Hi all,
I know that in early 1941 (probably in April, I do not remember the exact date) Bismarck & Tirpitz sailed together for the first and only time in the baltic.
I am just considering building a 1:350 diorama of the 2 sisters together.
For that I would greatly appreciate some historically correct info, if any of you know something about this day:
1) the usual question colours (especially turret tops)
Just about then Bismarck probably already sported the striped Baltic camouflage, possibly also sporting 2 different colours on turret tops (me and Antonio elsewhere suggested that colour clearly visible in some B/N photos could well be carmine red on Anton vs. gray on other turrets).
I would be inclined to think that Tirpitz was still overall gray, is that correct ?
2) What are the modifications needed on Tamiya kits to represent Tirpitz back then. I could possibly mix for T a Tirpitz and a Bismarck Tamiya kit. Hence I should have no difficulty in getting a Tirpitz with no additional AA on B turret and forecastle, or astern about the aft control position.
I also know she lacked the venting duscts around B and C barbettes, and still lacked the aft AA director, back then.
What else should I know ?
Any more suggestions about tamiya kit (for both ships) shortcomings ?
I could use the full sets of WEM stuff for them. Are they really complete ?
Ciao
Luca
Bismarck + Tirpitz - info & related modelling questions
-
Luca Bevilacqua
- Junior Member
- Posts: 18
- Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:49 pm
- Location: Naples, italy
-
Antonio Bonomi
- Senior Member
- Posts: 3799
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
- Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy
Diorama
Ciao Luca and all,
what a pleasure to be able to help you on this my friend
.
YES, on April 7th, 1941 Tirpitz and Bismarck were togheter on training on the Baltic sea.
Bismarck camo should be well known.
Full Baltic stripes camo with dark grey top turrets, including the sloped plates.
Tirpitz was still incomplete.
No rangefinders on any position, consequently no radar antenna's as well.
No A/A aft rangefinders ( 2 positions ) as well and no spherical covers.
No flak vierlings 20 mm C 38 on any position, and no addittional platforms as well of course ( both forward and aft ).
No torpedo tubes.
Mainmast with box ( like Bismarck ).
Tirpitz was coloured with 2 tome grey ( RAL 7001 and 7000 ) and with no top turrets camo.
The ship was having both flagpoles mounted.
To make Tirpitz this way I strongly suggest you to purchase one Bismarck more and use many common parts of Bismarck that are just perfectly done.
Than you need some handmade pieces, like dummy guns etc etc ....
WEM is just a wonderful set of Photo Etched parts.
Second comes the GMM and third TOM's based on my experience.
Never used other ones.
Ciao Antonio
what a pleasure to be able to help you on this my friend
.YES, on April 7th, 1941 Tirpitz and Bismarck were togheter on training on the Baltic sea.
Bismarck camo should be well known.
Full Baltic stripes camo with dark grey top turrets, including the sloped plates.
Tirpitz was still incomplete.
No rangefinders on any position, consequently no radar antenna's as well.
No A/A aft rangefinders ( 2 positions ) as well and no spherical covers.
No flak vierlings 20 mm C 38 on any position, and no addittional platforms as well of course ( both forward and aft ).
No torpedo tubes.
Mainmast with box ( like Bismarck ).
Tirpitz was coloured with 2 tome grey ( RAL 7001 and 7000 ) and with no top turrets camo.
The ship was having both flagpoles mounted.
To make Tirpitz this way I strongly suggest you to purchase one Bismarck more and use many common parts of Bismarck that are just perfectly done.
Than you need some handmade pieces, like dummy guns etc etc ....
WEM is just a wonderful set of Photo Etched parts.
Second comes the GMM and third TOM's based on my experience.
Never used other ones.
Ciao Antonio
-
Luca Bevilacqua
- Junior Member
- Posts: 18
- Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:49 pm
- Location: Naples, italy
Hi Antonio,
thanks for the excellent (as usual from you, my friend
) info you provided.
I usually prefer Tamiya acrilic colours, for ships superstructures & hull (the end result looks finer and neater than with enamels IMHO).
Would you happen to have experienced what is the best mix of Tamiya acrilic colours to get close to RAL 7001 and 7000 ?
Do you usually factor in a little scale effect (slightly faded, lighter colours) when choosing colours ?
I ask this also because I happened to notice the pics of a couple of models of yours (Tirpitz) with a markedly brown deck.
Tamiya suggests their XF55 - deck tan, which is much paler and greyish.
Elesewhere I did read a while ago a description of Bismarck's teck as "yellowish"...
such a hue is probably not very realistic but it does look great on a model....
(take a look at http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... index.html - great is not it ? this ship is my ideal, I would love to be able to get to this level, Andy is an absolute master, I think )
So Tirpitz on April 7 1941 would look a little bare with no main directors and light grey turret tops.
May be I should choose a somewhat later date...
When on May the 5th 1941, Hitler visited both sisters I do not think they were moored close together, were they ?
