The Ship Model Forum

For those interested, I just posted a separate [url=http://www.shipmodels.info/mws_forum/viewtopic.php?f=85&t=396961]review of 1/700 3D printed figures and Walrus from MRY-SFW STORE[/url] that I bought in relation to this build.

Wow , these prints are incredible !

Hi Mike,

thanks for sharing your list, you´ve definitely nailed many of the differences. We´ve worked with Brett Morrow and spent many days aiming to address - hopefully - all the necessary modifications so our list was even longer than yours. We focused also on details not covered in the Kent kit like additional differences on the main bridge, shielded torpedo mounts, side chutes on the hull etc. etc. down to mast details and individual deck vents. There are 2 items in your list about which caught my attention:

1) reduce height of turret bases to match broadside photos of HMAS Australia
I´m not sure about this but I admit I haven´t noticed much difference. I cross-checked my model (which is in the meantime nearly ready) and I don´t see noticeable difference. Have you considered that the Aoshima kit bases partially "sink" into the recesses in the deck planking?

6) reduce height of lowest level of bridge
I haven´t used the Kent bridge at all, there are more differences there. I replaced the whole bridge with PE that I designed based on the few available plans (incl. the one you posted) and many photos, so I can´t comment on the kit´s bridge.

Once again, thanks for your willingness to help, I hope you´ll like the build :wave_1:

Vlad:

Just coming across this thread now. I will watch with eager anticipation what you do with the Aoshima HMS Kent kit. But so far, looks great!!!

A few years back, right after the Aoshima kit was released, I sat down and tried to figure out what it would take to convert a kit of HMS Kent to an HMAS Australia circa 1941-1943 using photos of HMAS Australia available on the internet and in various published reference works. Here is my list of modifications--which you might find of use:

1) reduce height of turret bases to match broadside photos of HMAS Australia
2) reduce height of catapult turntable to match height of turntable in broadside photos of HMAS Australia
3) create single latticework searchlight platform for placement aft of catapult
4) raise level of flag deck platform aft of bridge
5) raise height of funnels
6) reduce height of lowest level of bridge
7) remove weatherdeck amidships
8) alter foc's'l deck forward of breakwater to wooden planks (don't know why this smiley is showing up instead of the number eight)
9) produce new ADO platform (forward main gun director platform) atop bridge to a wedge-shaped or faceted front face (more research is required here--its appearance may have changed over time)
10) remove weather deck and add splinter shields for 4" HA guns
11) add long walkway/catwalk from flag deck to aft pom-pom platform
12) add searchlight platform athwart or wrapping around the forward funnel (configuration is not clear from photos)

I also found the following drawings online for planned alterations as part of her late war refit, though I cannot recall which website I found them on, and will remove them if there are restrictions on their use elsewhere. There might be details here that you might find useful:

[attachment=1]HMAS Australia 13.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=0]HMAS Australia 14.jpg[/attachment]

Anyhow, hope this helps!

Best,

Mike E.

Hey MB, thanks for your kind words... and good to have you at the workbench again!
I hope something might happen even with the Australia if you were a bit patient ;)

I have GOT to get my Studio back to working condition (hurricanes and floods, and then something that was discovered in my throat, kept interfering with the new Studio).

Because these builds are inspiring, and I just started to re-build USS SF when the first flood happened…

The Astoria Build is amazing, and I have been looking for a HMAS Australia for a while now.

I think I need to replace m Midship DDs with your (Matt’s) Kraken stuff…

DAMN! That is some EXCELLENT work!

MB

Hi Stefano, thank you!

As can be seen on some of the close-ups, Simon has the supports extremely thin where they attach to the actual model, so they snap off really easily using Exacto or tweezers. He suggests putting the prints into the fridge to make removing supports easier, but that was never necessary in my case. Perhaps with larger scales the supports mave to be more substantial, I don´t know.

Hope I won´t let you down about the scratchbuilding - I´m using my PE in place of that, except if I made a mistake in the design :big_grin: or small cylindrical parts that are easier to cut off plastic rods than do from PE. That was in fact behind me starting with designing PE cause I disliked me not being able to become a good scratchbuilder, especially when it came to repeating parts.

Welcome back, Vladi! That's an incredible amount of details for such a small scale. Unbelievable what technology and fine design can do together. Is detachment of the pieces from the carrier complicated?

Looking forward to see the model assembled, am sure there will be some room for old fashioned scratchbuilding too. :thumbs_up_1:

... continued

... continued

Sorry for the long interruption...

