The Ship Model Forum

by **MartinJQuinn** » Sun Oct 25, 2015 3:57 pm

Aop Aur wrote:Hello.
I saw the first post that Dave Wooley posted here included the images of Alex MCfadyen's G3 and now those pics are not working.

Dave is still a member of the forum. Send him a PM - he may still have them.

by **Aop Aur** » Sun Oct 25, 2015 8:59 am

Hello.
I saw the first post that Dave Wooley posted here included the images of Alex MCfadyen's G3 and now those pics are not working. Can he or anyone send me some those images again? Or edit the post to make those pics viewable. I searched it on internet and seen some pics, but just curious to know what those pics are...

Regards,
Aop.

by **Cliffy B** » Wed Feb 06, 2013 8:27 pm

Wow, cool!!!! Do you have any more shots? What about for that 5 turret Yamato?!

by **able** » Wed Feb 06, 2013 8:19 pm

by **MartinJQuinn** » Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:58 pm

I thought I read they were to start with Invincible for the first ship.

by **Sr. Gopher** » Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:59 pm

Well, the past 8 months have shown a lot of info about these ships. One question I do have: What would their names have been?

by **Sr. Gopher** » Thu Mar 25, 2010 6:27 pm

Whoa. What's that??!!!?!?!?!

(I'm sorry, I don't usually go into detail with other navies. Go US!!!!!)

by **able** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:28 am

by **Sauragnmon** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 3:34 am

I have to admit, I personally love the G3's and N3's - I have the IHP 700 N3 kit, in partial construction, you can see a few pics of her in my "Children of what if" thread over in the Works in Progress forum. I'd love to get the G3 to add in beside her and my other RN Battleship Whifs eventually, though I seem to be on a Japan fix right now.

by **Tamenga** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 7:38 pm

Wow Impressive.
I love the detail

Now if somebody could make a Model of Design K3.

by **Longshaor** » Sat Oct 10, 2009 9:21 pm

Guest wrote:Gentleman,

I was interested in G3 desighn for some time and tried to gather information about these ships, however I never managed to find any kind of ships' plans. Can anyone give me an idea about the source of such drawings? I guess they should exist - construction actually started anf masterpiece discussed was built based on something.

Thank you in advance

Commercially? No. The only plans available are reproductions of the originals from the NMM. I purchased a set from them in the early 1990s and they were, IIRC, somewhere in the �150-200 range. Not cheap. And, frankly, there's more information there than you'd need to build a model, as well as details that would have changed between the plans and production - like the 6-barrel 2pdr mountings. I started redrawing the plans to make them more modeler-friendly, but work & life haven't been cooperating and that project's on the back burner for now.

by **Guest** » Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:49 am

Gentleman,

I was interested in G3 desighn for some time and tried to gather information about these ships, however I never managed to find any kind of ships' plans. Can anyone give me an idea about the source of such drawings? I guess they should exist - construction actually started anf masterpiece discussed was built based on something.

Thank you in advance

by **Andy G** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:07 am

JWintjes wrote:...the only examples that spring to my mind are Doggerbank and some parts of Jutland.

Much of Doggerbank occurred with the British forces at long range off the German's starboard stern quarter.

What does strike me as odd with regards to that battle - given the Blucher's low speed - was that a reduction in speed and a turn to starboard by the German forces would have aided the Blucher, and given them better control over the chase. If not crossing the T, at least forcing the British battlecruisers to turn to the right and trade blows between the battlelines.

And if that had happened, and British weaknesses in the battlecruisers had remained as they were (Lion was nearly lost, for example) then the outcome could have been wholly different.

Andy

by **1Big Rich** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:43 am

An incredibly impressive model. An outstanding effort!!

I'd only dispute the name, but perhaps the incomplete Admirals (Hood's near sisters) were carried over.

As a matter of fact, can anyone point me to any instance when a capital ship was compelled to engage an enemy on a dead astern bearing for any significant period of time?

I don't know if it was exactly bearing 180, but at Second Guadalcanal, South Dakota fired over her stern, setting her aircraft afire. Her second salvo blew them overboard...

S&G also were firing over their stern in the course of escaping from Renown in the Force 9 gale off of Norway in 1940.

Regards,

by **Foeth** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 8:14 am

IIRC, scharnhorst fired with C-turret dead astern when hit by DoY.

by **JWintjes** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 7:36 am

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps another reason for the Q turret was the desire to shorten the propeller shafts and the vulnerable section of side protection pierced by the shaft ally.

As a matter of fact, can anyone point me to any instance when a capital ship was compelled to engage an enemy on a dead astern bearing for any significant period of time? Swinging the guns around the stern while the ship turns does not count.

Chuck,

that's an interesting point indeed - the only examples that spring to my mind are Doggerbank and some parts of Jutland.

I'd guess that if you have superior armament, you wouldn't need a X/Y turret group.

Jorit

by **Guest** » Sat Sep 15, 2007 2:11 pm

Perhaps another reason for the Q turret was the desire to shorten the propeller shafts and the vulnerable section of side protection pierced by the shaft ally.

As a matter of fact, can anyone point me to any instance when a capital ship was compelled to engage an enemy on a dead astern bearing for any significant period of time? Swinging the guns around the stern while the ship turns does not count.

by **Guest** » Sat Sep 15, 2007 2:07 pm

JWintjes wrote:Ok, so throw something at me, but I think these are actually much more beautiful than Nelson or Rodney.

Jorit

While I personally think it is the other way around, I have to admit it is possible for a ship to be much more beautiful than Nelson or Rodney and still be indescribably ugly. And G3 and N3 were spectacularly ugly, rather like a blocks of seaside factory buildings that somehow detached themselves from land and drifted out to sea.

by **Andy G** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 3:10 am

JWintjes wrote:Somehow they capture the adventurous, future-orientated spirit of the 1920s much more like any other ship I know - as if they are out of a Fritz Lang movie...

Jorit

Nah...You just need to spend a little more time gawping at Dino's Barham to see the best that the 20's and 30's could offer. Now THAT's what I'd call a ship. ...And one not as restricted as the G3's in terms of firing arcs.

Andy

by **JIM BAUMANN** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 2:30 am

That is a semaphore signalling mast!

found on most British Ships I believe

HTH

JIM B

The Ship Model Forum

Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans

Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans

Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans

Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans

Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans

Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans

Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans

Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans

Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans

Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans

Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans

Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans

Re: Calling all Royal Navy G3 Battlecruiser fans