Modelling both alongside a single pier would be easy and convenient (as in the famous USS Alaska + USS Missouri photo), but I am afraid that would be historically most uncorrect.
May be I could model one of the 2 sisters (Bismarck) passing along a moored, more fitted (main fore directors + dark grey turret tops) Tirpitz ?
May be still a Bismarck with carmine red turret tops (hence before May 5th) ?
In any case...
Would you say that the aft A/A directors positions, for Tirpitz back in those days, could be modelled by just using Tamiya Bismarck pieces ?
Or were they yet still different (B had temporary open directors, T had none back then) ?
A dear friend of mine (guess who, anybody..) suggested Tamiya vs Academy kits may have a little different bow, hence could be a good base to aproximate the differences in the bows the 2 ships had.
Would you confirm ? Which would be which ?
How do you go about scratch building the aft positioned training guns ?
I know they were differently positioned, but they should be equal for both ships, should not they ?
My understanding is that the WEM P/E frets are very comprehensive, offering all there it was on superstructure walls that the kits sorely miss.
Also P/E light AA and patterned upper decks.
Would you say there is no item on GM frets that is not already provided by WEM ?
A long list, I know my friend but you never let me down...
May be some otehr friend can give a little advice on other after market improvements for the kits.
I only know about steve Nuttall's barrell set (which I may buy).
What about decal sheets for the svastikas on B deck (a pain in the.. to mask) ?
What about some more decent DKM flags ?
May be sturdier masts made of turned brass ?
May be resin cast dual 37 mm AA (that I am afraid are out of PE WEM improvements ?
Ciao to all
Luca
thanks for the excellent (as usual from you, my friend
) info you provided.I usually prefer Tamiya acrilic colours, for ships superstructures & hull (the end result looks finer and neater than with enamels IMHO).
Would you happen to have experienced what is the best mix of Tamiya acrilic colours to get close to RAL 7001 and 7000 ?
Do you usually factor in a little scale effect (slightly faded, lighter colours) when choosing colours ?
I ask this also because I happened to notice the pics of a couple of models of yours (Tirpitz) with a markedly brown deck.
Tamiya suggests their XF55 - deck tan, which is much paler and greyish.
Elesewhere I did read a while ago a description of Bismarck's teck as "yellowish"...
such a hue is probably not very realistic but it does look great on a model....
(take a look at http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... index.html - great is not it ? this ship is my ideal, I would love to be able to get to this level, Andy is an absolute master, I think )
So Tirpitz on April 7 1941 would look a little bare with no main directors and light grey turret tops.
May be I should choose a somewhat later date...
When on May the 5th 1941, Hitler visited both sisters I do not think they were moored close together, were they ?
Modelling both alongside a single pier would be easy and convenient (as in the famous USS Alaska + USS Missouri photo), but I am afraid that would be historically most uncorrect.
May be I could model one of the 2 sisters (Bismarck) passing along a moored, more fitted (main fore directors + dark grey turret tops) Tirpitz ?
May be still a Bismarck with carmine red turret tops (hence before May 5th) ?
In any case...
Would you say that the aft A/A directors positions, for Tirpitz back in those days, could be modelled by just using Tamiya Bismarck pieces ?
Or were they yet still different (B had temporary open directors, T had none back then) ?
A dear friend of mine (guess who, anybody..) suggested Tamiya vs Academy kits may have a little different bow, hence could be a good base to aproximate the differences in the bows the 2 ships had.
Would you confirm ? Which would be which ?
How do you go about scratch building the aft positioned training guns ?
I know they were differently positioned, but they should be equal for both ships, should not they ?
My understanding is that the WEM P/E frets are very comprehensive, offering all there it was on superstructure walls that the kits sorely miss.
Also P/E light AA and patterned upper decks.
Would you say there is no item on GM frets that is not already provided by WEM ?
A long list, I know my friend but you never let me down...
May be some otehr friend can give a little advice on other after market improvements for the kits.
I only know about steve Nuttall's barrell set (which I may buy).
What about decal sheets for the svastikas on B deck (a pain in the.. to mask) ?
What about some more decent DKM flags ?
May be sturdier masts made of turned brass ?
May be resin cast dual 37 mm AA (that I am afraid are out of PE WEM improvements ?
Ciao to all
Luca
-
Luca Bevilacqua
- Junior Member
- Posts: 18
- Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:49 pm
- Location: Naples, italy
Hi Antonio, hi all.
I (of course) just realised my mistake.
The WEM DKM flak PE set has replacements also for the 3.7 cm.
So that is settled.
However in the meantime I found
http://www.eduard.cz/./products/card.ph ... ge_start=5
Now is hard to say which fret set is best is not it ?
Eduard also has a fret for light AA.
http://www.eduard.cz/./products/card.ph ... ge_start=5.
but it looks inferior to WEM.
I'll try to figure out the prices.
