wr wrote:Dear Willie,
May I suggust that you do NO MORE work until you receive the information that is in the mail.
Oooppsss, sure.
What you say seems to suggest I am going to find many surprises regarding the refits of the Town Class in what is coming. My fangs are drooling -- a feeling that only other ship lover will understand.
Very best regards,
Willie.
Last edited by Willie on Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).
wr wrote:Dear Willie,
May I suggest that you do NO MORE work until you receive the information that is in the mail.
Very dear Wr,
Your letter arrived today in the afternoon. The only thing I can say is WOW and a million thanks again for the disturbances and your interest. I have very seldom seen so much information in only a sheet of paper.
I will have to study it in depth, but already with the first glimpse I could see that most of my guesses -- based on somehow blurr pictures and the excellent AOTS -- were basically correct. Some minor mistakes are also clear now and will be very easy to correct.
After your advice of asking for help in MW and SN, a friend modeller (thanks again, Robin ) sent to me some excellent pics of some of the units of the Town-class, and two of HMS Campbeltown herself, one taken from the port beam, very blurr, and another one from death astern, very clear but necessarily showing very few details, both done after 2nd. refit. These pics solve the problem forever : the so called compass house we were discussing about does not exist -- and you were right from the very beginning.
Your info will be very useful to add some other details that are not that clear in AOTS -- the gas tank on the gun deck, for example.
Regarding your proposal of altering the construction so substantially as to have to change the name of the ship itself, I will have to study it too, but honestly, I don�t know if it would pay the disturbance. This construction is already very advanced, with many parts that are already fixed with CA, and that can be altered with only great difficulty, along with many minor details that have cost a great deal in time and effort and would have to be rejected.
What I am considering after reading your letter today is starting a new ship from the beggining, as the alterations would make of them very different ships, even belonging to the same class, with the visual effect of having a different camo scheme too. Unnecessary to say how precious your letter will be for this new construction.
BTW, after the post of site administrator, another personal message from another member of the forum and your own signature, I can see who is behind the nick Wr. And me telling you that you seem to be a very knowledgeable modeller...
Please let me know if there is some way for me to reciprocate your kindness.
Thanks again for your interest and your time, and very best regards from Spain,
Willie.
Last edited by Willie on Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).
Here are the twin davits, minus the railings in the outer elements. Made using three pieces of the box, and the rest made with Evergreen strip and rod.
It needed quite a bit of work, including a complete reconstruction after being completely finished the first time -- after the painful discovery that they were two milimiters too wide, and would not suit by the searchlight tower
I hope you like them.
Brgds,
Willie.[/size]
Last edited by Willie on Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).
That area was a pain for me as I had to change the dimensions on the midships superstructure (Gallery superstructure) and it affected the pre-cut PE sets I had quite a bit.
Dear Willie,
Do you intend to fit four sets of torpedo tubes?
What do the photos of Cambeltown show for the above, also, are the two sets of davits of the original USN pattern, or has one of them been replaced by the RN style?
No, I intend to install only two sets of torpedo tubes ( the two fore sets ) as the aft ones were removed in Refit 1 stage.
The holes you see aft are the place of the removed torpedo tube sets, that have been filed-down, but not completely erased yet.
The davits are the ones of the original USN pattern. The pic of mid. 1941 is very blurr, but this detail can be clearly seen in it, as these davits had a very distinctive shape, very easy to recognize.
In the same pic the fore torpedo tubes are seen pointing forward, as was commonly the case, and this is a tip we can make good use of too.
Best regards,
Willie.
Last edited by Willie on Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).
That is some world class modeling!! Thank you for sharing...it's an pleasure to watch this build unfold.
Martin
"Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday." John Wayne
Then you will probably need to add two extra throwers along with the reloads as per the data that I sent you. See if this is correct as per the photos.
Willie wrote:Hi there, WR,
No, I intend to install only two sets of torpedo tubes ( the two fore sets ) as the aft ones were removed in Refit 1 stage.
The holes you see aft are the place of the removed torpedo tube sets, that have been filed-down, but not completely erased yet.
The davits are the ones of the original USN pattern. The pic of mid. 1941 is very blurr, but this detail can be clearly seen in it, as these davits had a very distinctive shape, very easy to recognize.
In the same pic the fore torpedo tubes are seen pointing forward, as was commonly the case, and this is a tip we can make good use of too.
Best regards,
They are taken from the book : Destroyers for Great Britain - A History of the 50 Town Class ships transfered from the United States to Great Britain in 1940, by Arnold Hague, Greenhill Books, 1990.
the scans are actually much bigger, but I have had to reduce them to adapt them to the format of the page.
As you can see, none of them is a definitive answer to all doubts, but they are a good help to some of the details we were discussing these last days.
The clearer one will allow me to complete a bit more the aft structure
details, for example with the cable attached to the edge, under the railings.
I would really appreciate your comments, as I have always done.
Very best regards,
Willie.[/size]
Last edited by Willie on Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).
wr wrote:Then you will probably need to add two extra throwers along with the reloads as per the data that I sent you. See if this is correct as per the photo
Very dear Wr,
Surprisingly enough, HMS Campbeltown was fitted with only two sets of depth charge throwers, which were placed inmediately ahead of the fantail structure. This can be seen in picture nr. 2.
