Ships doc
Members-
Posts
71 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Everything posted by Ships doc
-
WW2 ships fittings and equipment scale drawings..?
Ships doc replied to Mattlow's topic in Maritime WWII
Another good reference is 'The life and ship models of Norman Ough' - has some of his drawings reproduced with the accompanying notes. I think vents are included. As far as I know, the vent dimensions were not entirely standardised, lots of variation. For a 1/350 pow though you probably don't need to worry too much about that. For smaller vents I tend to use two sizes or square or round styrene stacked. Maybe some photo etch for the mesh if available. To get the height you can judge from photos - look for a sailor standing next to one. The best reference would probably be the as fitted plans from the national maritime museum, but even on these there might just be a sketch of the vent. Plus very expensive Good luck -
Not sure about this one! I can't find any other similar photos. Was she being refitted in March? The scheme may only have been on for a few days? I need to do some more reading....
-
I think probably yes, from 1943 onwards, with the octuple pom poms. In this photo you can just see the back of one of the Yagi arrays for a type 282 radar on the director platform (highest bridge level). https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205157919 There is also a photo in the man o war county class book which looks like there are type 282 radars behind the main range finder.
-
Here is an attempt at the starboard profile. The percentage area is indicated by each colour (as measured in ImageJ software). Reassuringly, the weighted average RF for this initial try also works out as 13.3% mean RF. I am not sure if this match port vs starboard can be taken as evidence of correctness of this combination though - other combinations also come out very close to each other. And my outlines are not 100% accurate to the ship.
-
Yes it's the place to go! I have been struggling with this profile for a long time, but think we may have made progress in the last few weeks with the help from everyone here @dickrd @Vlad @Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies. Here is the updated profile, taking into account the value from the camouflage observation report. This is quite surprising given what is published on Suffolk's profile, the scheme is much darker than I expected. However the written report is the only direct evidence of the scheme I've heard of, and I think we can have reasonable confidence in this, given how close the calculated RF figure comes to 12%, and also the combinations used for dark Admiralty disruptive patterns for smaller ships. A test will be how close the starboard profile comes out. For comparison, an old photo of my model of HMS Suffolk in 1/96 scale. This is painted in the former Colourcoats range 507a/MS3/507c. The model was as good as I could do at the time, but there are a few errors in addition to the camouflage. 1) The bridge should be covered, I have found better images since I built the ship. 2) Wood decks should be darkened. Steel decks probably MS1 or dark grey non-slip. At the time I had spent 3 months planking the deck so I was reluctant to ruin it with grey paint without more evidence. 3) Boot topping should probably not be there. 4) There should only be one Walrus aircraft! You can't see the other one in the hangar. However Suffolk's action report from the Bismarck action reports only on Walrus was on board, but it was out of service at the time so could not be used.
-
Thanks @dickrd - I think we are doing the same search! I found the one below of HMCS Iroquois which matches the dark disruptive pattern for the tribal class in CAFO 679/42. There is some MS4 in this one too, the midships => stern pattern is relevant though. This assumes the RCN were using the British tones in this case. I will keep looking but no luck on 4 stackers, E&F or JKN yet. Noted that this CAFO contains lots of examples of MS1/B5/MS3. Also in the accompanying text - I) MS3 is the tone used for athwartships surfaces & masts, not MS4 and II) decks are MS1 which I think matches Suffolk. I'm assuming that the principles were scaled to the larger ships? Also - it seems quite hard to find examples of dark disruptive patterns - would this be in keeping with perceived lack of efficacy? Could @Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies provide the RGB code for B5 and I will draw up an example?
-
I agree with all of the above - practice was highly varied, even within the same ship at the same time in some cases. Best to judge from photos of the ship if possible. @foeth's reference page is superb for all things RN. There are a few colour photos out there, such as this one on HMS Forth. https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205188377
-
@Vlad yes that number of 12% gives us a lot to think about - the overall reflectance would be close to HFG 507a? So maybe the palette is shifted down from where I thought. Hmmm....