Also have a look at
http://www.modelwarships.com/reviews/reviews.html
if these guys from China add a Bismarck/Tirpitz offer to the Mikasa and USS North Carolina. I hope they do.
Ciao to all
Luca
I (of course) just realised my mistake.
The WEM DKM flak PE set has replacements also for the 3.7 cm.
So that is settled.
However in the meantime I found
http://www.eduard.cz/./products/card.ph ... ge_start=5
Now is hard to say which fret set is best is not it ?
Eduard also has a fret for light AA.
http://www.eduard.cz/./products/card.ph ... ge_start=5.
but it looks inferior to WEM.
I'll try to figure out the prices.
Also have a look at
http://www.modelwarships.com/reviews/reviews.html
if these guys from China add a Bismarck/Tirpitz offer to the Mikasa and USS North Carolina. I hope they do.
Ciao to all
Luca
-
Antonio Bonomi
- Senior Member
- Posts: 3799
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
- Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy
BS and TP models
Ciao Luca and all,
here your answers my friend :
NO, I never used Tamiya acrylic grey colours ( but I do use only Tamiya Hull Red colour for all my models ).
I use Humbrol grey colours, but I have tested some WEM and Testors and they are all good as well, in my opinion the grey colour depends a lot of what you like better, and I like the Humbrol Satin effects.
Again, that is what I like better, a bit more ‘ wooden ‘ colour than light yellowish one.
But here I can help you with an original colour photo so you can see yourself how the Bismarck deck looked like :
http://www.ww2incolor.com/gallery/german-navy/bismark_2
As you can see it was very ‘ wooden ‘ type colour, exactly like a couple of original Tirpitz teak wood samples I have in my hands.
Also in this case I use an Humbrol matt colour.
Of course if you make Tirpitz May 5, 1941 it will be much more complete and better looking.
No the Bismarck was no moored at a pier, it was on the open sea of the harbour, and to reach Bismarck Hitler used another boat that anchored alongside Bismarck ( see the photos ).
Tirpitz was moored at the pier ( see photos as well ).
I think a May 5, 1941 diorama will be very beautiful, I strongly suggest you to do it.
Tirpitz did have them open like Bismarck, so using the Bismarck kit ones is just perfect.
This is just a ‘trick ‘ I use to underline the differences.
Tamiya kit do have a better and more accurate ‘ Atlantic ‘ bow were the ‘ arc’ is very well done and slim, very sharp.
Academy is more ‘ raw’ , I mean is more straight and less arc is done with the moding ( which is different of course ).
That is why I use the trick to use Tamiya hull for Tirpitz and Academy hull for Bismarck to underline the differences, it is not perfect, .. but it is something on the right direction.
They were the same for both ships, but differently positioned.
We are talking the 105 mm dummy and a 150 mm dummy.
Bismarck one in front to the other between C and D turret.
Tirpitz aside the C turret barbette each side.
White Ensign Model ( WEM ) is the most complete set of photo etched parts.
Gold Medal Model ( GMM ) is very good as well, but not as complete.
Tom’s is a very simple kit with few base parts.
WHOW !! Those Eduard are good as well, ..
….. but I still think WEM are the best !
Very good idea, those barrels are very well done.
I use to print them on paper with my PC high quality printer.
Than using thin bi-adesive to fix them on the deck.
This way they are also removable and very nicely looking been perfect with white circle, red banner and swastika’s.
I do the flags same way with my PC high quality printer.
Than I use Vinavil glue to put the 2 sides together and when drying off I mould them to give the wind effect.
Never done any mast change.
my suggestion for a better look of the model is to concentrate on the wires.
You are right, the kit one a are awful, on next models I will change them too.
YES, they are into the PE WEM set, so it is easily possible to make them much better.
Hope to have helped you,... but again just feel free, .. it is a long way to go I suppose.
Ciao Antonio
here your answers my friend :
Answer :Question GREY :
I usually prefer Tamiya acrylic colours, for ships superstructures & hull (the end result looks finer and neater than with enamels IMHO).
Would you happen to have experienced what is the best mix of Tamiya acrylic colours to get close to RAL 7001 and 7000 ?
Do you usually factor in a little scale effect (slightly faded, lighter colours) when choosing colours ?
NO, I never used Tamiya acrylic grey colours ( but I do use only Tamiya Hull Red colour for all my models ).
I use Humbrol grey colours, but I have tested some WEM and Testors and they are all good as well, in my opinion the grey colour depends a lot of what you like better, and I like the Humbrol Satin effects.
Answer :Question DECK :
I ask this also because I happened to notice the pics of a couple of models of yours (Tirpitz) with a markedly brown deck.
Tamiya suggests their XF55 - deck tan, which is much paler and greyish.
Elsewhere I did read a while ago a description of Bismarck's teak as "yellowish"...
such a hue is probably not very realistic but it does look great on a model....
(take a look at http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... index.html - great is not it ? this ship is my ideal, I would love to be able to get to this level, Andy is an absolute master, I think )
Again, that is what I like better, a bit more ‘ wooden ‘ colour than light yellowish one.
