Sink the Bismarck! HMS Ark Royal, 26 May 1941

[Dave Swindell]

Best cure for seasickness - sit under a tree....

[FlyingSpanner]

1 hour ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

Mind you, a few years earlier...

 

She’s not gonna win any beauty contests

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

1 hour ago, FlyingSpanner said:

She’s not gonna win any beauty contests

Not many bodged radical conversions from white elephant battlecruisers to carriers did.  See also early Japanese carriers.  OK Lexington & Saratoga had a certain muscular aesthetic appeal, and Eagle just about mustered up elegance from some angles... but ships (& aircraft, for that matter) tend to look good if they were designed that way from the start.

 

See the Blake / Tiger lash-up of the 1960s for further examples!

[mdesaxe]

Please excuse my mangling of English (not my first language) but 'ugly is as ugly does'. No Furious, no Fleet Air Arm. This carrier's captains, crews, and aircrews accumulated more 'firsts' than any other, either in the Royal Navy or worldwide: first RN deck-landing under way, first independent carrier operation (in World War I attempting to run down German attackers on Norway convoys), first strategic strike against land targets (Trondheim), first night operations; the list goes on and on. Similarly, the maybe-ugly US carriers established the foundation for all subsequent US Navy carrier doctrine with Admiral Yarnall's devastating demonstration in the 1932 wargames. The 'ugly' Japanese carriers (especially Kaga, which always is overlooked in favour of its more glamorous (prettier) semi-sister Akagi) created and demonstrated the efficacy of independent carrier task forces (in 1931, no less) and the two of them amplified that in the pre-1941 years, so that the concept became central to Japanese doctrine.

 

It has always baffled me that 'pretty' can be so important. Also, false senses of history and its significance. At the risk of starting a big war in the wrong forum, why was so much money wasted on refititing a worn-out Ark Royal when Eagle was a far better candidate in terms of its structural and mechanical state? It always seems to me it was from attachment to the ship's name rather than a rational analysis of the best option.

 

Rant off!

 

Maurice

 

 

[Martian]

10 hours ago, Rob998 said:

Pusser’s Gunpowder Proof not so much I’d imagine...

Gunpowder Proof Rum cures just about anything. This has been established after extensive clinical trials at Martian Towers.

9 hours ago, Dave Swindell said:

Best cure for seasickness - sit under a tree....

We won't be expecting you to sign up for the Maritime Volunteer Service any time soon then?

7 hours ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

Not many bodged radical conversions from white elephant battlecruisers to carriers did.  See also early Japanese carriers.  OK Lexington & Saratoga had a certain muscular aesthetic appeal, and Eagle just about mustered up elegance from some angles... but ships (& aircraft, for that matter) tend to look good if they were designed that way from the start.

 

See the Blake / Tiger lash-up of the 1960s for further examples!

Perhaps I'm a bit weird but I quite like the look of the Tiger/Blake conversions.

 

Martian 👽

 

 

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

5 hours ago, mdesaxe said:

Please excuse my mangling of English (not my first language) but 'ugly is as ugly does'. No Furious, no Fleet Air Arm. This carrier's captains, crews, and aircrews accumulated more 'firsts' than any other, either in the Royal Navy or worldwide: first RN deck-landing under way, first independent carrier operation (in World War I attempting to run down German attackers on Norway convoys), first strategic strike against land targets (Trondheim), first night operations; the list goes on and on. Similarly, the maybe-ugly US carriers established the foundation for all subsequent US Navy carrier doctrine with Admiral Yarnall's devastating demonstration in the 1932 wargames. The 'ugly' Japanese carriers (especially Kaga, which always is overlooked in favour of its more glamorous (prettier) semi-sister Akagi) created and demonstrated the efficacy of independent carrier task forces (in 1931, no less) and the two of them amplified that in the pre-1941 years, so that the concept became central to Japanese doctrine.