[b]3D parts by Micro Master[/b]

Besides the enormous help by Brett Morrow the other main contributor to my project is Simon Percival of Micro Master. We´ve been in touch with Simon since the days of my HMAS Canberra project so it was only logical I asked him for help with the Australia.

All Simon´s 3D parts are being designed in very large scale with an enormous level of detail so they can be provided in any reasonable scale depending on the customer´s wish. The quality of Simon´s design and printing cannot be overstated, they are simply excellent, as can be seen on the attached photos. Remember this is all 1/700 so the details are really extremely tiny and stand out in the macrophotography. The print layers are OTOH actually invisible on those parts after painting and using appropriate weathering techniques.

:thumbs_up_1:

[b]PE parts[/b]

The PE for Australia ended up to be my most comprehensive design so far, even more than my parts for USS Astoria. It included the complete forward superstructure and spanned over 2 and a half large A6 format brass sheets in 1/700. I didn´t count them but I guess there were close to 1000 individual parts. As usual, my first prototype version had some errors so I produced an improved version with even additional parts that I used for my build.

I did not make a complete deck overlay which I now think I could have done, but Aoshima´s deck planking is not bad. So the largest PE part is the overlay for the forecastle deck that was covered with wood planks, not metal as shown in the Aoshima kit. Additional large parts provide for a full replacement of the main bridge that was also different from Kent – more different than it appears at the first sight.

The PE set was designed for 1/700 but with the possibility of upscaling to 1/350 in mind. Upscaling would not mean degradation of detail in this case as the 1/700 is done in 0.1mm brass while the 1/350 would need 0.2mm thickness which would also bring an increase in the minimum dimensional requirements like line width, detail size etc.

Samples of my first attempt:

[attachment=2]20210216_EOS_0026_cr_01.jpg[/attachment][attachment=1]20210216_EOS_0026_cr_02.jpg[/attachment][attachment=0]20210216_EOS_0026_cr_03.jpg[/attachment]

[quote]sealing the portholes was in vain in the end. I was not satisfied how the PE seals turned out[/quote]

I know that moment all too well. :cry_3:

Thank you, Stefano, glad you find it hepful!

I should add that all the above work on sealing the portholes was in vain in the end. I was not satisfied how the PE seals turned out so I asked Simon and he´s been so kind to provide me with a set of 3D printed seals that look much better. So I had to drill the putty out from around 120 portholes – glad that the acrylic putty was quite soft :D

Great tip about the acrylic putty, Vladi. Results are impressive, I might give it a go. Thx for sharing :cool_1: Eager to see more in-progress pics soon

I mentioned that the Aoshima Kent hull was quite nice and crisp, especially the porthole brims looked really good. I like how the hull was constructed with internal bracing, more like hulls in 1/350. Also the waterline plate fits inside the hull so no seams can be seen from sides, really wise! Still it has some problems to correct – most importantly the overscale and unrealistic hull plating. I checked some completed Aoshima Counties on the internet and found this hull plating really ugly, so I hesitated no more to remove those lines. I modified a Proedge blade to scrape them off, followed by sanding with 1000 and 2000 grade sandpaper. I wished to protect the upper row of porthole brims so I covered them with masking tape while sanding.
[attachment=1]20201016_171244.jpg[/attachment]
The next step – easier to correct – were the portholes. Australia had almost all of her lower row of portholes and some of the upper row plated over, altogether about 120 of them. I filled those with acrylic putty at first intending to plate them over with PE later.
[attachment=0]20201017_140517.jpg[/attachment]
[b]Note:[/b] the vertical molds near the waterline should have been removed as well - I noticed that Australia did not have these covers over the water outlets only at a very late stage and it´s been very cumersome to correct at that time!

Then it was the main deck. It fitted nicely into the hull, very easy to install and with no seams. The deck planking is overscale as usual but I decided to leave it as in the kit to reduce the size of the PE set (I regreted this decision at a later stage but then it was too late). I also liked how the turrets were attached with separate barbettes so there´s no dilemma about how to postpone their installation while still being able to attach the deck and superstructure first. Very clever. So it´s only needed to remove all the representations of unneeded deck vents, reels, breakwater and anchor chains, all those to be replaced with PE or 3D parts later.

Hi Rui, thanks, I hope it will be interesting, just struggle to find time to write the posts.
What are you currently working at? Any WIP?

Hi Vladi

Following with interest (as usual)!
This is going to be fun to watch (not so fun for you, as with me in my latest projects!!!!)