But here I can help you with an original colour photo so you can see yourself how the Bismarck deck looked like :
http://www.ww2incolor.com/gallery/german-navy/bismark_2
As you can see it was very ‘ wooden ‘ type colour, exactly like a couple of original Tirpitz teak wood samples I have in my hands.
Also in this case I use an Humbrol matt colour.
Answer :Question Tirpitz May 5, 1941 :
So Tirpitz on April 7 1941 would look a little bare with no main directors and light grey turret tops.
May be I should choose a somewhat later date...
When on May the 5th 1941, Hitler visited both sisters I do not think they were moored close together, were they ?
Modelling both alongside a single pier would be easy and convenient (as in the famous USS Alaska + USS Missouri photo), but I am afraid that would be historically most uncorrect.
May be I could model one of the 2 sisters (Bismarck) passing along a moored, more fitted (main fore directors + dark grey turret tops) Tirpitz ?
May be still a Bismarck with carmine red turret tops (hence before May 5th) ?
Of course if you make Tirpitz May 5, 1941 it will be much more complete and better looking.
No the Bismarck was no moored at a pier, it was on the open sea of the harbour, and to reach Bismarck Hitler used another boat that anchored alongside Bismarck ( see the photos ).
Tirpitz was moored at the pier ( see photos as well ).
I think a May 5, 1941 diorama will be very beautiful, I strongly suggest you to do it.
Answer :Question A/A directors :
In any case...
Would you say that the aft A/A directors positions, for Tirpitz back in those days, could be modelled by just using Tamiya Bismarck pieces ?
Or were they yet still different (B had temporary open directors, T had none back then) ?
Tirpitz did have them open like Bismarck, so using the Bismarck kit ones is just perfect.
Answer :Question BOW :
A dear friend of mine (guess who, anybody..) suggested Tamiya versus Academy kits may have a little different bow, hence could be a good base to approximate the differences in the bows the 2 ships had.
Would you confirm? Which would be which?
This is just a ‘trick ‘ I use to underline the differences.
Tamiya kit do have a better and more accurate ‘ Atlantic ‘ bow were the ‘ arc’ is very well done and slim, very sharp.
Academy is more ‘ raw’ , I mean is more straight and less arc is done with the moding ( which is different of course ).
That is why I use the trick to use Tamiya hull for Tirpitz and Academy hull for Bismarck to underline the differences, it is not perfect, .. but it is something on the right direction.
Answer :Question Dummy guns:
How do you go about scratch building the aft positioned training guns ?
I know they were differently positioned, but they should be equal for both ships, should not they ?
They were the same for both ships, but differently positioned.
We are talking the 105 mm dummy and a 150 mm dummy.
Bismarck one in front to the other between C and D turret.
Tirpitz aside the C turret barbette each side.
Answer :Question Photo Etched parts :
My understanding is that the WEM P/E frets are very comprehensive, offering all there it was on superstructure walls that the kits sorely miss.
Also P/E light AA and patterned upper decks.
Would you say there is no item on GM frets that is not already provided by WEM ?
White Ensign Model ( WEM ) is the most complete set of photo etched parts.
Gold Medal Model ( GMM ) is very good as well, but not as complete.
Tom’s is a very simple kit with few base parts.
WHOW !! Those Eduard are good as well, ..
….. but I still think WEM are the best !
Answer :Question gun barrels :
I only know about Steve Nuttall's barrell set (which I may buy).
Very good idea, those barrels are very well done.
Answer :Question decals :
What about decal sheets for the svastikas on B deck (a pain in the.. to mask) ?
I use to print them on paper with my PC high quality printer.
Than using thin bi-adesive to fix them on the deck.
This way they are also removable and very nicely looking been perfect with white circle, red banner and swastika’s.
Answer :Question flags :
What about some more decent DKM flags ?
I do the flags same way with my PC high quality printer.
Than I use Vinavil glue to put the 2 sides together and when drying off I mould them to give the wind effect.
Answer :Question Mast’s :
May be sturdier masts made of turned brass ?
Never done any mast change.
my suggestion for a better look of the model is to concentrate on the wires.
Answer :Question 37 mm guns :
May be resin cast dual 37 mm AA (that I am afraid are out of PE WEM improvements ?
You are right, the kit one a are awful, on next models I will change them too.
YES, they are into the PE WEM set, so it is easily possible to make them much better.
Hope to have helped you,... but again just feel free, .. it is a long way to go I suppose.
Ciao Antonio
-
Antonio Bonomi
- Senior Member
- Posts: 3799
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
- Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy
Eduard Pe kit
Ciao all,
.... by the way, I was just looking the model they show with the Photo Etched parts mounted on Tirpitz.
They do have the Fu Mo 26 radar set I see ( 3 bigger antenna's ), ..but they mounted it on the top main tower the antenna with still the FuMo 27 antenna under teh FuMo 26, and it is wrong
, ..... so be careful.
