1/600 What-if 16 gun HMS Belfast

[robgizlu]

Looking very fine indeed Jeff

Rob

[ArnoldAmbrose]

Gidday Guys, thanks for your interest. I did consider placing the fwd pompom directors on the platforms behind  the guns (those 'sticky out ear things' to use technical maritime terminology 😀) but decided not to at this stage, particularly now that the superstructure is glued to the model. I'd have to shave off the balustrading and add supports underneath and I think it would be too difficult to repair if I botched it up. But thank you for the suggestion. Regards, Jeff.

[ArnoldAmbrose]

Gidday again Guys, I've said it before but, gee, you lot make work for me. Earlier today it was TBJohn with his suggestion that the aft pompoms would best be abreast the aft funnel, which I'm now trying to do. This time it's Tom Modelholic. 🙂 With his suggestion of mounting the fwd pompom directors on those 'sticky out ear things bits'. I thought "A good idea, but too risky at this stage." 

      Then I had another look and thought "A good idea, but it might be too risky now."

      Then yet another look and thought "Maybe I could."

Then I reached for the scalpel! Rather than cut away the balustrading only I cut away the entire platform where the director tub will go, with a very sharp scalpel blade, a sharp curved chisel blade, and an awful lot of care and trepidation. But I succeeded. I'll raise the height of the pompom director tubs with 4mm tube. So Tom, thanks for the suggestion/encouragement, and if I had of botched the job I would NEVER have forgiven you! 😠 Only Joking.  😀  I appreciate all suggestions and ideas. Some I'll act on, some I'll decline but I'll appreciate them all. And the decision as to whether or not to act on them is mine alone, with the consequences falling on my shoulders only. So everyone, please feel free to continue with suggestions. I think the model will be better because of them.

     I'll post a photo on what I've done a little later, when I have more to show.

Oh well, it's getting late here, time for my beauty sleep. (Which I keep getting told doesn't work 😠). So stay safe everybody, and regards, Jeff.

[TallBlondJohn]

1 hour ago, ArnoldAmbrose said:

Gidday again Guys, I've said it before but, gee, you lot make work for me. Earlier today it was TBJohn with his suggestion that the aft pompoms would best be abreast the aft funnel, which I'm now trying to do. This time it's Tom Modelholic. 🙂 With his suggestion of mounting the fwd pompom directors on those 'sticky out ear things bits'. I thought "A good idea, but too risky at this stage." 

      Then I had another look and thought "A good idea, but it might be too risky now."

      Then yet another look and thought "Maybe I could."

Then I reached for the scalpel! Rather than cut away the balustrading only I cut away the entire platform where the director tub will go, with a very sharp scalpel blade, a sharp curved chisel blade, and an awful lot of care and trepidation. But I succeeded. I'll raise the height of the pompom director tubs with 4mm tube. So Tom, thanks for the suggestion/encouragement, and if I had of botched the job I would NEVER have forgiven you! 😠 Only Joking.  😀  I appreciate all suggestions and ideas. Some I'll act on, some I'll decline but I'll appreciate them all. And the decision as to whether or not to act on them is mine alone, with the consequences falling on my shoulders only. So everyone, please feel free to continue with suggestions. I think the model will be better because of them.

     I'll post a photo on what I've done a little later, when I have more to show.

Oh well, it's getting late here, time for my beauty sleep. (Which I keep getting told doesn't work 😠). So stay safe everybody, and regards, Jeff.

 

The sticky outy bits are (I think) the signal deck (flag lockers etc) and so also had the signalling lamps - which need a clear view outwards...uh oh... I was going to suggest you just glue the director tubs to the rear corners of the top bridge deck. If its too late the signal lamps could go on the hangar roof outboard of the 4" directors.

[ArnoldAmbrose]

Gidday TBJ, yeah small signaling lamps went there, plus larger searchlights were placed where the pompoms will now be going. I'm planning to fit the searchlights a bit further fwd from where they were, the lamps may now have to go at the fwd edge of that deck, which is becoming very crowded. I don't want to play around with this area much more. I was very careful with my carving last night and got away with it but I don't want to tempt fate. Plus I'm running out of time. (I seem to have said that or similar before. 😀) Regards, Jeff.

[ArnoldAmbrose]

Gidday All, thank you for your interest, comments and suggestions, I greatly appreciate them. I have a bit more progress to report on the 16 gun HMS Belfast. Below is a photo showing the latest.

