Egilman

Correction; That last pic is of DD-939, (ex Z 39) before she was turned over to France in 1947.... The US Navy used her to test her high speed machinery, the French used her for spare parts....

Yeah that's the Hoche in 1952 (ex German z 25) A good reference of the type can be found in Seaforth Publishing - Shipcraft 25 - German Destroyers She had 8 sisters, only four survived the war, the Z-23 & Z-25 went to France... (Z-23 as a wreck salvaged by the french & Z-25 as the Hoche) One was seized by Norway and was turned over to the British, (Z-30, ws scrapped in '49 after being used as a target ship) and Z-29, Siezed by the British, she was given to the US Navy in '45, the Navy surveyed her in Boston and found her in poor mechanical state, so they sailed her back to Britain in an attempt to return her to the British, but they refused her, so she was scuttled in December '46 off Jutland.... The only thing we have documented comparable is the Z 29's photos from 1945 when she was turned over to the US Navy and underwent inspection in Boston Navy yard... It appears to me she was in pretty good shape paint wise, (last pic being the worst, taken shortly before she was rejected after trials) She spent the last years of the war confined to the baltic due to lack of crew issues so they really didn't see much action in the latter half of the war, same as Z-25.... She had the same fit as the Z-25, a modified Type 1936A....

I was kinda taken aback when I was told that, I mean what's the difference, Right? Anyways a few things to notice about those pics and is consistent with all Warships with awnings... They are at anchor or tied up to a dock, (most usually at anchor in the bay) ie. when nothing of importance navy wise was going on.... They were only put up at certain times, like religious services on Sunday, (most ships at Pearl, out in the bay, on the day, had all of the awnings up) Visitors days, open houses and the like, they would take upwards of a half a day to erect and half a day to take down and secure.... ie, they weren't something that were installed all the time, and never when under way...... Nice to know that installing awnings on a model warship in a waterbase display, although interesting, requires it to be in calm water in port....

Awnings, I did a bit more research.... you can find pics of awnings on Battleships all the way up to December 7th 1941, then they disappear until after August of 1945 when they majically reappear........ {chuckle} Even such, they are few and far between when looking for images of them even prewar.... and then to narrow the search down to British ships? (the US Navy used a different system of hanging awnings than their RN counterparts) Here is what I've found.... HMS Hood 1938 in a colorized pic.... HMS Repulse, in 1937.... (probably Singapore) note the awnings hanging over the sides of the ship over the water... And the only QE class ship I could find... The HMS Barham after her rebuild sometime in '37...... That should give ya an idea of what they looked like... Now in asking around I was told that there isn't too many pics of battleships with awnings out there cause people wanted to see pics of guns, lotsa big guns.... They didn't take to big guns in skirts, is the way it was put to me.... It was also pointed out that most photographers were independent and made their living on purchased pics so they would know what their clientele wanted... and it wasn't battleships in bedsheets.... So there isn't a lot out there in relation to battleships with awnings, in fact there really isn't much out there in relation to any warship, any nation showing it under awnings.... That's the long and the short of it...

GMM gives you a PE tool for bending theirs etched right into the fret..... makes it easy.... But I will second the dull #2 blade for forming them technique, once you get the hang of it it's the fastest method of all.....

I don't know as much about the British Navy as I do the US Navy, so I was guessing as well.... I'm having a hard time finding pics of a British warship with awnings up during the war, that's the basis of my speculation.... Yes the US Navy went on a crash program of stripping all flammables off their ships shortly after the first few battles around Guadalcanal.... Another thing that was common to British ships of the period was flying bridges rather than enclosed bridges, (bridges open to the air) The US Navy also used flying bridges during WWI, went to enclosed bridges during the tween war period and went back to flying bridges during WW II, (for better aerial sight/firing lines) especially on their smaller ships, then after the war, went back to enclosed bridges.... Comfort is not needed, better firing lines are during wartime... {chuckle}

Ah..... I keep forgetting... https://www.skywaymodel.com/# Gentleman named Emil... Great guy....

I have a friend like that today, he runs the only model shop in the entire Puget Sound area of Washington.... The last one, so far he's survived covid......

HMS Warspite in Grand Harbor, Malta, August 1943..... Probably just what it looked like in early '43... note the lack of awnings.... The British Navy had awnings but seldom used them during wartime.... Update: After studying that pic, I believe you can see 3 to 4 open doors on the port side, the corresponding doors would be open on the starboard side to promote ventilation while sitting still in harbor and not under orders or alert conditions.....

Lou is right on the money here, it depends.... cold bad weather they would be closed, hot calm weather they would be open for ventilation, they were all steel, one big giant oven.... On any alert condition, all watertight/hatches doors would be closed, at battle stations, all would be closed and dogged.... Most of the time when in action they would be closed. Given the camo pattern she is wearing, (late war) it depends on where you intend to depict her? The Indian ocean in '42, the Med in '43, The north seas fleet in '44 on..... Naval ships spend a lot of time doing nothing, even in a state of war, especially in that period... The Indian ocean is hot, so is the Med, so anytime she wasn't under orders they would more than likely be open, on the converse, the North Seas (and parts further north) are of course cold, stormy, gloomy and rainy, more than likely be closed... Pick the period you want to depict her in, either under action or not and go from there.....

It's a relief etched into the brass to make folding easier, they usually go to the inside, if they are intended as detail the instructions will tell you which way to fold it... But then when they don't tell you, generally it goes inside....

Yeah especially how to fold the PE, Dragon didn't include any such assistance....