Error on the 37 mm under the main tower changed with PE 20 mm vierlings ...
Error on the Wurzburg radar,.. the base needs to be elevated before that radar been mounted,....
Error on the vierling after the wavebrakers ....
Error with 2 by 20 mm single placed on the deck side C turret never existing there....
..OK I stop here,... there are surely many others, .....
They need some consulting on Tirpitz, ..
... I am here if they need it ....
Ciao Antonio
.... by the way, I was just looking the model they show with the Photo Etched parts mounted on Tirpitz.
They do have the Fu Mo 26 radar set I see ( 3 bigger antenna's ), ..but they mounted it on the top main tower the antenna with still the FuMo 27 antenna under teh FuMo 26, and it is wrong
, ..... so be careful.Error on the 37 mm under the main tower changed with PE 20 mm vierlings ...
Error on the Wurzburg radar,.. the base needs to be elevated before that radar been mounted,....
Error on the vierling after the wavebrakers ....
Error with 2 by 20 mm single placed on the deck side C turret never existing there....
..OK I stop here,... there are surely many others, .....
They need some consulting on Tirpitz, ..
... I am here if they need it .... Ciao Antonio
-
Luca Bevilacqua
- Junior Member
- Posts: 18
- Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:49 pm
- Location: Naples, italy
Ciao Antonio.
Well....
First of all the link you provided is just GREAT.
I had visited the same site some time ago, but it was quite a long time ago, and I think they have added many more great pics since then
to them and to you, my friend , for reminding me about it.
As an aside I wander what ship is this one with yellow looking turret tops AND barrells. Looks like an Hipper class cruiser.
http://www.ww2incolor.com/gallery/german-navy/ship_land
(BTW the deck is clearly brown there I just wander what the colour would be for a very "new" ship, may be lighter ?....)
Back to the diorama related questions:
in this forum
http://kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.ph ... c&start=15
you proposed a detailed timeline of Bismarck fitting and camouflaging.
My ideal would be to depict just a few days before May the 5th.
My hope would be to model a T more complete with dark turret tops and a Bismarck with one or more than one red turrets.
Since we know May the 5th also Bismarck had dark grey turret tops I am trying to figure out if there could have existed a day with such colour combination.
Do you happen to have seen a map/pic of the disposition of the 2 ships in those days, (distance, buildings around the pier and stuff like that).
Most likely the ship at anchor (B) would not be possibly put in a correct scale distance with the moored one T (it would require an enormous base especially in 1:350, but apart from this would be nice to try me as historically correct as possible).
BTW I noticed that the thread plates on the upper decks of Eduard P/E are noticeably different from the analogous pieces by WEM (which I know are correct for B).
Is in your expert opinion is that an error or there were some differences in teh 2 ships ?
Probably one could buy 1 of each sets and fit the Bismarck wit WEM and the Tirpitz with Eduard...
Steve's barrel sets are nice, but a bit expensive....
Ciao
Yours
Luca
Well....
First of all the link you provided is just GREAT.
I had visited the same site some time ago, but it was quite a long time ago, and I think they have added many more great pics since then
to them and to you, my friend , for reminding me about it.As an aside I wander what ship is this one with yellow looking turret tops AND barrells. Looks like an Hipper class cruiser.
http://www.ww2incolor.com/gallery/german-navy/ship_land
(BTW the deck is clearly brown there I just wander what the colour would be for a very "new" ship, may be lighter ?....)
Back to the diorama related questions:
in this forum
http://kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.ph ... c&start=15
you proposed a detailed timeline of Bismarck fitting and camouflaging.
My ideal would be to depict just a few days before May the 5th.
My hope would be to model a T more complete with dark turret tops and a Bismarck with one or more than one red turrets.
Since we know May the 5th also Bismarck had dark grey turret tops I am trying to figure out if there could have existed a day with such colour combination.
Do you happen to have seen a map/pic of the disposition of the 2 ships in those days, (distance, buildings around the pier and stuff like that).
Most likely the ship at anchor (B) would not be possibly put in a correct scale distance with the moored one T (it would require an enormous base especially in 1:350, but apart from this would be nice to try me as historically correct as possible).
BTW I noticed that the thread plates on the upper decks of Eduard P/E are noticeably different from the analogous pieces by WEM (which I know are correct for B).
Is in your expert opinion is that an error or there were some differences in teh 2 ships ?
Probably one could buy 1 of each sets and fit the Bismarck wit WEM and the Tirpitz with Eduard...
Steve's barrel sets are nice, but a bit expensive....
Ciao
Yours
Luca
-
Antonio Bonomi
- Senior Member
- Posts: 3799
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
- Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy
PE parts
Ciao Luca and all,
Yes, that colour photo of Bismarck stern is very helpful.
You are right as the other colour photo is the Admiral Hipper into a Norwegian Fjord, so during 1942.
You correctly noticed both the YELLOW top's ( and gun barrels ) as well as the deck looking exactly like the Bismarck one as far as colour.