Due to our recent discussions I've had a bit of a rethink. Although this is a whiff I like it to be as plausible as possible, as you're no doubt aware. The original placing of the boats, before they got moved to the catapult area, I think wasn't possible. There simply wasn't enough space for them as I had the ship's waist arranged. So hence the rethink. The scenario is now this:- Two quad pompoms mounted on platforms abreast the aft funnel. That structure fwd of the aft funnel was not there and the boats were all stowed (with two exceptions) between the funnels. After the aircraft were landed, being considered no longer necessary thanks to improved radar, a boat tier was built across the catapult and some of the boats moved from the crowded boat deck to this new location. In the space freed up a deck house was built and the mainmast fitted above it. Two tubs for 20mm Oerlikons were mounted on it too. For better or worse, this is what I'm going with. I hope you approve. 🤞
    Anyway, progress report. The funnels are now glued down, plus I've made/added platforms abreast the aft funnel for the pompoms. I've raised the height of the four tubs for the pompom directors and glued them down. While modifying the tubs I also removed the pillar of styrene inside them which was meant (I think) to represent the directors themselves but look more like, well, pillars of styrene. I've made my own pompom directors, that's them in the foreground on the block of wood to the left. I'll post close-ups later. I've glued the two twin power Oerlikons to the quarterdeck, out of sight in this photo. I'll be fitting another two (one either side) on the 4-inch gun deck, immediately abaft (behind) the second 4-inch mount and under the aft pompom. You can see the locating hole in the deck for it. On the 'new' deck-house fwd of the pompom is a tub for a single 20mm Oerlikon. It's dry fitted at present. The searchlights are glued on, two on the aft superstructure and two on the fwd. The boat crane is dry fitted at present. On the aft main deck beside the aft superstructure you can see an unpainted boat. I'm planning on putting whaleboats on davits there.
     On the fwd superstructure you can see the sponson for the fwd pompoms, and behind it the tub for the pompom director. You can see where I had to cut into a platform there to make it fit, a rather nerve-wracking task considering the superstructure was already attached and I didn't want to botch it. Fwd of that is another searchlight, then the stbd HA (high angle) director, dry fitted. Then in front of that another tub for a single 20mm Oerlikon. The kit had a twin power mounting there but with my modifications there is no longer room for it. On 'B' turret deck below that is yet another Oerlikon tub.
     In the foreground on that thin MDF board are the parts for the 20mm Oerlikons I'm scratch building and some other kit twin power Oerlikons. I'm using two of them. Clamped in the clothes peg is one of the four Boffin 40mm Bofors I've made, to be fitted on 'B' and 'X' turrets. I've omitted the turrets for this photo, you've already seen them.
     Well, that's it for now I think. Doing the pompom directors took me quite a long time. Making the 20mm Oerlikons is my next task. They won't make themselves so I'd better get on with it. Thank you for your interest. Stay safe, and regards to all, Jeff.

[ArnoldAmbrose]

Gidday All, just a bit of progress on the 16 gun HMS Belfast. I've finished making the light gun outfit for the ship - almost. I've just noticed that one of the 40mm guns has lost it's autoloader. Below is a photo.

     At the top are the four twin 4-inch mounts and the four quad pompom mounts. To the right at the rear are four pompom directors with their radar. Below them on the sprue are twin 20mm Oerlikon power mounts. I'm only using two of these, but there are another two already fitted to the quarterdeck. Below them to the front are eight single 20mm Oerlikons, and to the front right are another four, plus the four single 40mm Bofors Boffin mounts. These last will be mounted on the crowns of the superfiring  turrets.
      Well that's it for now. Soon I'll start attaching all this small stuff. Thanks for your interest. Stay safe, and regards, Jeff.

[ArnoldAmbrose]

Gidday All, the commissioning of the 16 gun HMS Belfast is in sight now. Today I fitted all the guns to the ship, plus some other fittings. Below is a photo of where I'm up to.

    All guns are attached, although the main turrets are removable. I've fitted both main DCTs and the boat cranes. The three HA directors, radar lantern and four pompom directors are done but not fitted just yet. I've also fitted the two signaling lamps on the upper bridge and two boats (whalers, gigs ?) on skids abreast the aft superstructure. When I fitted the 20mm Oerlikons into their tubs on the catapult deck I realized I had made a mistake with the five midship Carley floats, when one of them obscured the third Oerlikon. They should be stowed horizontal, not vertical as I have them. I didn't think they looked right when I glued them on. Oh well, I'm not changing them now. I'll invoke the 'Whif Clause' and blame dockyard fitters without any sense of gun firing arcs.
     I've started painting the masts and the screws prior to fitting them to the model. Once that's done and the aforementioned directors are added the model will just need a bit of busying up. The decks around the fwd turrets are a bit bland, and I haven't fitted paravanes or booms yet. (Actually, I forgot them).
     Well, that's it for now. Thank you for your interest. Stay safe, and regards to all, Jeff.

[ArnoldAmbrose]

Gidday All, well I think we're nearly there with the 16 gun HMS Belfast. She has all her guns, and now her screws, directors and lower masts. Below is a photo of where I'm up to.