-
Thanks @dickrd, very interesting! Does the 'type 12 approx' refer to the original 1941 design, or the observed result in 1942? I wonder if there is a patch of dark tone on the stern, just visible in the June 1941 aerial photo, which might bring down the average as designed. What do you think about B5? To me the mid and light tones seem very close, which is why I was favouring MS3 to go with MS4. Are you aware of any good examples where we know these tones are together for comparison? Do I remember that Suffolk was design number 2? Would there have been quite a lot of variation in the early designs, before practice was established? I am working on the pattern for the starboard side, which will be interesting to compare.
-
@dickrd: I have measured the areas of the three tones for the port profile; and calculated weighted overall reflectance values for a variety of combinations as quoted in @Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies references. Noted that we only think the top four are likely candidates as the dark tone is presumed to be MS1.
-
Great ๐ This is why I did the port side first!
-
Hi @Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies Yes I think so - done in Inkscape so this is RGB, not sure if that's the same as sRGB The tones seem very close to each other, but I think this matches the photographic references even better now. The distinctions between the light and medium tones are quite hard to spot in places, eg. on the after part of the bridge. Are you happy with the MS1? This is just a generic dark grayscale.
-
Here is an attempt at the port side profile. The profile changed over time, as shown in the IWM photographs. There are quite a few on board photos taken in June 1941, which help with some of the details. There may be another patch of MS1 on the stern as shown in the aerial photo June 1941, but I am not sure. The hull paint is worn, and the mid tone is hard to make out with the angle of the light in that photo. The decks seem to be painted dark grey. There are also some photos not available online that were helpful in constructing this - from the 'Man O' War' county class book, and an overhead photo in Friedman's British Cruiser book.
-
Thanks Jamie - Seems like consensus with MS1 (A) and MS4 (C). I agree 'drab' is the description. I'm not sure about the 4th tone D (lighter than MS4) - in some images there might be some patches on the starboard side, on the hangar. In the picture you've annotated I also noticed that area, but I think it might be where the paint has been reapplied - to my eye there is a vertical line extending down into the MS1 below, and a horizontal one extending forward, leaving a rectangle of worn paint forward above the waterline. I am trying to piece together a tone map - challenging because the scheme seemed to be altered over 1941. I will post when more progress but I have the basic line drawing now to work from.
-
I have had a go at drawing some profiles of Suffolk to get an idea of how the colour combinations might look. Draft below- the pattern is simplified. Within the limitations of computer screens, my best guesses at close colours, converting B&W to colour etc. I think the MS1/MS3/MS4 combination looks the most convincing compared to the photos. The MS3 is definitely too green though, and the MS1 too dark. The first one is the Warship Perspectives suggestion The others are combinations of MS1 with either MS3/B5 and MS4/507c Comments welcome!
-
I have been looking over images of Suffolk again trying to see if there is anything new I didn't notice before. One approach might be to find Suffolk near to a ship of a known colour. On this photo of Suffolk, Norfolk is in the background. I don't know what the colours are for Norfolk. However, the lightest tone seems lighter than the lightest one on Suffolk, and also a greater contrast to the mid tone (which may not be the same as Suffolk). https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205032854 One possible interpretation is that the lightest tone on Norfolk is 507c, and the lightest on Suffolk is MS4. The dark tones in both cases are likely MS1. Mid tones unknown. I'm conscious that this may be confounded by the effects of distance and lighting, but I think it lends some weight to the lightest tone on Suffolk being MS4.
-
Royal Navy ships' bottoms and boot-topping 1936-1950
Ships doc replied to dickrd's topic in Maritime WWII
Thank you for posting this updated version - superb! -
I had guessed not - as this would have made many discussions around this and other ships trivial! Worth asking though. I will try to finish my version of a colour profile, work has got in the way of progress! MS1 plus MS3 OR B5 plus MS4 OR 507C is my current conclusion. There is also the recent colour footage of her 1943 scheme to analyse, on my to do list...