Look at the scheme number 2 here in and you will find it :
http://www.forum.marinearchiv.de/viewto ... 89af#17215
I think that those deck's could only look lighter during the summer under the sun, with the wood drying out.
Moving into the diorama you need an harbour map of Gotenhafen ( Gdynia ) which is a city in Poland currently.
I do not have an harbour map of that period but I think that the harbour should not have changed much.
There are good photos of both Bismarck and Tirpitz anchored at the pier in that harbour and probably I do have some RAF aerial photos of the harbour too.
YES, the deck on BS and TP were different especially at midship were TP had a much larger deck area ( the 2 main cranes were placed differently and on different decks ).
BS on main deck and there were disturbing the 105 mm gun.
TP on the upper deck more close to the funnel, no problems for the 105 mm gun.
To make the 2 ships perfect with best pieces I wonder you should buy almost all the sets, .. and still had manual parts to be made, .. with modeling you are never satysfied, .. but the decks will drive your selection at first.
Ciao Antonio
Yes, that colour photo of Bismarck stern is very helpful.
You are right as the other colour photo is the Admiral Hipper into a Norwegian Fjord, so during 1942.
You correctly noticed both the YELLOW top's ( and gun barrels ) as well as the deck looking exactly like the Bismarck one as far as colour.
Look at the scheme number 2 here in and you will find it :
http://www.forum.marinearchiv.de/viewto ... 89af#17215
I think that those deck's could only look lighter during the summer under the sun, with the wood drying out.
Moving into the diorama you need an harbour map of Gotenhafen ( Gdynia ) which is a city in Poland currently.
I do not have an harbour map of that period but I think that the harbour should not have changed much.
There are good photos of both Bismarck and Tirpitz anchored at the pier in that harbour and probably I do have some RAF aerial photos of the harbour too.
YES, the deck on BS and TP were different especially at midship were TP had a much larger deck area ( the 2 main cranes were placed differently and on different decks ).
BS on main deck and there were disturbing the 105 mm gun.
TP on the upper deck more close to the funnel, no problems for the 105 mm gun.
To make the 2 ships perfect with best pieces I wonder you should buy almost all the sets, .. and still had manual parts to be made, .. with modeling you are never satysfied, .. but the decks will drive your selection at first.
Ciao Antonio
-
Luca Bevilacqua
- Junior Member
- Posts: 18
- Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:49 pm
- Location: Naples, italy
Hi all, hi Antonio.
I learned that using WEM colourcoats as a reference
RAL 7000 is Dunkelgrau 51 (WEM KM 02)
RAL 7001 is Hellgrau 50 (WEM KM 01).
How do you guys go about scale effect ?
Does WEM colours factor that in or are (as I suspect) the pure reproduction of the colours.
I think 1:350 should have quite a bit of scale effect to it.
Also the effect of scale vs. teck decks puzzle me a lot.
antonio has well demonstrated that colour photos back then showed a markedly brown deck, but...
was it wet or dry ?
was it new or darkened ?
how one should make it lighter for scale effect '
I know RN used to holystone teck decks obtaining lighter shades as a result.
the new decks I see used today on yachts looks much lighter,..I wonder why...
Ciao my friends
Luca
I learned that using WEM colourcoats as a reference
RAL 7000 is Dunkelgrau 51 (WEM KM 02)
RAL 7001 is Hellgrau 50 (WEM KM 01).
How do you guys go about scale effect ?
Does WEM colours factor that in or are (as I suspect) the pure reproduction of the colours.
I think 1:350 should have quite a bit of scale effect to it.
Also the effect of scale vs. teck decks puzzle me a lot.
antonio has well demonstrated that colour photos back then showed a markedly brown deck, but...
was it wet or dry ?
was it new or darkened ?
how one should make it lighter for scale effect '
I know RN used to holystone teck decks obtaining lighter shades as a result.
the new decks I see used today on yachts looks much lighter,..I wonder why...
Ciao my friends
Luca
-
Antonio Bonomi
- Senior Member
- Posts: 3799
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
- Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy
KM Colours
Ciao Luca and all,
YES, the WEM colour reference for KM is a very easy and good option.
I highly suggest anyone that do have doubts about colour selection to use them as the set is complete.
Never thought about scale effect, I just use the colours that best fit my eyes and my perception
The decks I showed you can be assumed been dry.
Only if you take a photo against the sun in summer than the decks will look lighter, but that will be due to the sun effects on the film, not to the real deck colour.
I have a set of colour photos of Admiral Scheer on the Indian Ocean and the deck is exactly similar to the Admiral Hipper and Bismarck referenced above.
Than I have some of other ships looking a bit lighter, but as said my opinion is that it is due to the sun effect on the film.
2 real pieces of teck wood from Tirpitz deck in my hands do confirm the darker colour.
But again, anyone at the end for his own model should simply paint the deck the way it looks better for his eyes .