 

It has always baffled me that 'pretty' can be so important. Also, false senses of history and its significance. At the risk of starting a big war in the wrong forum, why was so much money wasted on refititing a worn-out Ark Royal when Eagle was a far better candidate in terms of its structural and mechanical state? It always seems to me it was from attachment to the ship's name rather than a rational analysis of the best option.

 

Rant off!

 

Maurice

 

 

No-one was disputing Furious’ importance in development of the FAA - though Hermes, Eagle and (especially) Courageous & Glorious also made huge contributions to inter-war development.  However, there is also no denying that, of those, E & H rapidly became too small as aircraft developed, and C, F & G were all conversions and thus a long way less good than they should have been - capacity too small, in particular.  They were also over 20 years old by the late-30s.  Even after the RN had lost - either permanently or for long builds following damage - Ark, Illustrious, Courageous, Glorious, Eagle & Hermes, they still used Furious as a training carrier or aircraft ferry for most of the war.  
 

Besides, I’m not sure I’d class Ark 3 as “pretty”.  But she was undeniably a huge leap forward in capability, largely (as I have acknowledged several times in this thread if you had read it before reaching for your soapbox...) building on the experience gained in the late-20s and early-30s from C, F & G.  And the Illustrious class were a further step forward building on the Ark experience but without the Washington Treaty constraints.
 

I am assuming you have jumped a generation seamlessly when discussing refitting a different Eagle and Ark!  You are surely not seriously suggesting that the sole reason Ark 4 was refitted instead of Eagle was the name.  If so, that’s preposterous and I suggest you do some more reading of the sources, first language or no.  The Navy wanted, and planned, to upgrade both Eagle & Ark to operate Phantoms, but the politicians cut the budget, slashed the F4K order and essentially wound up UK carrier aviation for several years.  Ark’s refit just happened first.  Nothing whatsoever to do with the name.  Utter myth.

[Terry1954]

46 minutes ago, Martian said:

Perhaps I'm a bit weird but I quite like the look of the Tiger/Blake conversions.

I must be a bit weird as well then, cos I quite like them too .............. maybe it's the Dorset air we breath Martin!

 

Terry

[Brian Derbyshire]

May improved operational capabilities,but Tiger and Blake took a severe beating with the "ugly stick"each to their own.

Cheers Brian.

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

I’m with Brian - & Tiger was the first RN ship on which I ever set foot.  We shouldn’t confuse capability with purity of form:

 

- Hood: beautiful... deeply, deeply (fatally) flawed

- Vixen FAW2 much better weapon system, but FAW1 infinitely more pleasing shape without the boom carbuncles on the front

- Batch 3 Type 22s: a lot more capable than their older cousins, but... “I see you baby, shakin’ that bottom...” with the fat rear end of the Merlin hangar & flight deck
 

edit: [I didn’t write “bottom”: Nanny Forum Autocorrect is definitely at the Mary Whitehouse setting]

 

Lots of other examples - FRS1 Shar vs FA 2; Pup vs Camel; Overstrand vs.. (OK, now I’m getting silly...)

[Martian]

2 hours ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

I’m with Brian - & Tiger was the first RN ship on which I ever set foot.  We shouldn’t confuse capability with purity of form:

 

- Hood: beautiful... deeply, deeply (fatally) flawed

- Vixen FAW2 much better weapon system, but FAW1 infinitely more pleasing shape without the boom carbuncles on the front

- Batch 3 Type 22s: a lot more capable than their older cousins, but... “I see you baby, shakin’ that bottom...” with the fat rear end of the Merlin hangar & flight deck
 

edit: [I didn’t write “bottom”: Nanny Forum Autocorrect is definitely at the Mary Whitehouse setting]

 

Lots of other examples - FRS1 Shar vs FA 2; Pup vs Camel; Overstrand vs.. (OK, now I’m getting silly...)

I get the hint Crisp. I'm weird.

