Calling all HMS "Mighty" Hood fans

[Cag]

Hi All,

Hi Frank/EJ, great work and appreciate how hard it is to say things for certain, but so far everything makes sense.

Thanks also to Richard, I can say I've a memory of seeing an AFO which mentioned destroyers removing corticene but have not seen this for other classes so far.

I guess it all depends on what work was carried out during her last refit in 41 (284 work etc etc). I intend looking at the inquiry papers and all related maps plans etc at some point, I think there are quite a few, not sure it will reveal anything but worth a look?

Best wishes and thanks for the continuing work
Cag.

[FW_Allen]

Hi All,

Hi Frank/EJ, great work and appreciate how hard it is to say things for certain, but so far everything makes sense.

Thanks also to Richard, I can say I've a memory of seeing an AFO which mentioned destroyers removing corticene but have not seen this for other classes so far.

I guess it all depends on what work was carried out during her last refit in 41 (284 work etc etc). I intend looking at the inquiry papers and all related maps plans etc at some point, I think there are quite a few, not sure it will reveal anything but worth a look?

Best wishes and thanks for the continuing work
Cag.

I've never come across anything more in the books, plans or the enquiries, but it certainly wouldn't hurt to have more folks look through that information. We could've missed something (like how we missed the grey bottom or the corticene reference until recently).

[Cag]

Hi All,

Hi Frank, no doubt you're correct, I've got to take a look for another research line I'll just add to my list.

On the Hood Association website there are shots in the David Wills collection of the edge of the forward 0.5 inch platform (port side I think) which shows hold down strips, would these be corticene covered too?

Best wishes
Cag.

[EJFoeth]

I would think so.

[europapete]

Thank you all for such an impressive amount of work. And in time for my model too. You mentioned that the colour of the Semtex is unknown, would it be a reasonable deduction to look at other capitol ships of the same time frame that had Semtex and maybe the colour is known for them? Would that then give a reasonable clue as to Hoods' Semtex colour? Just a thought. Regards, Pete in RI

[FW_Allen]

On the Hood Association website there are shots in the David Wills collection of the edge of the forward 0.5 inch platform (port side I think) which shows hold down strips, would these be corticene covered too?

Yes, I believe it is corticene. I base that opinion on the look of the material (as compared to other photos of corticene), the size and position of the strips plus the fact that strips are screwed in place. I also believe that all her major bridge decks had corticene for most (perhaps even the whole) of her career...

[Thomas E. Johnson]

Just did a quick skim through of the last 10 or so pages....

Has the colors we�ve been using been revised due to new info?

[EJFoeth]

Here is a small picture summarizing the full extent of our overwhelming evidence of conrticine on the Vickers Quad emplacements (top) and Admiral's bridge (bottom).

Cortibridge.jpg

The former is reasonably clear, the latter not so much other than a thin line running from the 5.5"gun director, and a small bolted strip around it. What happened after the Admiral's bridge was extended is not known, but not altogether unlikely corticine was present.

[Thomas E. Johnson]

I take it conrticine is similar to todays non-skid deck coatings?

[SovereignHobbies]

I take it conrticine is similar to todays non-skid deck coatings?

It was a competitor to linoleum - i.e. a fairly thin floor covering supplied in rolls similar to a carpet.

[Guest]

TEJ,

No: as defined in RN Newton's "Practical Construction of Warships:" published in 1941, it was made from a mixture of powdered cork and linseed oil which was applied to a canvas (I can recall an open weave hessian-like material as well) backing, under pressure and allowed to harden by oxidation of the linseed oil. It was a heavy duty, sheet linoleum. The finish was matt and thus scrub-able with soap and water, however, it could also be polished. I never saw it used afloat (1961) but it could still be found in use as a deck covering in older Royal Navy shore establishments in early 1995.

I hope that helps.

[FW_Allen]

I take it conrticine is similar to todays non-skid deck coatings?

It was a competitor to linoleum - i.e. a fairly thin floor covering supplied in rolls similar to a carpet.

I wonder if there are any surviving examples (above water) that folks can view? The only thing I can think of are likely more modern approximations: the bridge/compass platform of H.M.S. Belfast in London and some of the interior decks of the restored M33 in Pompey. I know for certain that its a modern approximation for M33 and am assuming its a similar case for Belfast (albeit less modern)?