I thought mark was in charge of the popcorn? Well since I'm the last man in I suppose I could run down the the dollar store and pick up some extra buttery..... About 50 bags should suffice?

He does move fast, lots of skill being shown, and the experience.... Man, some day I'll get there.... But right now, figuring out the PE is like climbing Mt Everest....

WoW! Where did I miss this? Sorry bout being late to the party, the world is slowing me down a bit right now.... I'm in.... (thinkin' on hoisting my self up to the rafters)

I for one can tell ya that your skills are getting better, this looks great.... I'm impressed..... Looking forward to more as you get the time....

Like Greg said Brother, there is no hard and fast rule, in general, you try to build in subassemblies, hull & maindecks, some painting needs to be done before assembly... Superstructures are assembled and painted in the same manner you add the details that don't get in the way of painting.... Overall assembly, add all the little details that make it pop..... And all ship models are different.... that's part of the attraction is trying to figure out the best way to go about it.... It's definitely not a follow the numbers game like it was 40 years ago....

What Jack said.... +1

Annealing Brass PE....

Yeah, I'm learning brother.... I went ahead and look for some replacements for the Sky Lookout equipment on chance that one of the AM companies would make a replacement.... I found one, the only one..... And it's only available from Hobbylink Japan.... But from looking at it they are much nicer than the original Dragon design and more accurate to boot.... And it gives me 10 of them which I will need for several of my TF-18 builds.... And I get the early war target designators and closed pelorus's as well.... Will take a couple of weeks to get here, but at least I have a solution.....

Well, Thanks Mike, WE are kinda self regulating in this manner, build logs should be about the subject build and it's details and issues.... The early war disaster that was the Mk-14 torpedo was has nothing to do with Japanese destroyers.... Sometimes I need to be reminded of such, I can drop into discussions over disparate subjects way too easily sometimes.... Unfortunately there is no area here to discuss such things and it isn't appropriate anyway for a forum devoted to ship modeling.... At times I need reminding of this.... EG

Your absolutely right, and I apologize to Mike for straying off the topic.... This isn't the place for a discussion over torpedo effectiveness and reputation..... Sorry...

I found another reference to the US Navy's interest in Italian torpedoes in WWII.... Regia Marina Italiana Weapons; Torpedoes This covers the torpedoes in use by the Italian Navy during WWII, at the bottom it mentions the US Navy's strong interest in them... It's not definitive true, but it backs up what Ike wrote in his Memoirs.... Still looking for more... EG

Thanks Lou for the suggestion, I always love reading the experiences of people who were there.... I've obtained a copy and will be perusing it's pages shortly.... In the meantime, I would suggest two items.... NUSC Technical Document 5436 15 September 1978 A Brief History of U.S. Navy Torpedo Development (pdf) E. W Jolie Weapon Systems Department Naval Underwater Systems Center Newport Laboratory Basically I'm posting it here for everyone I'm sure you know most of this info already.... and.... From "US Navy Bureau of Ordinance In WWII" Chapter 6; Torpedoes... This is an extensive report on the torpedoes used by the US Navy in WWII, their origins, their designs, their improvements, and their battle history.... (in minute detail all the way to the point of both King and Nimitz ordering the deactivation of the magnetic exploders on all the Mk 14 torpedo in use at that time) One thing it notes, the US Mk 14 & Mk 18 Torpedoes were the most successful submarine naval torpedoes used during the war, (by an order of magnitude over anyone else's) they were the only torpedoes used in combat on our submarines during the war..... Yes they had a very well earned bad reputation early in the war and it goes into the truth as to why this came about, the results and actions taken to overcome it, (It was a rep that never really went away) And how they never fully fixed it's reputation, by 1944 they had mostly eliminated the problems technically..... By 1944, the reputation of them got so bad and the exaggeration of that rep by the crews and officers using them making it worse every day, casts every anecdotal report of their performance in question... Especially from late in the war especially after solutions were found and implemented, which gets very short shrift in the anecdotal re-telling..... As far as the Mk 18 torpedo being a copy of the German G7e, the Mk 18 was a Mk 14 using a Newport/GE designed electric motor for propulsion on the same principle as the German design, it's main claim to fame is no wake.... (they first obtained a G7e from a captured U-boat in mid '42 according to the Bureau of Ordinance) My information on the Italian Mk-18 torpedo and the Navy's desire for an example comes from studying the negotiations for the Italian surrender during WWII, it's was prominent in those negotiations they really wanted the guidance system for examination as it was claimed to be the most consistently accurate of the pre-war systems.... (interesting that it isn't even mentioned in the Ordinance report on US torpedo development) It was such a prominent feature of the surrender negotiations that General/President Eisenhower wrote about it in one of his memoirs...... (reading it in his memoirs is what prompted me to research the surrender) As always brother I appreciate the suggestions for further reading, keep them coming my friend.... As far as the details I'll let you all read it for yourself...... so you all can develop your own opinions and not take mine as rote.... The Ordinance report does cover the bad rep in detail, it's valid beginnings and it's exaggerations and propagation amongst the crews and personnel as the war progressed even after they reduced most of it problems.... A need to read as it gives a needed factual perspective to counterbalance the perceived hate of faulty equipment..... (much like the Sherman tank hatred espoused by those that don't like facts) Statistically, the Mk 14 and it's derivative Mk 18 were the most successful torpedoes of the war, in anyone's navy.....

It's really hard to put down a thin consistent coat with rattlecans, you have to spray so far away from the object you lose half the can to overspray at times....