 

This Autocorrect thing is getting a bit silly. At the start of my Canberra thread, I wanted to make a reference to someone pricking their ears up and got some waffle about "Gentleman's parts" with some numbers thrown in for good measure which made the whole sentence totally nonsensical.  Wibble.

 

Martian 👽

[Dave Swindell]

5 hours ago, Martian said:

We won't be expecting you to sign up for the Maritime Volunteer Service any time soon then?

Best part of 40 years at sea, and circumnavigations round both capes into double figures. I've also run rescue boats on Ullswater for over 30 years whilst on leave. Now retired with a tree in the garden..

 

If Crisp will excuse a bit of swinging chainblocks for a minute, the photos of focsles and poop decks awash with the oggin brought back some memories

My first east-about circumnavigation was pretty uneventful out and round the Cape of Good Hope to Australia and New Zealand, however leaving New Zealand heading for Cape Horn we had a quite heavy following sea. The ships we used for this service handled this quite well, and although they would roll about 20-25 degrees each side of the vertical it was a long slow roll and not uncomfortable. The one run I did on these back from Australia via the Cape of Good Hope heading into the weather was most unpleasant. The weather you had when you left NZ would pretty much stay with you all the way to the Horn, so if it was grot when you left you had two weeks of it til you got round the corner and started heading north.

The poop deck was below the upper deck, and open at the rear and sides through cut-outs in the hull, and it also extended forwards either side of the aft hold, again with cut-outs in the hull, until you reached a watertight door with access into the side passageway, and thence to the engine room. Access to the steering gear was via another watertight door on the centreline of the forward bulkhead of the poop deck proper. I'd already had best part of 2 months wandering down to the steering gear from the engine room via the side passageway and poop deck every duty day, it was a pretty routine job. My first duty day after we left Port Chalmers, with the ship rolling nicely, I set off from the engine room as normal to check the steering flat, down the starboard passageway and out through the watertight door as the ship rolled well over to port. I had a cracking view out over the top of the following rollers and the soaring Albatross we always had following us. The sky was a deep dark grey and the deck was wet, I didn't think anything of it and itched my boilersuit up so the leg bottoms didn't get wet before stepping out of the door, which I conscientiously shut behind me, and I strolled aft as the ship started to come upright and roll to starboard. The stern was also just coming out of the bottom of a trough as the next roller slowly overtook the ship. With brain in neutral and admiring an albert peering into the cut-out just off the starboard quarter I rounded the corner onto the poop deck proper, slowly realising that all was not well - I think the giveaway was the albert having a good snigger as it could see what was about to happen. I turned to see where I was going and was faced with a view not unlike that posted by @Our Ned earlier:-

On 22/06/2020 at 19:30, Our Ned said:

 

I managed to grab hold of a nearby scupper pipe before being completely engulfed in a wall of none too warm water. As I'd come this far and was just as likely to get another soaking on the way back I made a hasty inspection of the steerring flat before heading back in a rather bedraggled state to the control room to provide the morning's entertainment for the rest of the troops.

 

Venturing out onto the poop in these sort of conditions needs careful planning and impeccable timing to ensure you move from one safe "dry" spot to the next when you're on the high side, and keep yourself sheltered during the periods on the low side.

 

This was shortly after the Falklands War, and we always got an RN "escort" and RAF flypast or two as we passed, there wasn't much in the way of traffic down there then, so I guess they were keen to have a look at anything new. We had twin 8 cylinder engines, the rumour was that the submarine patrols could never get an identifiable sound signature from us as we usually had at least one leg of an engine hung up, and never the same one.

 

I never heard of anyone getting anything worse than a good soaking down on the poop deck, but sadly, up on the focsle (different ships and runs) we lost 2 shipmates killed and a couple badly injured when they got caught out taking water over the bow. One of those we lost had survived the Conveyor sinking. The sea can be very unforgiving, no matter how much experience you have.

