this question, but I would like to directly ask. How were German ships referred to in WWII? I have heard in history programs that they were referred to as "He" and "Him" because of a masculine outlook on the Navy.

How are they referred to today?

[Olaf Held]

I spent 12 years in today's German Navy and we always referred to our ships in the feminine gender, even if they had masculine names such as the three US-built DDGs L�tjens, M�lders and Rommel (CFA-class).

All the best ~ Olaf!

[navydavesof]

I spent 12 years in today's German Navy and we always referred to our ships in the feminine gender.

Thank you so much. I don't know if you have followed the Bismarck Tirpitz Replacement thread of not, but I am drawing up a fictional modern Scharnhorst. How are names chosen for German ships? I saw Rommel in your last post, so I may have answered my own question, but is there much credence paid to potentially "offensive" names of WWII ships such as Bismarck, Tirpitz, Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, Prince Eugen, etc.?

I apologize for asking such basic questions, but I am just now starting to wade into the waters of German ships and organization. I already find the general arrangements fascinating. How are the hull numbers broken up? I can figure that the �F� designation such as F221 is for a Frigate. Is it the 221st frigate built? How are other ships classified? Would something like a Scharnhorst be labeled as �B� or would it be another letter?