     As you can see (just) I've fitted the rack abreast the fwd superstructure that carries some Carley floats and the minesweeping paravanes. I was going to omit that and try to fit a strip to the side of the superstructure with floats attached but then I'd have nowhere to carry the paravanes. Hence my late decision to fit the racks. Plus it would be more authentic. It would have been a lot easier to have done it earlier but where's the fun in that? 🥴 The racks should be carrying seven floats and three paravanes each but as you can see I cut them back a bit, because of the 20mm Oerlikon on 'B' turret deck. I also added planes to the paravanes. I'll show close-ups when the model is done, which hopefully will be very soon now.
     I've fitted the HA (High Angle) directors and my scratch-built pompom directors, and the displaced signaling lamps. The masts have given me a bit of grief. The main mast is OK, it has suitable rake (backward lean) but not the foremast. I made the incorrect assumption that all the parts would be microscopically precise and hence didn't dry fit them first. Silly me. 🙄 The bracing legs are about 1mm too long and hence prevent the mast having the rake that it should. By the time I realized it the glue had almost set. Too late now, I think. To try to fix it would put too much at risk of damage - I'm just going to have to live with it. I still have to add the topmasts. I've painted them but they're rather chunky. I might make my own.
     Just a bit of busying up to do now. I'm making ready-use ammo lockers and have made two paravane winches for 'B' turret deck. That's them in the pegs near the bow, waiting for the paint to dry. I also want to make some hawser (berthing lines) reels for the area around the fwd turrets. All the detail there got removed while I was removing the fitted barbettes to make way for my larger barbettes.
     Then I think she'll almost be done. I'll post some close-up photos when the model is done. So until then, thank you for your comments and interest. Stay safe, and regards to all, Jeff.

[TallBlondJohn]

Looks very smart - and that extra bow makes her much prettier than a standard Belfast. If I ever do a 9x8" Belfast (HMS Erin?) this would be the basis. I think the only change I would have make would be to move the aft pom poms out further to give more firing arc aft, and put the forward pom-pom directors on the corners of the bridge deck.

 

I replaced my masts with brass rod but remember fit issues with the front mast as well, I think I ended up building it four times (and took three years, and still haven't put on the radars)

[ArnoldAmbrose]

Gidday TBJ, thanks for the comments. I think she's turned out reasonably balanced. I guess firing arcs are a bit of headache for ship designers - increasing the arcs of one mount could mask those of another. I wanted both the aft pompom and the aft 4-inch to be able to fire directly astern, and both of them can, just. I pity the gunner in the cockpit of the twin 20mm though. But I guess the guns would be at a reasonably high elevation if aiming at an aircraft coming in directly astern. I'd imagine that the best location for maximum firing arcs for the aft pompom would be on the shelter between the 4-inch mounts, but I've never seen a pompom there so I guess there's a reason for it - too heavy perhaps? The forward pompoms can almost fire directly fwd. I couldn't move the HA directors any further inboard because the radar mounted above them would hit the upper bridge. Also I think the weight of the pompom mount itself prevented it being moved further out on the sponson due to lack of support. My thoughts anyway.

     When I've finished I plan to photograph my original HMS Belfast OOB alongside this vessel, to compare them both. Should be interesting.

I'd like to see you do your HMS Erin. Do you have her in your build program? And I think that's a nice name for her. I'll consider that name reserved by you. A modeler on the ATF a few days ago suggested to me an 8 x 8-inch Belfast. I don't think such a build would require the rearrangement that this build needed.

     Anyway, thanks again for your interest and ideas. Regards, Jeff.

[TallBlondJohn]

The idea which I mentioned at the start of this thread is that the RN found out about the Mogami rebuild plan and decided to counter it with a 'Country' class pair, HMS Erin and HMS Hibernia. The first two ships would have 4 x twin 8" guns as the turrets didn't need designing and bulged hulls as built. They would deliberately mimic Belfast and Edinburgh so that an opponent wouldn't know what he was facing until the shell splashes started (and its also a straight turret swap for me). No idea if I'll ever get round to it though - feel free to build her if you like! (nice camouflage scheme please and red bottom)

 

Then no more naval treaties, so the RN moved on with the same idea - the Colony class are built with 3 x triple 6" and a Dominion Class equivalent with triple 8" - similar silhouette but bigger hull - using your design with X turret dropped aft to restore some rear superstructure with extra AA (probably a 4" superfiring, or more pom-poms), straight funnels and masts.