The most common practice, as I have observed in most of the pics that I have, and also in the info you sent me, was to fit each ship with two pairs of throwers on both ends of the aft structure ( and even two sets in the aft end, inmedialtely before of the racks ) but it is clear enough that HMS Campbeltown had only two sets fore of the fantail.
Thanks again, and very best regards from Spain,
Willie.
Last edited by Willie on Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).
Dear Willie,
Thank you for putting up the photos. The stern view I had forgotten about.
I have the feeling that the date of the two photos is sometime in 1941, (note the type 286 radar at the head of the foremast.) probably late in the year. THat is a guess on my part. If the ship had a second refit (not counting the special conversion for the raid), then I suspect there would be further changes.
Do you have the dates ( to the month), for the two views that you have shown?
Willie wrote:
wr wrote:Then you will probably need to add two extra throwers along with the reloads as per the data that I sent you. See if this is correct as per the photo
Very dear Wr,
Surprisingly enough, HMS Campbeltown was fitted with only two sets of depth charge throwers, which were placed inmediately ahead of the fantail structure. This can be seen in picture nr. 2.
The most common practice, as I have observed in most of the pics that I have, and also in the info you sent me, was to fit each ship with two pairs of throwers on both ends of the aft structure ( and even two sets in the aft end, inmedialtely before of the racks ) but it is clear enough that HMS Campbeltown had only two sets fore of the fantail.
Thanks again, and very best regards from Spain,
wr wrote: I have the feeling that the date of the two photos is sometime in 1941, (note the type 286 radar at the head of the foremast.) probably late in the year. THat is a guess on my part. Do you have the dates ( to the month), for the two views that you have shown?
Very dear Wr,
Thanks for the tip on what radar it was. I was not sure and it will make things easier when searching for info and pictures of this radar.
The date is not stated in the captions of the pictures, but in one of them the ship is hoisting Dutch flag, and the caption of the other one stated that the ship was sailing iunder Dutch flag too.
As HMS Campeltown was manned by the Royal Dutch Navy between March 28th and late september 1941, we have to asume that the pics were taken between those two dates.
Thanks again for your interest, and very best regards,
Willie.
Last edited by Willie on Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).
this is the kind of articles that should be published in model magizines
a whole soft back book could be done on this . this is some of the best
modeling on a 4-stack dd i have seen in a long time. jim t
One question, in case somebody knows : What would be the suitable color for the decks of this ship ?
I have already quite clear the colors for the hull and the vertical surfaces, but I am not too sure about decks. I would appreciate if you could give me a Humbrol enamels reference number. If not, anything will do.
I am planning to paint it ( I mean, the decks ) in dark grey Humbrol matt79, but I am not sure if this would be the right tone.
TIA and best regards,
Willie.
Last edited by Willie on Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).
Here you are a pic of the three main guns, already glued, painted, mounted and ready to set in place.
The setting of the shield for gun no. 1 was quite exasperating, as I had to achieve a realistic compromise between the gun mounting, the height of the shield and the length of the gun optics and brakes. All things considered I think it is not too bad.
I hope you like it.
Very best regards from Spain,
Willie.[/size]
Last edited by Willie on Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).
A little trick that was a headache until I found out how to solve it, just in case it is useful for somebody.
Stack nr.3 is quite strange, as it has got not only the steam exhaust, but also the galley stack.
This last stack is placed almost 90 degrees on deck but slightly turned aside from the centerline, in a quite uncomfortable position to be fixed after the completion of the model, so that it was necessary to place it before finishing the rest of the model. On the other hand, the height of the lower part of the tube has to be exact, as it has to be inside the hole on the galley bulkhead, so after much hesitation I decided to build three rings with stretched sprue, to place them on three little plates made with yogourth container, to slide the rings on the tube, and to glue them on the stack.
In the process we achieve two things : [a] The tube is perfectly mobile to be placed in position, and to adapt distances and angles to the galley bulkhead before glueing, and we achieve a greater realism, as the galley stack was actually fixed to the main stack in this way.
This is the first time I build mobile pieces, and I am modestly satisfied of the results.
Very best regards to you all,
Willie.[/size]
Last edited by Willie on Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).
I have just scanned through this entire thread and am amazed at what you've accomplished here. Very nice. I've been considering a Town Class in 1/72nd scale. I think you may have given me the inspiration that I need.
A couple of the elements I was very anxious about : The outboard supoports for the depth charge racks, a distintc element of the Town Class. They are made with four elements each, all of them the with the corresponding curve of the hull.
I think I have achieved to avoid the joints, so that I do not have to use putty, which would be very difficult to sand away here, in such limited spaces.
The process of construction of both rudder and screw shafts can be seen quite clearly as well. These are two of the elements whose construction I enjoyed most.
Very best regards,
Willie.[/size]
Last edited by Willie on Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso (Lk 23,43).
and a million thanks again for the disturbances and your interest. I have very seldom seen so much information in only a sheet of paper.
) sent to me some excellent pics of some of the units of the Town-class, and two of HMS Campbeltown herself, one taken from the port beam, very blurr, and another one from death astern, very clear but necessarily showing very few details, both done after 2nd. refit. These pics solve the problem forever : the so called compass house we were discussing about does not exist -- and you were right from the very beginning. 