Cheers,
Rui

[b]Collaborations[/b]

I´m no big expert in RN/RAN ships so I turned again to Brett Morrow who already greatly contributed to my HMAS Canberra build back then. Brett is a top expert with a vast knowledge about the Royal Australian Navy and also owner of a great collection of photographs and other documents. I was very happy when he agreed to participate in my project and his contribution was indeed crucial.

Although we found no worthy plans of Australia in her wartime fit available, wartime photos were really abundant – we collected well over 200 of them after her 1938-39 refit. Some show excellent, rarely seen detail of life on a capital ship and others well document her overall fit, but there are still serious gaps if it comes to individual details in 1942.

Most importantly there are two awesome side view shots showing her port and starboard sides in August 1942:
[attachment=0]19420830 HMAS Australia port Solomons 80-G-12107.jpg[/attachment][attachment=2]19420800 HMAS Australia Guadalcanal no exact date NHSC013.jpg[/attachment]
The somewhat blurred starboard side view is complemented by slightly later view of the same side taken after her late 1942 refit and installation of an SG radar in 1943:
[attachment=1]19431000 HMAS Australia RAN Archive 04014.jpg[/attachment]
We agreed to use a plan based on NAA plans and NHSA early fit drawings so that we have a place to record all the necessary modifications – and this turned out to be really a good decision, although these modifications turned out much more extensive than anticipated, not much was left from the original plan in the end. We soon established a working routine with Brett: we collected photos of a specific part of the ship, I drew what I saw into the shared plan and Brett then sent his comments and suggestions for corrections that I then implemented. It worked really well, despite the time difference between Czechia and New South Wales, Australia.

Since I´ve also already had an excellent collaboration with Simon Percival (Micro Master) on the Canberra, I hesitated not for a minute to turn to him again for all the general RN accessories. Simon designs in large scales so the quality of his production is breathtaking. It turned out that he had not yet available some of those parts that were needed, but he planned to design many of those anyway and I was in no hurry, so I got my best hopes here.

Unfortunately, Simon had no capacity to do Australia´s superstructures in 3D, so I decided to sort this out by designing another complete PE set like I did in case of e.g. Astoria. I found PE a very good choice to build convincing open bridge structures in 1/700, and much easier for me as I could do a lot in 2D but I´ve not been much good in 3D design.

So much for the introductory background info, let´s start with more practical issues in my next posts :wave_1:

Thank you, gentlemen!

Lars, IMHO if you wish to have a reasonably accurrate model, forget about the Kombrig Australia (and Canberra). They´re not a good starting point, too inaccurate and too basic - and too expensive considering how many parts are really useful :cool_1: The only reason why to use the Kombrig hull in case of Canberra these days would be that missing torpedo belt.

I found it quite interesting that there are still no other Australia kits on the market than the old Kombrig. Why would she be so uninteresting? Perhaps because of her “boring” one-tone camouflage variants she wore most of her Pacific war career? But isn´t there that sexy “lady leg” two-tone camo she carried since fall 1940 in the Atlantic for some 20 months and then at Coral Sea? How I regret she didn´t retain it until Savo Island :heh:
[attachment=0]19410500 HMAS Australia departing Sydney NHSC136.jpg[/attachment]
Or are there no better kits because too much research would be needed?

It took several painful weeks until my Aoshima Kent was delivered due to all those Covid restrains. Besides working on the Chicago and Kinugasa I spent them by continuing to catalogue modifications that will be necessary for the Australia conversion. As often, many more turned up than first anticipated.

Then the kit finally arrived! It was contained in a rather small but tall box packed tight with heaps of plastic parts. Sorry to say that, but most of it was not as good as I would have expected, some parts appeared almost toy-like and apparently were not much usable for me :( Overall, compared to the recent 1/700 kits produced by e.g. Flyhawk or Fujimi - but also to 15 years old Hasegawa Aoba and Furutaka classes! – it´s below standard these days. The good news though was that the hull and deck were clearly the best of the kit, nicely and crisply molded. It´s really a pity Aoshima didn´t do a better job, and the 1/700 Kent by Trumpeter (that did not exist at that time) would have been a better starting point in many respects.

In short, I ended up using only the hull, the main deck, the forecastle deck and the aft superstructure parts from the kit in the end anyway :smallsmile:
[attachment=2]20200608_184402.jpg[/attachment][attachment=1]20201015 P1300206.jpg[/attachment]