 

These ships would also have made flagships for the post-war navies. HMS Africa, HMS India, HMS Canada, HMS New Zealand? There is already an HMS Australia so one built for the RAN could be HMS Victoria? Or would that mean that Australia had, no matter the cost, to have a HMS New South Wales as well? 😉

[ArnoldAmbrose]

Well, naturally, I'd go for HMAS Western Australia. 😀 I think we could have a lot of fun with all the variations to this theme, at least until the supply of hulls ran out. But at my age there probably wouldn't be time. I'm 64 so into my last five or six decades. (Don't I wish! 😁)

     To do another RN cruiser will probably be down the track a bit. I still have to finish HMS Jamaica, and my next major build will be an Airfix HMS Hood converted to her May 1941 configuration. Then HMAS Swan for the ANZAC group build here. After that? At some time I'd like to do some WW1 battlecruisers, plus some IJN and USN ships. I'd really like to do USS Alaska in 1/600 one day. So after HMS Jamaica I'll probably give RN cruisers a rest for a while. But don't think I'll have forgotten them. 🙂 And I have been known to change my build program from time to time.

Regards, Jeff.

PS - You said about an hour ago a 9x8" Belfast (HMS Erin). Was that a typo? Meaning 8x8"?

[TallBlondJohn]

Yeah, Erin would be 8x8 (though it would be my whiff so I could call it what i like!)

[ArnoldAmbrose]

Gidday All, the 16 gun HMS Belfast is finished! Close up photos may show areas of paint that need a touch up, but that's about it (I hope).

     I've scratch built some ready-use ammo lockers, some hawser reels, two paravane winches and the two top masts. Behind is a celebratory glass of red wine. Not a normal wine glass I know, but I find I'm less likely to knock this type of glass over, and I wouldn't want to waste 25c worth of Cabernet Sauvignon. 😁
     I'll take some more photos for the RFI section in the next day or two, when I have better light. In the meantime, thank you all for your comments, suggestions and interest during the build.

Regards, Jeff.

[PF Naughton]

Hi,

That really turned out great.

[Gazontipede]

Wow, trust me to turn up late!

She's looking bloody marvelous, your awesome work in transforming the old Airfix kit into a very different beast has been amply rewarded. Utterly convincing.

Looking forward to many more photos soon! 😎

 

 

 

Oh, if you do, in a fit of madness perhaps, consider doing another British cruiser WHIF, might I be cheeky enough to plant the idea of the 10 gun Amphion design that was postulated as a Leander follow on?

Apparently B and X turrets were to be triples superfiring over the twins in A and Y positions, like the American Pensacola class.

Of course IRL the Amphions all wound up with the RAN, so this could produce a rather bitey HMAS Perth...

 

 

 

 

 

[ArnoldAmbrose]

Gidday Gazontipede, I didn't know about the ten-gun Leanders. I get the impression that the RN gave sea keeping qualities priority in their designs so I would have thought that the triples would have been A and Y turrets, being lower down and hence more stability for the ship. Do you know if increased beam was part of the proposal?

     I've actually done HMAS Perth 1, many years ago. The model was my first modification of an Airfix HMS Ajax kit. I've also done HMAS Perth 2 from a Rommel kit. Both in 1/600.

As for more photos of this build, I'm about to add a post in the RFI section. There'll be different photos there.

Regards, Jeff

[Our Ned]

According to Norman Friedman British Cruisers: Two World Wars and After (Barnsley: Pen & Sword Books, 2010), Controller was asked to progress a design with either nine 6" guns (two triples forward and one aft) or ten 6" (triple turrets in "B" and "Y" positions (no rationale shown for the locations chosen)).  If the Pensacolas are anything to go by, the choice of "B" position may have been governed by the fine lines of the hull below "A" position and the need for a larger magazine and shell-room for a triple mounting.  This eventually led to the twelve-gun Minotaur (later Southampton) design.

 

However, AlanRaven & John Roberts British Cruisers of World War Two (Arms & Armour Press, 1980) lists several possible configurations which were considered for what was to become either HMS Phaeton or HMS Apollo: twins in "A" and "Y", triples in "B" and "X", Twin in "A" (only) and triples in "B" and "Y" and Triple in "Y" (Only) and twins in "A" and "B".  These were discarded as the eight- and seven-gun ships offered no advantage over Amphion's design, and the fire control complications and increased displacement precluded the nine- and ten-gun options.

[ArnoldAmbrose]

Gidday Ned, thanks for that. I hadn't considered the issue from a hull form/magazine capacity point of view. Regards, Jeff.

[Gazontipede]

Morning Jeff, I've only got Raven & Roberts, which is where I saw the 10 gun Phaeton/Apollo proposal (also the 16 gun Belfast). Unfortunately, IIRC, that volume doesn't go into much discussion about the actual technicalities of the unsuccessful proposals. However, as Ned's excellent summary above suggests, I'd say that like Pensacola, the triples are placed superfiring due to internal space requirements in what is a rather fine lined hull. (I may have to try and get a hold of the Friedman volume, even if I find his writing style with hordes of end notes scattered liberally throughout a little distracting.) Which is at least somewhat suggestive that the beam of the 10 gun design may not have been increased by much if anything.

 

Anyway, off to the RFI section to drool at the Belfast photographs! 😎