Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Ex-FAAWAFU

Sink the Bismarck! HMS Ark Royal, 26 May 1941

Recommended Posts

On 7/11/2019 at 11:10 PM, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

 I’d kill for a decent photo of the compass platform / bridge!

Do the plans from Roberts 'British Warships' show any of the layout detail for the compass platform/ bridge? 

 

Just got my copy and haven't had a chance to study it yet, but there's a breakdown of each level of the island if I remember rightly?

 

Although with my memory it could of been a map of the Isle of Wight I saw somewhere....

 

Geoff 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plans yes, but I’d still love to see a photo or two - & there is nothing for the port side, either.  As far as they go, those plans are superb, but they’re incomplete (as published, anyway).  The Profile Morskie plans lack detail, and in some places aren’t quite accurate (assuming the builders’ plans reflected reality).

 

In the end, we have what we have; it’s possible to piece together quite a lot of the missing detail from glimpses of the island in the background of IWM Swordfish & Fulmar pictures, for instance.  I’m also looking at quite a lot of video; Ark was something of a film star in her brief life (& I’m not just talking about “Ships With Wings”, which plays just as fast & loose with reality as most films, but does have some film of the real thing).  And if it can’t be found, then who is going to prove me wrong?

 

When I went to the FAA Museum with @CedB and @The Baron last week, I was hoping that there would be a large (?builders’?) model of Ark.  I think I’ve seen one there before, but can’t be sure.  But there wasn’t.  Lovely model of Ark 2 in her Dardanelles guise.  Ditto Ark 4, Indomitable, Furious, Argus... even a Kiev class.  But no Ark 3.

 

Ah well!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit more, building on last night’s work.  

 

First up, this is what I mean by the PE scuttles with eyebrows.  3 are fitted as a test; pretty happy with how they look.  As you can see, still a little filling to complete further aft, and since I’m obviously going to need to sand it a bit, the remaining 5 scuttles can wait a bit longer.  Concept proved OK, though.

spacer.png

 

You can also see in the picture above that the interior walkway towards the top of the funnel is glued into one side.  Plus this shows one of the brass brackets for the galley flues that I mentioned last night.

 

Here it is with the other half of the funnel dry fitted.

spacer.png

 

Happy.

 

Crisp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking and learning from this as many others I have this kit and the Tetra sets  :book:

 

Crisp have you had a look at the Topdrawings books from Kagero some good detailed drawings in these i think.

 

spacer.png

 

spacer.png

 

spacer.png

 

spacer.png

 

beefy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Beefy - yes, I do have the Kagero book; very good in some places, less so in others.  But strong on the island!

 

One more shot for this evening; the beginnings of the funnel cover support frame for the top of the funnel.  A challenge not to bend this out of true (a challenge I have not entirely passed!); this is 8 separate pieces of brass, with several more yet to come (one visible taped down alongside, because I’m now stopping through tired eyes).

 

spacer.png

 

More tomorrow, I hope

 

Crisp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

Plans yes, but I’d still love to see a photo or two - & there is nothing for the port side, either.  

Ah well!

I've been collecting photos of Ark Royal  and her aircraft for 20 years. I have quite a number of close-up photos of parts of the ship that are not well-represented in photos you can find on-line;  including  various close-up photos of the island and funnel. One of these shows the interior of the funnel (photographed from above facing the stern).  I would say that Tetra made an educated guess at what they thought the interior structure of the funnel looked like. In reality there was a series of inter-connecting walkways at different levels  The walkway in the centre is possibly a bit lower that Tetra would have you place it and doesn't extend forward the complete length of the funnel. Directly underneath this central walkway, there is another. These are flanked, at an intermediate level, by a walkway on the port side (again, not running the entire length of the funnel). Joining the lower central walkway is a transverse one that forms the head of a "T".   On the port side I don't see the structures that Tetra have conforming to the shape of the funnel. I would assume that the starboard side of the central walkway is a mirror image of the port side, but it's not in frame.

 

I started with the funnel on my 1/200 build, and I will scan a low res version of this photo in due course when I start a WiP in a couple of weeks after my return from the Pyrenees to watch Le Tour and ride a few Cols. The only version I have at the moment is 1600 dpi.

Edited by iang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

As ever, it is (genuinely) fascinating to hear from someone who has clearly studied the subject for decades, so knows more about this Ark than I ever will.  Any photo titbits you can thrown in my direction will be gratefully gobbled up - equally, I understand if you cannot.