Ciao Antonio
YES, the WEM colour reference for KM is a very easy and good option.
I highly suggest anyone that do have doubts about colour selection to use them as the set is complete.
Never thought about scale effect, I just use the colours that best fit my eyes and my perception
The decks I showed you can be assumed been dry.
Only if you take a photo against the sun in summer than the decks will look lighter, but that will be due to the sun effects on the film, not to the real deck colour.
I have a set of colour photos of Admiral Scheer on the Indian Ocean and the deck is exactly similar to the Admiral Hipper and Bismarck referenced above.
Than I have some of other ships looking a bit lighter, but as said my opinion is that it is due to the sun effect on the film.
2 real pieces of teck wood from Tirpitz deck in my hands do confirm the darker colour.
But again, anyone at the end for his own model should simply paint the deck the way it looks better for his eyes
.Ciao Antonio
-
Luca Bevilacqua
- Junior Member
- Posts: 18
- Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:49 pm
- Location: Naples, italy
Hi all, hi Antonio,
you may be wandering why I am so keen on evaluating the shade of brown to be used, in spite of hard photograpic evidence provided by Antonio to us all.
The most important reason has just to do with a modelling technique I am experimenting with to replicate variation in colors among deck planks.
After unsuccessfully triyng the exceptional technique by Rusty White, of multiple sprays of different shades with deck progressively covered by many tiny stripes of tape (to represent each plank - my attempt failed mainly because in Italy I can't seem to be able to find the precut tape on the right widths - I did manage to cut them myself but only in 1:200, even in that scale it is a real challenge on patience, tough),
I am now trying the following:
1) first I cover the deck with a uniform spray of a light shade (either Tamiya deck tan - greyish, for aged decks, or Humbrol 74 yellowish for ultra new decks).
2) then I slide coloured (extremely well pointed) pencils (various brown and grey shades) in the grooves delimited by the plank lines of the model.
Raised plank lines, a firm hand and ultra sharp pencil tips should allow for straight coloured marks that can represent each plank in different shades.
One can also mask off alternate stripes on the deck to have a guide for marking the right lenghts (in scale) for all the planks.
3) The result will be a very contrasted deck. I tone down the contrast by spraying a light, mist, colour overall.
Here one could choose according to the deck shade of the real ship.
I usually prefer Tamiya acrilics for this last layer, because the use of acrilics let me make washes with oil artist colours more safely later (in Italy is also difficult to get the famous Future, much used by our US and Uk fellow modellers).
Of course the whole process works better if the overall colour is not too dark (Tamiya deck tan for example is OK with it).
Markedly brown shades, if sprayed overall, would kill the pastel work (already Tamiya buff, which is far clearer than the deck shade in the pic, would kill most of the effect, especially if you plan to do later brownish washes).
That's why I am desperately trying to figure out if there could be conditions in which the german decks looked lighter.
BTW the old Skwiot-Jarsky monografie about the Bismarck shows the deck with planks that are always mounted aligned with each other (all planks beginnings and ends are aligned) and not intertiwined 8each plank ends at about the middle point of adjacent planks).
Do you think that was correct ?
Ciao
Luca
Yours
Luca
you may be wandering why I am so keen on evaluating the shade of brown to be used, in spite of hard photograpic evidence provided by Antonio to us all.
The most important reason has just to do with a modelling technique I am experimenting with to replicate variation in colors among deck planks.
After unsuccessfully triyng the exceptional technique by Rusty White, of multiple sprays of different shades with deck progressively covered by many tiny stripes of tape (to represent each plank - my attempt failed mainly because in Italy I can't seem to be able to find the precut tape on the right widths - I did manage to cut them myself but only in 1:200, even in that scale it is a real challenge on patience, tough),
I am now trying the following:
1) first I cover the deck with a uniform spray of a light shade (either Tamiya deck tan - greyish, for aged decks, or Humbrol 74 yellowish for ultra new decks).
2) then I slide coloured (extremely well pointed) pencils (various brown and grey shades) in the grooves delimited by the plank lines of the model.
Raised plank lines, a firm hand and ultra sharp pencil tips should allow for straight coloured marks that can represent each plank in different shades.
One can also mask off alternate stripes on the deck to have a guide for marking the right lenghts (in scale) for all the planks.
3) The result will be a very contrasted deck. I tone down the contrast by spraying a light, mist, colour overall.
Here one could choose according to the deck shade of the real ship.
I usually prefer Tamiya acrilics for this last layer, because the use of acrilics let me make washes with oil artist colours more safely later (in Italy is also difficult to get the famous Future, much used by our US and Uk fellow modellers).
Of course the whole process works better if the overall colour is not too dark (Tamiya deck tan for example is OK with it).
Markedly brown shades, if sprayed overall, would kill the pastel work (already Tamiya buff, which is far clearer than the deck shade in the pic, would kill most of the effect, especially if you plan to do later brownish washes).
That's why I am desperately trying to figure out if there could be conditions in which the german decks looked lighter.