Above- Belfast; Below- M33

[Thomas E. Johnson]

So it was weatherproof I take it as it was used on open decks.

Did it all have this chocolate color or could the color be made to whatever was wanted during manufacture?

[Guest]

TEJ,

FW Allen answers his own suggestion in the attachments to his post of 10am. The deck covering that you see is "Corticene." I have never visited M33.

Yes, it was weather-proof providing that water did not get underneath by way of the hold down strips at the edges and providing the adhesive used had not "failed."

Regarding colour, there was once some debate about this but as far as I am concerned the matter has been resolved: it was the colour of milk chocolate (that is also by first-hand experience and anecdotal evidence). If you stump up the money, I am sure that Mr Duff would gladly sell you a shade of paint colour he markets that represents it. That said, I have seen a variant shade that was more "ginger" than "milk chocolate," however, milk chocolate generally fits the bill though it will have depended on the cork (essentially brown) used in its manufacture.

One thing that is was NOT was fire-proof!! However, that aside, as nice as it looked, I would not have fancied fighting a gun and trying to keep my footing on it in any seaway with a 40lb + round of 4inch ammunition in my arms; which is probably the main reason why it was replaced by c(s)emtex; which provided grip to the footwear. There may also have been reasons regarding corrosion if water did get underneath it.

[Thomas E. Johnson]

TEJ,

FW Allen answers his own suggestion in the attachments to his post of 10am. The deck covering that you see is "Corticene." I have never visited M33.

Yes, it was weather-proof providing that water did not get underneath by way of the hold down strips at the edges and providing the adhesive used had not "failed."

Regarding colour, there was once some debate about this but as far as I am concerned the matter has been resolved: it was the colour of milk chocolate (that is also by first-hand experience and anecdotal evidence). If you stump up the money, I am sure that Mr Duff would gladly sell you a shade of paint colour he markets that represents it. That said, I have seen a variant shade that was more "ginger" than "milk chocolate," however, milk chocolate generally fits the bill though it will have depended on the cork (essentially brown) used in its manufacture.

One thing that is was NOT was fire-proof!! However, that aside, as nice as it looked, I would not have fancied fighting a gun and trying to keep my footing on it in any seaway with a 40lb + round of 4inch ammunition in my arms; which is probably the main reason why it was replaced by c(s)emtex; which provided grip to the footwear. There may also have been reasons regarding corrosion if water did get underneath it.

I may have missed it above;

Did Hood have Corticene on her decks in 1941 or had it been replaced by this Cemtex material. The later material I have heard of before....

[EJFoeth]

How could you have missed that?

[Thomas E. Johnson]

How could you have missed that?

Because I�m often forced to do drive-by forum visits due to lack of time....

I just went back an re-read the relating posts....

I�m really not very excited about having to paint a beautiful warship with chocolate colored decks.....

[FW_Allen]

I�m really not very excited about having to paint a beautiful warship with chocolate colored decks.....

Don't forget her grey/black (not red) bottom!

[Thomas E. Johnson]

I�m really not very excited about having to paint a beautiful warship with chocolate colored decks.....

Don't forget her grey/black (not red) bottom!

Damn that�s gonna look ugly!

I build these large size models Admiralty Style mainly so I can make them look �Idolized� rather than how they looked in the field.....

[Cag]

Hi All

Thanks once again for the pics and confirmation of areas of corticine.

Thanks Guest for the info too, I did read somewhere that when Victorious became USS Robbin the US asked for the interior corticine to be removed due to its flammable tendency.

I've had a peek at the IWM pics of Rodney and Nelson taken in 1940 and think I see hold down strips and corticine on the 4.7 gun deck and pom pom platforms? If so there seems evidence of other units having this still fitted which adds to the belief that Hood still maintained some too?

Funnily enough I've also looked again at the pictures taken of the damage to Prince of Wales post Denmark Strait, I noticed a while ago that some show her boat deck covered in shards of something blasted off the deck by splinters.

This has bugged me and looked again and wonder if maybe this is an indication of either Semtex or non slip compound applied over the single thickness of 12lb plating of her boat deck? Possibly similar to the semtex laid on Hoods 4 inch gun extention areas?

Best wishes
Cag.