Calling all HMS Invincible/Indefatigable battlecruiser fans

[Haijun watcher]

It says on this Steel Navy site review that the HP HMS Indomitable kit has the wrong turret shape.

Would someone who has built any of the HP Invincible class kits please elaborate on this defect?

I am guessing this can be corrected using an old Polygon shape turret set from Admiralty Modelworks? (unless they only offer it for guns above 14-inch and 15-inch)

Source: Steel Navy review on Indomitable http://www.steelnavy.com/HPIndomitableMV.htm

I believe that all three models of RN battlecruisers from HP (Invincible, Inflexible and Indomitable) are the same set of castings and that my Indomitable kit was the Invincible in 1914 but with incorrect wing turrets

(...SNIPPED)

I decided to depict the absent hull plating by scribing the resin hull surface, as the plating was visible in photos of the ship. The incorrect turrets were modified to the correct shape using styrene sheet, and the 12" guns were replaced with the Seals Models RN & IJN fittings, which are a great source of parts. The HP boats and light guns were oversimplified and horrible; these were replaced using again mostly Seals Models parts.

[Frank Fowler]

No the 15 inch turrets by Admiralty will not work. The early Dreadnaught and other 12 inch armed BB and BC turrets were similar to each other, but not close to the later 15 inch turrets on the QE and R classes.

[PetrolGator]

So, I own the mentioned Breyer, Burt, and even have the Roberts book where the Indefatigable is mentioned. I'm still hunting for images of her in 1915/1916 with specific regard to the disposition of her forward superstructure. I can infer, based on the Jutland photograph, that her bridge looked similar to the Combrig kit, but Breyer's drawings suggest substantial changes.

Also: When the 4" guns were casemated, was the top of the aft superstructure decked over? Seems silly to place the forward two 4" guns in case mates and leave them exposed on top.

Any additional images or information would be appreciated. I contacted the guy listed on the Flickr account (linked on this thread) and hope to get a better copy of the watermarked Indefatigable/New Zealand 1915 image. The fraking "e" from the watermarket sits literally over what I need........

[Jeff Spencer]

Though this is captioned �Australia�, it is clearly Indefatigable with her high tower of casemate 4-inch guns aft. This, and the Imperial War Museum�s 1915 phot of her from aft, are the only phots of Indefatigable during the war which I have seen, aside from the phots of her end.


https://www.alamyimages.fr/le-hmas-la-n ... d0%26pl%3d

[PetrolGator]

Though this is captioned �Australia�, it is clearly Indefatigable with her high tower of casemate 4-inch guns aft. This, and the Imperial War Museum�s 1915 phot of her from aft, are the only phots of Indefatigable during the war which I have seen, aside from the phots of her end.


https://www.alamyimages.fr/le-hmas-la-n ... d0%26pl%3d

I've managed to secure a full-size copy of this photograph. The collector in question may have more, and of other Grand Fleet vessels that have never been printed. Friend of mine is contacting him for HOPEFULLY a chance to liberate the collection for publishing. Between this, the Jutland photo, 1915 photo, and a pretty accurate line drawing in "British Battlecruisers" by Peter Smith, I have a decent idea of her final configuration. I'm still trying to minimize guesswork.

[PetrolGator]

I have 16 files at 26.3mb of drawings as fitted for that ship if you need them.

Hey, I'll take anything! Shooting you a DM! Thank you.

[Giampiero]

Hi,

How much the first funnel should be raised in 1/700 scale, on the Invicible and on the Indomitable.

Thanks
Giampiero

[Giampiero]

Ciao


I was interested in knowing when the first funnels of the Invicible and the Indomitable and theirs were raised and how far the funnels were raised.

Regards
Giampiero

[Guest]

According to Campbell and Parkes, 1910 Indom, 1911 Inflex and Feb 1915 Invinc. No details of the increases in length are given.

[Guest]

Giampiero,

Add to my last: according to "Breyer" it was "about 2metres." Call it 6ft in Imperial and it will be about right!

Best Wishes,

G

[tjstoneman]

Indomitable's forefunnel was heightened in 1910, Inflexible's in 1911 and Invincible's during her January-February 1915 refit in Gibraltar.

[Giampiero]

Hi,

Thanks

Regards
Giampiero

[FW_Allen]

I�m currently working on a Flyhawk 1/700 Invincible model. I�m using it to prepare for my upcoming Flyhawk 1/700 model of Hood. The old Alpha and Omega approach so to speak. I plan to depict the ship as she appeared at the time of the Falklands. I�ve worked out the paint scheme more or less (through posts under camo and paint): she seems to have been somewhat light in appearance with an exceptionally dirty (or is that rust) hull. The planked decks were wood of course and it�s obvious that there would be corticene covering the superstructure decks. The upper masts (above funnel level) should be black, though the exact colour of the structures atop the masts is not entirely clear to me. Painted black or simply grimy due to the tons of coal smoke?

I�ve hit one major snag however: funnel stays. I can work out the rough number and their attachment points on the three funnels, but I can�t see where many of the stays actually anchored to the deck. I�ve seen photos of Inflexible in Ian Johnston�s excellent �Clydebank Battlecruisers� plus the plans in John Roberts� �British Battlecruisers 1905-1920� and these do show some of the stay anchor positions, but not all.

Can anyone share any other photos/drawings or recommend good publications? Those of you who are Hood enthusiasts know that I�d do the same if the roles were reversed

I�ve attached a photo of the progress so far. Don�t laugh! I�ve been away from ships for a spell (been doing aircraft for a break), so it�s taking me some time to get back into gear.