-
Just picking up on a note from @dickrd in the HMS Jasmine thread, that Suffolk was the second disruptive design issued: were the colours recorded?
-
I tend to build mine for radio control - so the below the waterline bit is essential! However I appreciate both types of display. Pristine museum piece full hull to weathered waterline. What matters is the overall effect and impact of the model๐
-
HMS Havock 1893 - A class Torpedo Boat Destroyer
Ships doc replied to Steve D's topic in Work in Progress - Maritime
Well worth the investment in the plans - especially for a longer term project. A model can only be as accurate as the reference material. I have found with my current set though that even the NMM plans have limitations once you get into the depths of the project- e.g. the dimensions not matching on two views, which can lead to head scratching! I think this is probably because of stretching/ contraction of the material over time. Looks like a fantastic project, thanks for posting the updates! James -
Hi everyone Have been doing some more trawling of online records for more clues - not much luck, mostly things I had seen before. Most things seem to reference the Raven profile 507c/MS3/507a. I tried searching for contemporary artwork of Suffolk - no real success as yet. There is one by Eric Erskine Campbell Tufnell but the pattern and details of the ship are wrong so not helpful. For later artwork; (which is clearly not a very reliable source but worth reviewing) There is a painting by Peter Gerald Baker dated 1979 so a while after 1941, but before the Raven profile book. The scene is fictional, potentially painted from a photo of Suffolk - the profile looks similar to a known photo, and is pretty accurate. https://www.askart.com/auction_records/Peter_Gerald_Baker/11269443/Peter_Gerald_Baker.aspx?lot=3766987&source=AUCTION_RECORD Some interesting points about this painting 1- the medium grey looks greenish to me, consistent with ms3. However, the image looks yellowed overall. 2- the antifouling is dark grey/ black (I don't know what Suffolk actually had). I haven't been able to find many details of Peter Gerald Baker, but most of his paintings seem to be of sailing ships. (Tempting to speculate he had a connection to HMS Suffolk!) There is also this picture https://www.shipsnostalgia.com/threads/hms-hesperus-h57-painting-by-john-rowan-dominy.53089/ Date not clear. The pattern is not quite correct (out of sync with the fit of the ship). Interestingly the medium tone is blue in this one. Probably not reliable? Finally - the centrespread colour profile in the 'Man O War' book on County class cruisers shows the medium tone as blue, which is confusing. In summary - not much help! Still have: Dark tone: MS1 Medium tone: MS3 or B5 Light tone: MS4 or 507c James
-
Just been looking over the photos of Suffolk again. Compared to other photos of HFG vs MS1 I'm almost certain the darkest tone is MS1 (as already indicated by @dickrd@Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies above). Comparing to some of the other colour schemes recently updated (eg KGV, Howe, Jamaica) and the corresponding photographs, I agree MS4 is likely to be the lightest tone. 507c seems almost white in most photos, but there is a clear difference between the lightest tone and the "white" patches on the hangar on Suffolk in 1942. Also noted that in most of the other schemes MS4 is the 'base' colour with smaller areas of 507c. However I don't think 507c is 100% ruled out. Still not sure about the medium tone, I think either MS3 or B5. Maybe MS3 as it seems close to the lightest tone, sometimes hard to tell apart depending on the lighting. However also note that B5 seems common in other schemes with MS1 & MS4 (although this is based on quite a small sample size).
-
@dickrd Thank you for looking into this, it's all very interesting! Helpful to know the Ship's Cover is probably not the place to go. Some of the as fitteds are scanned at low resolution on the rmg website, this suggests the modifications are only shown in the major refit 1937 but I might get in touch with them too to see if this is correct, there are some notes referring to a 1940 drawing. I also wondered about the Fairfield Shipyard archives in Glasgow, as this is where the 1940/41 refit happened after the ship was damaged in operation duck. (Also where the camouflage scheme was first applied I think). @Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies - which program do you use to draw your profiles? I did some sketches of the tone map to guide the painting back in 2014 which I could try to draw up on the computer. Thanks again! James