Topic: HMS Glorious 1917 (Read 21686 times)

gingyer · « **Reply #175 on:** January 10, 2023, 08:13:20 pm »

it looks good, that 3d model will be handy

raflaunches · « **Reply #176 on:** March 12, 2023, 06:47:50 pm »

Started to mark out the plating and anyone who says that ram bows don’t work my left check and jaw say otherwise!

Whilst (stupidly) balancing the hull on its side marking the hull plating I dropped my pencil so i dutifully went to pick it up. Glorious being a faithful British WW1 warship decided to attack and promptly slid in to my face! Ouch that hurt didn’t really cover it!

The model is fine if anyone is interested.

Capt Podge · « **Reply #177 on:** March 12, 2023, 06:58:24 pm »

Well it could have been a lot worse Nick - could've been a sharp tool or maybe a hot soldering iron

Anyway, as you said, the ram bow really does work

Good to know you can still function at least

Ray.

Martin (Admin) · « **Reply #178 on:** March 12, 2023, 07:59:41 pm »

raflaunches · « **Reply #179 on:** March 12, 2023, 08:27:39 pm »

raflaunches · « **Reply #180 on:** March 12, 2023, 08:28:41 pm »

Quote from: Capt Podge on March 12, 2023, 06:58:24 pm

Well it could have been a lot worse Nick - could've been a sharp tool or maybe a hot soldering iron
Anyway, as you said, the ram bow really does work

Good to know you can still function at least

Ray.

Very true Ray. Could have been much worse, thankfully not.

tonyH · « **Reply #181 on:** March 13, 2023, 08:51:23 am »

But Nick, according to various "MEJA" sources, it's rather fashionable in the right circles to have a broken jaw............some people are rather strange!

Beagle1831 · « **Reply #182 on:** March 13, 2023, 09:33:11 am »

Ouch!

The Navy drop an F35 off the top of an aircraft carrier...

So the RAF drop an aircraft carrier off the top of...

Geoff · « **Reply #183 on:** March 13, 2023, 09:48:41 am »

Glorious went for you because ships are female - you just haven't been paying her enough attention to her - you have been warned!!

Geoff

raflaunches · « **Reply #184 on:** March 26, 2023, 07:27:49 pm »

To ask for Glorious’ forgiveness for not paying enough attention for a while I’ve been doing research for her on the extremely complex triple 4 inch secondary guns that only the Renown and Courageous classes carried. They were very cumbersome and slow to use but wow they look good in this picture…

Any ideas as to what the things are above each breach on the shield roof? I’m thinking lights but they look very odd.

Ralph · « **Reply #185 on:** March 26, 2023, 08:06:23 pm »

Could they be loudspeakers for passing on fire orders in the noise of battle?

Ralph

raflaunches · « **Reply #186 on:** March 26, 2023, 08:07:16 pm »

Very possible Ralph

Beagle1831 · « **Reply #187 on:** March 27, 2023, 09:29:23 am »

Hi Nick

Interesting! All these minor details we never noticed...

There is a note on the Navweaps page that suggests these are lights (under additional pictures). I've not seen them on other mountings, maybe they realised that illuminating your gun crews in action was a bad idea??

James

Geoff · « **Reply #188 on:** March 27, 2023, 11:23:33 am »

Hmm, they do indeed look like lights but I can't see the benefit and at night surely not a good ides. Another thing, may be air blasts to blow smoke from the breaches but on balance I think lights.

Picture to follow

Cheers

Geoff

Geoff · « **Reply #189 on:** March 27, 2023, 11:34:29 am »

Have you seen this?

John W E · « **Reply #190 on:** March 27, 2023, 12:26:15 pm »

hi there Nick

Have a look at this link Britain 4"/45 (10.2 cm) BL Marks IX and X - NavWeaps you may already have this, but, I do think they are lights above the guns. Have a look at the photograph in the link this object above the gun shield is very similar and they are saying its a light.

John

Colin Bishop · « **Reply #191 on:** March 27, 2023, 12:27:19 pm »

Doesn't download for me Geoff - 0 bytes

Is it the one on this site:

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_4-45_mk9.php

See photos at bottom of page of a single gun mounted on the monitor Sir John Moore where the fitting is captioned as a shaded light. Looking at other photos of the triple mounting o Renown/Repulse it seems that not all mounts were fitted with the lights.

SNAP John!

Colin

Beagle1831 · « **Reply #192 on:** March 27, 2023, 02:52:35 pm »

There is also a diagram in John Lambert's naval weapons volume ii - labelled as a 'loading light'

ballastanksian · « **Reply #193 on:** March 27, 2023, 09:20:36 pm »

I agree as it is something I missed on my 4inch gun model for HMS Ready and wish I had done the light integral to the breech/shield tarpaulin.

Those mountings are almost analogous to Organ guns! They are impressive though.

raflaunches · « **Reply #194 on:** March 27, 2023, 09:28:12 pm »

Thanks for the information everyone. The light is a strange thing as mentioned but being in the military it really doesn’t surprise me if it was supposed to be used in combat conditions!
Looking forward to making these platforms as they are so different to the usual 4 inch layout.
Currently painting up some 1/96 scale figures dressed in WW1 uniforms. Absolutely tiny but they look enough to add a sense of scale to a model.

ballastanksian · « **Reply #195 on:** March 27, 2023, 09:32:27 pm »

Not bad for model boat figures Nick. I like the uniform colouring.

I wonder how strong the lights were? I imagine that as the light was behind the shield, the enemy would not see much unless very close.

If the light was too strong then it might put the mounting in glorious (excuse pun) silhouette

Colin Bishop · « **Reply #196 on:** March 27, 2023, 10:12:51 pm »

The light would be directional and behind the shield which would have been pointing at the enemy at a considerable disrtance so unlikely to be very visible but still useful for the gun crews. The guns were manually operated so the crew needed to see what they were doing at night.

Overall a bad design though with three guns in a single mounting and 23 crew tripping over each other. No wonder they were not repeated.The twins were far more efficient.

Colin

warspite · « **Reply #197 on:** March 28, 2023, 09:35:14 am »

They are not that smaller than the 1/72nd Airfix crews, though they seem a bit 'shiny' a wet duffle coat is still not shiny though the seal skin ones are, is she being depicted in a force 10 gale?

dodes · « **Reply #198 on:** March 28, 2023, 04:06:30 pm »

Hi Nick have B/W pics of the Norfolk crew then, all hats where dark navy as white tops are peace time only. The outside kit was black oil skins with black rubber wellies, and dry weather buff thick woollen duffle coats . Dampness was a problem with poor ventilation(woollen socks bunged in them to keep warm), father said to me after Norfolk spent 18 months inside the Artic circle most of the crew suffered from T.B.

Geoff · « **Reply #199 on:** March 28, 2023, 04:48:57 pm »

My picture wouldn't down load for me either - I sent it to Nick by e-mail, maybe he can post the plans! Damn computer!!

I did learn that despite its reputation for being cumbersome the triple mount actually worked quite well and according to Friedman its rate of fire was fully compatible with three single mounts - much depended on crew training. Also despite the barrels being independent they soon learned it was best to fire all three at once, a mini salvo which increased the chance of a hit.

It was dropped not because it was cumbersome or slow firing but because the 4" shell was marginal at stopping a destroyer. The corollary being the 6" which fired a 100 pound shell was found to be too cumbersome to operate in a seaway, so with Hood they tried a 5.5" gun which worked quite well, middle ground.

I have ten open shield 5.5" mounts to contemplate on my Hood model soon!!

Cheers

Geoff

News:

Author Topic: HMS Glorious 1917 (Read 21686 times)