 

 

 

[Brandy]

On 6/21/2020 at 10:02 PM, TheBaron said:

What with the chains and all this looks suspiciously like someone's making up a ransom note from newsprint.....

A sort of "never mind the rowlocks"?

 

Ian

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

Top fit, Dave.  Swing the lamp, somebody... [Sounds scary!]
 

I used to love being at sea in heavy weather, but that was in a warship with the cab safely double-chained in the hangar and the upper deck firmly out of bounds, so the only outside view was from the bridge.  
 

My Lynx Observer on Broadsword flight suffered badly from seasickness, so occasionally we’d get airborne for a couple of hours just to give the poor sod a respite.  Made for some cheeky deck landings, but the Lynx was completely in its element around a moving deck, so provided you took your time you were fine.  

[Iceman 29]

The Lynx is an amazing helicopter..

 

i love this vidéo. It'll bring back memories, maybe? 😊

 

 

Some time the sea is very rough, but you have to try to sleep.. and working eventualy if your’re  not sick. This bad weather can follow you some long days. 

A video of one my ship in december 2012, north atlantic, coming from Panama canal and going to Holland by the Channel, i spent 3 years of contracts on this gas carrier (590 foots long)
 

Take care, you can be sick. Take your pils. 🤮End of off-topic.. 

 

Not so far from the position where the Bismarck sunk.. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

Iceman’s film of the Danish Lynx in sporty weather illustrates the point perfectly; if you get into a reasonable hover and wait (& his hover relative to the world is solid; it only looks all over the place because the camera is on a wildly moving platform), at some point a quiet period will arrive & you can land.  I used to hover immediately to port of the deck to wait, partly to stay clear of turbulence from the superstructure but mostly because you could look ahead and judge the wave patterns to start anticipating your quiet period.  The Danish guy in the film misses one chance, I reckon, before he nails the second one - but who knows what was occupying his attention for the split second of decision.  
 

Sport of Kings!  I used to love DLs!  Maybe less so in the dark...

[giemme]

10 minutes ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

Iceman’s film of the Danish Lynx in sporty weather illustrates the point perfectly; if you get into a reasonable hover and wait (& his hover relative to the world is solid; it only looks all over the place because the camera is on a wildly moving platform), at some point a quiet period will arrive & you can land.  I used to hover immediately to port of the deck to wait, partly to stay clear of turbulence from the superstructure but mostly because you could look ahead and judge the wave patterns to start anticipating your quiet period.  The Danish guy in the film misses one chance, I reckon, before he nails the second one - but who knows what was occupying his attention for the split second of decision.  
 

Sport of Kings!  I used to love DLs!  Maybe less so in the dark...

Whoever does/did you job, has my complete and utter admiration! BOS! (see if you can guess that acronym )

 

Ciao

[foeth]

Fortunately systems are developed that scan the wave pattern in front of the ship and try predicting windows when ship motions are minimal. (https://www.marin.nl/jips/owme)

Edited June 25, 2020 by foeth

[Terry1954]

57 minutes ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

The Danish guy in the film misses one chance, I reckon, before he nails the second one - but who knows what was occupying his attention for the split second of decision.  
 

Impressive stuff indeed. I tried to spot the one chance you refer to, but extremely difficult for a novice. I saw what I thought might be it at about 0:46 seconds in, but really not sure?

 

Have to agree with Giorgio, great admiration for you and your colleagues that can do this. I used to get phased by light crosswind landings when I did my PPL training! Nailed them in the end I guess, but even so .............. phew!

 

Terry

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

3 hours ago, Terry1954 said:

Impressive stuff indeed. I tried to spot the one chance you refer to, but extremely difficult for a novice. I saw what I thought might be it at about 0:46 seconds in, but really not sure?

 

Have to agree with Giorgio, great admiration for you and your colleagues that can do this. I used to get phased by light crosswind landings when I did my PPL training! Nailed them in the end I guess, but even so .............. phew!