 

Having said that, there is a limit to how far I’m prepared to go in the pursuit of accuracy... and the interior of the funnel is beyond that limit.  Particularly since what you will see (particularly in 1/350 rather than 1/200) is the impression of a walkway or walkways in the depths (which will be pretty murky, what with funnel soot an’ all) all underneath the funnel cap, funnel cover frame and a couple of flues built into the uptake.

 

Tetra’s walkway is an educated guess, though not entirely correct.  None the less, Tetra’s educated guess is just one of no doubt hundreds of educated guesses that I’m going to have to make, so who am I to complain.  It definitely stays!

 

P.S. All this also definitely comes into the ‘First World Problem’ category.  I have the Roberts copies of the shipbuilders’ “as built” plans [albeit missing one side].  I have the Kagero & Morskie plans.  I have several books, a reasonable number of photographs.  I also have the Victorious “Anatomy of the Ship” book and John Lambert drawings in assorted places which give me good references for HACS, Vickers .5” guns, 4”, 8-barrelled pom-poms, pom-pom directors, assorted sights, signal projectors, searchlights, bridge equipment, paravanes, winches, cable holders...  and here I am being all precious about not having the right photo of precisely that area of the ship.

 

Get over it, man, and build what a) is plausible for the period and b) looks right!

 

P.P.S. Not for the first time, let’s hear it for Gator’s Grip.  I always use GG for these complex PE constructions, only committing to CA and/or solder once I am sure everything is in place.  GG gives me enough flexibility / wiggle room to manipulate things without either breaking the bond and having to glue it all over again, or bending the brass because the glue joint won’t budge a mm.

 

So, mindful of Ian’s point about the walkway (whatever shape it was!) being lower in the funnel, and having done a visual test fit of the funnel cover frame which suggested there was going to be a problem... the walkway has been detached from the funnel again.  Without damage.

Edited by Ex-FAAWAFU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/14/2019 at 5:13 PM, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

Adjust your (mind)set accordingly.

Sorry for the late reply, my world is busy,busy,busy at the moment.

Tweaked and adjusted accordingly. I do like the way you include so much historical detail in your builds, it pulls us in and has us wanting more and adds another dimension to the build.

You are correct in that we do often  judge historical events through a modern lens, often forgetting that many of the weapons systems of that war were getting their first 'real use' and much of the[r operational doctrine was in it's infancy.

Keep feeding me/us please 🙏

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/17/2019 at 10:54 PM, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

 

spacer.png

I had to do a double take when I first saw this as I thought you'd lost the plot ................ I could have sworn it was the makings of a type 965 bedstead!

 

Great progress on the etch and the accompanying background is very inspiring.

 

Terry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting build Crisp, and wow very nice start :like:

Just reading a book called Scramble about young fighter pilot Tom Neil who was posted over seas after the Battle of Britain to Malta  and they left Britain on the Aircraft carrier HMS Furious but transferred to the HMS Ark Royal in Gibraltar, they man-handled 23 Mk 11 Hurricanes of 249 Squadron across planks from one  carrier to the other, and all Hurri's stayed on Ark's deck, and it goes on to say that they would be disposed in such a manner as to enable the fighters to operate should there be an attack.

Tom Neil said in his book "the Ark Royal was as different from the Furious as chalk is from cheese"

 

Looking at all the sheets of PE :think: just wondering what type of magnifying glasses are you using.

 

Regards

Richard

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Furious, being a converted battlecruiser (-ish; she was one of “Fisher’s Follies”, along with Glorious & Courageous, designed for some pie-in-the-sky WW1 attack via the Baltic) which went through several different conversions before she reached her fully flat top final form, could only ever be a bodge.  The accommodation was not up to 40s standards (themselves pretty spartan by the standards of today), and according to my Father, who did some deck landing training on her, she was very smelly because her boiler gases vented astern rather than via a funnel.

 

Ark, on the other hand, was only 3 years old and designed from the ground up as a modern carrier.  I bet they were ‘chalk & cheese’!  But the Hurricanes had to be stowed on deck because they couldn’t fit down the lifts (no wing fold).

 

Ark did several “Malta club runs” (as they used to call them) to deliver (land) fighters to Malta, usually escorted / led by a Skua or later a Fulmar to assist with the long over-sea navigation.  Indeed she had just finished one when Force H was sailed suddenly for the Bismarck hunt, and was on the way back to Gib after another when she was sunk.

 

Magnifying glasses?  Just a bog standard Optivisor

Edited by Ex-FAAWAFU

Share this post


Link to post
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...