[FW_Allen]

pm sent.

Many thanks David! Response sent!

[Jack G]

That build is looking good Frank.

I have a link here to a very good model (the builders model?) of HMAS Australia: it may help with general stay arrangement.

https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/RELAWM09096?image=1

The model appears greeny-grey with a darker grey, thick bootstrip, and red underneath. Given the recent revelations regarding how Hood was grey/grey black underneath at the time of her loss - do we know the true lower hull colour for the early British battlecruisers?

The following model (builders?) of Iron Duke shows an almost-black grey upper, and light grey underside:

https://www.deviantart.com/rlkitterman/ ... -619846828

Patches of the superstructure of the Australia model have a darker, more blue grey as well.

(Regarding the thickness of the bootstrip on the model, many Edwardian Australian passenger ships appear to have had a thick Salmon coloured bootstrip above their red lower hulls)

[mikasa]

I�m currently working on a Flyhawk 1/700 Invincible model. I�m using it to prepare for my upcoming Flyhawk 1/700 model of Hood. The old Alpha and Omega approach so to speak. I plan to depict the ship as she appeared at the time of the Falklands. I�ve worked out the paint scheme more or less (through posts under camo and paint): she seems to have been somewhat light in appearance with an exceptionally dirty (or is that rust) hull. The planked decks were wood of course and it�s obvious that there would be corticene covering the superstructure decks. The upper masts (above funnel level) should be black, though the exact colour of the structures atop the masts is not entirely clear to me. Painted black or simply grimy due to the tons of coal smoke?

I�ve hit one major snag however: funnel stays. I can work out the rough number and their attachment points on the three funnels, but I can�t see where many of the stays actually anchored to the deck. I�ve seen photos of Inflexible in Ian Johnston�s excellent �Clydebank Battlecruisers� plus the plans in John Roberts� �British Battlecruisers 1905-1920� and these do show some of the stay anchor positions, but not all.

Can anyone share any other photos/drawings or recommend good publications? Those of you who are Hood enthusiasts know that I�d do the same if the roles were reversed

I�ve attached a photo of the progress so far. Don�t laugh! I�ve been away from ships for a spell (been doing aircraft for a break), so it�s taking me some time to get back into gear.

A7F10C0C-554F-4185-984E-DB051F1DE5E2.jpeg

With round placement like that, I'm not laughing at anything you do.

I do love me some Albatros. Tell us more about those builds.... (Looks like the upper wing for two planes?)

[FW_Allen]

With round placement like that, I'm not laughing at anything you do.

I do love me some Albatros. Tell us more about those builds.... (Looks like the upper wing for two planes?)

Ah, that target is a 50ft offhand .22 target. I take my post-match used targets and use them to line my airbrush booth. I consider it �recycling� of sorts, LOL. My average was down a bit this season (had to get used to a new CZ rifle).

Albatros? Yes! I�m working on two concurrently with the Invincible. Both are 1/48 Eduard D.III (non OEFFAG) variants. I�m being a bit predictable though by choosing Voss�s �heart� machine and MvR�s �Le Petit Rouge.� I am using 3D decals and photoetch for Voss but photoetch only for von Richthofen. Gonna paint both with oil over acrylic wood grain effect, but MvR�s plane will get a layer or two or dark red (enough to make it obviously red but still hopefully see the wood effect). Attached is a photo showing the underside of the wings (going for a wing tape effect). I hope the moderators don�t mind this wee foray into non naval aircraft!

As for Invincible, not much has changed since my last photo: Since then, I�ve painted some small pieces, recreated some lost parts (large mushroom vents) and then fitted all remaining main deck/hull parts. It�s ready for hull rails, gloss coat and weathering. The sea base still needs the white portions of the waves added. I�ll do the superstructure elements as mini builds and add them afterwards (whilst hoping I don�t damage the hull rails!).

One thing I botched were the anchor cables/chains. I should�ve scraped them off and used chain or photoetch, but I was lazy and left the moulded plastic bits in place. Hopefully with a bit of paint and a wash it will be okay.

As for this photo, the ship looks very pale, but that�s just due to the flash.

[biercemountain]

I was recently surprised to read that these battlecruisers were built with telescoping funnels. It said they could be lowered to fool the lookouts on enemy ships into believing they were a friendly vessel. Can anyone confirm this fact?

I can't imagine the ruse was ever used operationally, or was it?

[81542]

biercemountain,

I have a vague recollection of reading something similar many years ago but cannot remember the details. Methinks that it may have been one of "Jacky" Fisher's flights of fancy when he was doing some of his "future thinking" but the idea may have been to reduce the ship's silhouette rather than fool the opposition. He also wanted diesel propulsion but as far as the Royal Navy went, never got it for capital ships.

81542

[biercemountain]

biercemountain,

Methinks that it may have been one of "Jacky" Fisher's flights of fancy

My source is "The Dreadnoughts" from the Time-Life series "The Seafarers". As you point out the idea was Fisher's but it claims the idea truly was to mimic the low funnels of the German ships and thus give the British ships a few minutes before the spotters realized their error.

How it was supposed to be done in practice isn't discussed. Would the funnels have been quickly lowered upon sighting a vessel or were they just supposed to steam around with them down?

Oh well, I'm sure it seemed like a good idea at the time. Could be an interesting modification to a model as well.