 

Terry

0:46 is a possibility, but he hasn’t been established in the hover for long at that point, so not surprising that he doesn’t go for that one.  Around 1:25 I was inwardly shouting “NOW!” - but the deck rears up at him about 5 seconds later, so he might have seen that coming.

 

It’s also worth pointing out that the film is of a very small ship for a flight deck of that size; in particular, I imagine her pitching motion is harder to judge from the pilot’s view.  A longer vessel (Type 22s were my bread & butter, but “other types of ship are available” as the BBC would put it) still pitches, obviously, but you get used to your own “Mother” and become very adept at judging from the motion of the bow what the stern will probably be doing in 5 seconds’ time.  Hence why it helps to hover alongside the deck rather than over it while awaiting your moment.

 

We were VERY well trained, but in my case I also had 220 Sea King deck landings under my belt before I ever sat in a Lynx (I finished my career with over 1,500 DLs, 400 of them at night).  Landing a Sea King on a carrier is obviously a very different thing, but the principles are the same and your judgement of relative motion, momentum and distance is growing better all the time - plus the Sea King isn’t in the same league in terms of manoeuvrability / responsiveness close to the deck.   Only after my first Lynx tour did I have to operate a Sea King from a Batch 3 Type 22; that could be extremely challenging!  Alas, I only ever flew the Merlin sim; never the real aircraft, and certainly never anywhere near a deck; I understand they handle very nicely for such a big aircraft (half as big again as a Sea King; 15 tons all up).

 

For my money the really brave guys were people like Ralph (@chewbacca) who had to sit there while trained monkeys like me waffled about close to the deck.  The pilots are busy; the poor Looker just sits there and hopes his mate doesn’t cock it up!

 

Edit: incidentally, for anyone sitting there wondering why I’m talking about flying rather than building models, my Man Cave is staggeringly hot at the moment - way too warm to sit in for any length of time with any pleasure.  Normal service (or what passes for it round here) will be resumed at the weekend, I understand

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

Finally a bit of modelling to report, so I have been continuing with the quarter deck and cable deck.

Firstly building (dry fitting only for now) the assorted hawser reels that sit aft, plus the (Tetra PE) characteristic supports for the deck above:

Then with the for’d bulkhead dry fitted (though some iffy photography!):

At the other end of the ship, I’ll be adding a couple of 3lb saluting guns that appear in the builders’ plans - extreme close-up here, but these are lovely MicroMaster 3D prints:

 

Finally for today, here’s the cable deck itself; bitts fitted, capstans and cable holders, and the cable itself: still to be added, hawser reels as on the quarterdeck, fairleads (you can see the gaps for them in the wooden deck), and the afrementioned saluting guns.

 

Getting there.  Happy.

 

Crisp

 

 

[CedB]

Happy you should be!

 

More stunning work Crisp  

[Terry1954]

Lovely work on that cable deck. 

 

Terry

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

35 minutes ago, Terry1954 said:

Lovely work on that cable deck. 

 

Terry

Thank you; a mixture of Shapeways (bitts / bollards), Tetra (the 'wooden' deck, the ladders, doors, & assorted yet-to-be-fitted slips on the anchor cables), Merit (the styrene, obvs, including the capstans / cable holders), Northstar (parts of the hawser reels), MicroMaster (the 3lb saluting guns) and of course the yxmodel cable itself, which is a work of art.   6 suppliers for one section of the ship which is about 2" long and will be very hard to see; bonkers when you think of it like that, but it keeps me happy!

 

I am also quite pleased with my experiments with using water colour pencils instead of dry brushing to bring out some of the detail.  Even in extreme close-up it's not instantly obvious, but to the naked eye it just gives that little bit of definition - and will do all the more when I've done a bit of dark wash around edges.

[robgizlu]

As Terry said - consistently Super work.

I found that video of the Lynx landing faintly terrifying 

Rob

[giemme]

Excellent progress, Crisp - I'm very impressed by the cable deck!    

 

Ciao