An heretic 1944 Indianapolis. Academy Premium Edition 1/350

[Zubimusu]

Hello to the ship community!. Best wishes from Spain. This model is heretic because i'ts a 1945 Indianapolis, as I comment, but with 1944 camouflage, so it's a little bit "tricky". This is just the presentation, I hope to ad more pics this afternoon. Enjoy and best wishes!.

The model box. The model includes an I-58 with Kaiten, very interesting

 

Edited August 23, 2019 by Zubimusu

[Courageous]

Looking forward to your build.

 

Stuart

[ArnoldAmbrose]

Gidday again Borja, you've just answered the question I asked in your introduction thread - 1/350 scale. Looking forward to it. Regards, Jeff.

Edited August 23, 2019 by ArnoldAmbrose

[Zubimusu]

Thank you both, Stuart and Jeff, for your kind reception. I'm the CEO of a model shipyard, Zubimusu Shipyards, based in San Sebastian (Spain). Before laying the keel of the ship, and following our traditions (of ZS's), first, the historic introduction. BTW, Zubimusu means Kissbridge and is a park close to my home.

Our story dates back to 1919, precisely a century ago. Under the Treaty of Versailles, which closed the IWW, Britain had a problem. The Royal Navy was the most powerful navy in the world, almost twice the size of the two following navies, the US Navy and the IJN, but the Empire couldn't afford it and so,  keep Neptune's Trident. So ruinous was the First World War o Great War, for the economy of the Empire, that it wouldn't recover until 1936, so graveous had been. So, for the Empire's strategists, there was no choice, they had to find a mean to keep status quo economically. Solutions?. A treaty that keep the Royal Navy as powerful as posible but in a reduced size, keeping at bay japanese and americans. But, how to reach this goal?. The solution came from an unespected place.

The origins of the 1922's Washington Treaty, which in turn is the origin of Indianapolis and all the 8" armed heavy cruisers, is based in an idea from US president Woodrow Wilson. "In order to keep the world peace, I propose to dismantle all the new american battleships and keep the fleet in minimun size". The hoorays! and bravo! from japanese and british politicians and sailors were heard around the globe, but...

Until tomorrow, sleep well. Enjoy.

Edited August 23, 2019 by Zubimusu

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

Hmmm.  That makes it sound as though the Washington Treaty somehow benefitted the Royal Navy.  A quick look at the state of the fleet in 1939 tells a very different story.

 

 

[Zubimusu]

No, the british fleet in 1939 was still the most powerful fleet in the world, only in 1942 would the US Navy took the lead. Britain, simply, has no money left to spare in the Royal Navy as was  the case in 1905-1916. Until 1942, as I've mentioned, it was an old but very powerful fleet.

Edited August 24, 2019 by Zubimusu

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

A fleet with only 1 remotely modern aircraft carrier, no new battleships or battlecruisers...  Yes, it was still large, but it was in desperate need of modernisation to deal with the threats of the 1940s, rather than those of 30 years before (for which almost all of it was designed).

 

Besides, your theory completely disregards minor details like the Wall Street crash and the Depression - or were they some kind of dastardly British plot to keep other nations in their place as well?

 

The Washington Treaty was the result of a combination of a pacifist / idealist (take your pick) reaction to the horrors of 1914-1918 and the worldwide - but led by the US - recognition of the economic carnage of the 1920s.  To characterise it as some sort of convenient fiction designed by “the Empire’s strategists” (in your phrase) to perpetuate the RN’s position is a travesty of the truth.  If anything, it was the powers that signed the treaty but quietly got on with disregarding it (notably Germany, but not only them) who “benefitted”.

 

I’m sure it will be a great model, but you really need to read some history.

 

 

[ArnoldAmbrose]

On 8/24/2019 at 5:48 AM, Zubimusu said:

The Royal Navy was the most powerful navy in the world, almost twice the size of the two following navies

Gidday, I believe that was British policy prior to WW1, to have a fleet the equal to that of any two potential adversaries. And for an island nation of world-wide maritime interests I guess it was necessary. But also, I imagine expensive. After WW1 a number of navies began building programs of large and expensive capital ships, and I think the Washington Treaty put a stop to this to prevent everyone going broke.

     My interest in this is more the hardware side of things - the ships themselves. As for the politics of the treaty I freely admit to being somewhat ignorant so I'll leave that side of things alone, other than to learn from others more knowledgeable than I. 

     As for your model Borja, I am still looking forward to seeing it built.

Regards, Jeff.

[Zubimusu]

If somebody feels hurt, I apologize. for the rest, the ship goes on.

Some music, who calmes the hearts...

 

It's one great musician.

[Zubimusu]

I've just open my mouth with the supports of the ship. Two holes in the bottom (the pantoque in Spanish) and the trip begins!.

Well, the more the shafts, the more fast is the ship. As usual with American cruisers, our Indy has four shafts for 32 knots. Almost the american fleet speed, 33 knots.

Some pictures

After WWI, in which almost all the big ships carried a twin rudder, in the second one, the majority of navies opted for a single rudder, semi-compensated, less manouvrable, but cheaper.

The two holes (I know, it's too slow, but this is a public work after all and I'm an spaniard ;-)).

Hasta mañana, enjoy!

Borja

Edited September 10, 2019 by Zubimusu

[Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies]

It was the British who kept pushing for caps on displacement and gun size. We wanted to maintain our dominant position at a cost we could almost afford. The Americans intended to achieve parity with the Royal Navy. Japan smiled and politely declined from playing. It was the UK's perceived enemies who completely ignored it.

 

I'd offer that Britain tried to influence the Washington Treaty to our advantage, but it didn't work out that way. Our heavy industry declined in the interwar years whilst our enemies borrowed the money to build up their navies anyway - the precise thing the British wished to avoid having to try to keep ahead of.

 

As we all know we entered WW2 with a pair of 16 year old battleships as our newest plus, plus cruisers slightly younger and one newish aircraft carrier. The KGVs were a compromise aimed at getting best value for money from a set of constraints that only really we and the Americans paid any heed of.

[Zubimusu]

I disagree with you, James, I think that you're too british-centered, take a look at the other fleets. In the case of battleships, Britain had the newest ones (1925), more modern than the japaneses Nagatos(1917) and the american Colorados (1920). For the carriers, in the same way as american and japanese transformed battleship and battlecruiser hulls into two aircraft carriers each, the same did Britain (Glorious and Corageous-1928 and 1930 commisioned) and had more, but smaller aircraft carriers than the other two powers, due to a different policy. I think that you are too centered upon Britain, I insist. It's not my intention to create an aethernal discussion, but if you want, we can talk about this topic more "en profondeur".

Best regards

 

Borja

Edited September 10, 2019 by Zubimusu

[Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies]

I think you're forgetting the US Navy's North Carolinas which were brand new and in service as the war started (in 1939, not when the US officially entered in late 1941). By then the South Dakotas were well on the way. They also had the 3 Yorktown sisters, Wasp and Ranger as carriers.

 

Germany had already built 3 new Deutschland class surface raiders in the mid 1930s which displaced "10,000 tonnes" only if the turrets and superstructures were stripped off. They were well on with the huge Bismarck, and had the Scharnhorst & Gneisenau twins plus the Hipper heavy cruisers. This was a substantial new fleet.

 

Italy too had been building up a new fleet before the war and good ships too. Lucky for us their leadership was still inept.

 

In terms of numbers we still had a lot. Almost all of it was aging by the outbreak of WW2 and we wouldn't commission a new heavy unit until well into 1940. Anson and Howe wouldn't be commissioned until the latter half of 1942 - 3 years after the outbreak of war.