Jump to content

Sink the Bismarck! HMS Ark Royal, 26 May 1941


Recommended Posts

Intermittent & brief moments at the bench this week, but we’re still moving forward; 

 

a) with the hull openings

50881687823_8a0b56845f_b.jpg


b) with the Fulmar wing paint mule (Alclad black primer & a heavily thinned coat of Jamie’s 507C)

50880316081_f1d2cbf05a_b.jpg

 

More soon

 

Crisp

  • Like 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funnily enough I'm working on hull openings at the moment too, though as I don't really have a hull yet I'm not quite sure whether they qualify, thankfully I don't have nearly as many to worry about as you do Crispin, looking really good this ere barky, the amount of detail you are packing onto it is truly awe inspiring !

Lovely shot of the Cathedral BTW !!

 

Cheers

 

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, PolarisPrime said:

What would they be called?  I have called them galleries, but that may not be the right term. 

As they're on the gallery deck Id go with galleries else why call it the gallery deck - but that said the navy seemed to call things whatever they fancied at the time so........

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then lets call the ones on the gallery deck the galleries, and the ones on the bay deck the bays. 

 

Is the bay deck the top row or the bottom row of the openings?  Or is that the deck my cabin was on when I was on the Emerald Princess?

Edited by PolarisPrime
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sticking to the port forward bay, I cannot put off building the second pair of paravanes any longer.  It's been a while, so may I remind you of the fact that there are already two stowed paravanes on the bulkhead of the equivalent bay to starboard, along with their associated winch (also North Star, and superb):

50883358043_1d3073c79b_b.jpg

 

The good news is that the North Star paravanes (actually US cruiser paravanes, but the right size and generally the right configuration, so more than good enough to pass muster as a means of busying up Ark's bays) are beautifully done.  The bad news is that they are TINY and complicated and the brass for their PE is extremely fragile; it bends if you breathe wrong.

 

Still, needs must, so here's one en route (resin body & 3 pieces of PE):

50891545151_f401ba037c_b.jpg

 

..and here are two as at the time I stopped this evening to wait for everything to cure; a further 2 bits of brass on the left hand one to give it a stand.  The tall thing is a retaining strap that will fold over the top - the right hand paravane still has the upper PE part to be added [I've lost its tail to the carpet monster, but it won't be visible in the configuration they'll end up].  

50891661762_8768d16b3b_b.jpg

 

There are other bits which I will be leaving off as invisible.  The North Star ones are excellent, but there does come a point when you reach the "You have got to be kidding me!" stage, and the 4 straps marked 6 on this PE runner are well beyond that point.  As are the 'tails' which would be invisible against the bulkhead anyway; you can see that I tried one and then didn't try any more!

50890834423_cfe1f23625_b.jpg

 

Here is a photo with a scalpel blade for scale.  All you stunning 1/700 modellers are no doubt shrugging your shoulders at this point, but there is a reason why my 1/700 Ark 2 has been stalled for about 2 years (and possibly for ever):

50891743807_fd92d23c16_b.jpg

 

While waiting for the glue to cure on the paravanes I thought I could turn to the boat booms; there are 4 of them to add.  If anyone within 100 miles of Salisbury heard an outbreak of regrettable language a few minutes ago, I apologise; can the people at Merit really not measure anything? [Incidentally, you can see the paravanes in this close-up of a Kagero drawing re-scaled to 1/350]

50890834428_47f6ecf257_b.jpg

 

I mean, I know that there are areas of the ship where evidence is scarce... but there are others where a clear photograph is staring you in the face if you care to look:

Ark Royal sinking, 13 November 1941, seen from HMS Hermione

[IWM photo, obvs]

 

Ah well.  Even Merit's brackets are hopeless, so yet more scratch building lurches into my future.

 

Honestly, I continue to applaud them for producing a kit of Ark 3 at all - after all, no-one else has - but the number of simple and easily avoidable errors is astonishing.  It's not as though producing a boat boom that is about 25% too short is any simpler or less effort than producing one that's right.

 

Ah well.

 

More soon

 

Crisp

  • Like 22
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

Honestly, I continue to applaud them for producing a kit of Ark 3 at all - after all, no-one else has - but the number of simple and easily avoidable errors is astonishing.

It would be genuinely fascinating to learn the human processes whereby kits come to embody errors of all kinds.

 

Presumably a design team is employed rather than just a single individual, so are their checks against references just cursory, do they get overwhelmed somewhere between part and whole, or are they on such tight budgetary schedules that critical analysis is minimal? 

 

Or are these monsters no more than plastic nihilists, out to disrupt all apprehension of the past through the production of defective replicas. Ignatius would know.

 

Ps. I'm very fond of that delicate work on those paravanes. Painstaking isn't in it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

but the number of simple and easily avoidable errors is astonishing

This is true for almost anything that comes from the Trumpeter factory.  It's the same issue with the Hobby Boss 1/32 B-24.  While they do something that is Iconic that no one else has done - and it is mostly top notch - there are glaring errors that are head scratching.  And some of the glaring errors are in major locations. 

 

But like you say, no one else has produced a 1/350 scale Ark Royal.  If they could just produce a 1/350 scale Nelson/Rodney instead of those 1/200 giants I would take it, bad engineering and all. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps it's an international team and one part was using metric and the other imperial? Like the Mars Climate Orbiter… and other measuring gaffs.

 

Nice work though Crisp, and I don't blame you for leaving out 'The North Star 6'. Sometimes you need a sense of perspective… :D 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, PolarisPrime said:

This is true for almost anything that comes from the Trumpeter factory.  It's the same issue with the Hobby Boss 1/32 B-24.  While they do something that is Iconic that no one else has done - and it is mostly top notch - there are glaring errors that are head scratching.  And some of the glaring errors are in major locations. 

 

But like you say, no one else has produced a 1/350 scale Ark Royal.  If they could just produce a 1/350 scale Nelson/Rodney instead of those 1/200 giants I would take it, bad engineering and all. 

Yes they've been promising Rodney for a while, the LHS in Gloucester has started showing it on their website as coming soon so I don't know if it will finally be appearing but I hold little hope

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have at least worked out a plan for the boat booms; I have some Master turned brass generic yardarms, one of which is pretty close in length and spot on for taper / girth at the centre.  So I have order another set from a certain well-known online auction site.  I probably could have produced the booms myself with some patience, but I am almost certain I could not have produced 4 convincingly identical ones [not for the first time a quick perusal of Evert-Jan's ridiculously wonderful work (scroll down) provides a mixture of inspiration and awe].

 

I can add grommet strops etc. [the ring thingies from which the lizards and Jacob's ladders are suspended when the boom is in use] around the boom from strips of masking tape and/or foil, so that should be OK.  I attach a generic diagram from the Admiralty Manual of Seamanship Vol.1 for those of you who do not speak Sailor.  Note the short paragraph immediately above the diagram for why strictly this should be called a "Lower Boom", but I am going to stick with just "Boom".

50894308091_c9ac537d2d_b.jpg

 

That just leaves the attachment points to the hull, which ought to be doable, though I think I will wait until I have the booms ready before committing to brass or styrene; exact measurement will be key.

 

More later

 

Crisp

 

P.S.  Meanwhile, the paravanes are finished:

50894399296_339bee6b05_b.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to assume that when they say "lazy painters" they are not actually referring to a sailor with a paintbrush. As such, what is the purpose of these booms? No point in climbing a ladder to nothing!

 

Ian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The boom is for ship's boats when the ship herself is at anchor - used to get people ashore, stores, moving from ship to ship etc.  The boatrope (as the term suggests) attaches to the bow to control the boat (you can see that it leads forward to a fairlead, so the ship could control where the boat sat relative to the boom).   Most sailors got in and out of boats by sliding down / climbing the lizard; using the Jacob's Ladder was regarded as very second rate if you were a proper seaman.  

 

The RN of this era and before was completely obsessed with boats and boat work; "a ship is known by her boats".  This was because the larger ships (battleships, battlecruisers, carriers etc.) were more often at anchor than alongside - there simply wasn't room alongside for more than a few large vessels, so the berths tended to be used for ships that really needed cranes or engineering work; operational ships would mostly be at anchor.  

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Respect for those Paravanes - (having just scratched a couple for Griffin - with considerable less finesse than yours) and I'm loving the Boom discussion having just learnt all this arcanery for Berwick :winkgrin:

Rob

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stopping for the evening now; apart from the paravanes, this is a close-up (unforgiving as ever!) of where they are destined to go:

50894780542_19ba84610f_b.jpg

 

...and the next bays extending aft:

50894780547_40e2389007_b.jpg

 

I can't wait to get some primer on this; it all looks horribly messy in these extreme close-ups!

 

More soon

 

Crisp

  • Like 21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very thorough looking bay work there. I'm assuming that grey plastic/resin looking object is some sort of powered winch? You may have mentioned it before.

 

This sort of busy look is what makes good marine models IMHO.

 

Terry

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paravane winch; the paravanes themselves will be on the bulkhead just forward (i.e. between the winch and the door).  It's a North Star resin winch; stunning piece of casting.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Brandy said:

I'm going to assume that when they say "lazy painters" they are not actually referring to a sailor with a paintbrush. As such, what is the purpose of these booms? No point in climbing a ladder to nothing!

 

Ian

 

Painters are ropes / wires / chords. They can be used for towing boats or rafts or securing them. The modern dictionary definition of a lazy painter is essentially what the boat ropes are for above - you secure your boat's own painter line to the bottom of it to stop your boat drifting away. @Ex-FAAWAFU can probably say with more authority but here I thought they might secure the bigger boats to the boat ropes then tie-off the Jacobs ladders to another cleat somewhere so the ladder doesn't flap about in the breeze whilst someone tries to climb down (or up). Would the lazy painter in this context be whatever they used to tie off the Jacobs ladder to wherever they wanted to access the ladder from in the boat?

 

li2-M.jpg

 

Over-the-boom-girls-001-610x643.jpg

 

http://www.hmshood.com/photos/miscellaneous/pinnace.jpg

 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...