BTW the old Skwiot-Jarsky monografie about the Bismarck shows the deck with planks that are always mounted aligned with each other (all planks beginnings and ends are aligned) and not intertiwined 8each plank ends at about the middle point of adjacent planks).
Do you think that was correct ?
Ciao
Luca
Yours
Luca
-
Luca Bevilacqua
- Junior Member
- Posts: 18
- Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:49 pm
- Location: Naples, italy
-
Luca Bevilacqua
- Junior Member
- Posts: 18
- Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:49 pm
- Location: Naples, italy
Hy guys, hi Antonio.
I studied a bit the instructions for WEM P/E available on the net.
There are (of course) several platforms that are rendered in P/E and that were Tirpitz specific.
Conning tower platform is an example, as is the more famous "kartoffelraum" platform.
As I know there are experts out there (Antonio, are you there ?
), can any one help me in determining when exactly each platform was fitted.
I suspect most were additions due to Tirpitz longer career.
It would surprise me if the ships were so different in early 1941....
Ciao
Luca
I studied a bit the instructions for WEM P/E available on the net.
There are (of course) several platforms that are rendered in P/E and that were Tirpitz specific.
Conning tower platform is an example, as is the more famous "kartoffelraum" platform.
As I know there are experts out there (Antonio, are you there ?
), can any one help me in determining when exactly each platform was fitted.I suspect most were additions due to Tirpitz longer career.
It would surprise me if the ships were so different in early 1941....
Ciao
Luca
-
Antonio Bonomi
- Senior Member
- Posts: 3799
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
- Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy
Photo etched platforms
Ciao Luca and all,
Many thanks for the ' expert ' definition
OK, I see you already got correctly the top main tower platform as well as the "kartoffelraum" platform.
For sure the main platform midship were the cranes and the airplane catapult was fitted, as Tirpitz was larger and going till the hull side, Bismarck was shorter.
Main cranes were differently positioned since the beginning as on Bismarck the crane's were disturbing one of the 105 mm twin A/A gun freedom to rotate and fire.
Than you can notice some difference on the aft platform too.
Bismarck stairs to go from main deck ( oberdeck ) to the higher deck ( aufbaudeck ) were only 2 aside C turret barbette.
Tirpitz had 3, 2 like Bismarck, one more on the starboard side, and that will change your platform as well a little bit.
Go up one level deck and you will have the 2 stairs on different positions between Bismarck and Tirpitz, that will need a different platform too.
Go up one level deck more, if you make Tirpitz 1941 you do not have the added 2 vierlings platforms aft under the rangefinder, those were added on May 1942 in Faettenfjord ( Trondheim - Norway ).
Than the funnel platforms are different, especially on the side between the funnel and the main tower.
But please consider that the 2 ships were made by different companies, B&V and KM Werft so you will find a lot of other differences on every platform.
Every A/A flak platform will have a different shape, the main tower platforms will have different shapes and maybe dimensions too.
I am sorry to disappoint you, but the majority of those differences were there since the beginning
.
It just depend on how deep you want to go with details, till you reach your acceptable level compromize.
Just look at this guy for example :
http://www.forum.marinearchiv.de/viewto ... sc&start=0
To make a good model of Tirpitz 1941 look, you will need them both.
I saw for example FineArtModels made a lot of attention on those details, given the 1/200 scale of course, so you can use them as reference for a good level model on 1 /350.
But of course you can always count on your personal .. 'expert' ... for any question you have.
I am here to help and have fun .
Ciao Antonio
Many thanks for the ' expert ' definition
OK, I see you already got correctly the top main tower platform as well as the "kartoffelraum" platform.
For sure the main platform midship were the cranes and the airplane catapult was fitted, as Tirpitz was larger and going till the hull side, Bismarck was shorter.
Main cranes were differently positioned since the beginning as on Bismarck the crane's were disturbing one of the 105 mm twin A/A gun freedom to rotate and fire.
Than you can notice some difference on the aft platform too.
Bismarck stairs to go from main deck ( oberdeck ) to the higher deck ( aufbaudeck ) were only 2 aside C turret barbette.
Tirpitz had 3, 2 like Bismarck, one more on the starboard side, and that will change your platform as well a little bit.
Go up one level deck and you will have the 2 stairs on different positions between Bismarck and Tirpitz, that will need a different platform too.
Go up one level deck more, if you make Tirpitz 1941 you do not have the added 2 vierlings platforms aft under the rangefinder, those were added on May 1942 in Faettenfjord ( Trondheim - Norway ).
Than the funnel platforms are different, especially on the side between the funnel and the main tower.
But please consider that the 2 ships were made by different companies, B&V and KM Werft so you will find a lot of other differences on every platform.
Every A/A flak platform will have a different shape, the main tower platforms will have different shapes and maybe dimensions too.
I am sorry to disappoint you, but the majority of those differences were there since the beginning
.It just depend on how deep you want to go with details, till you reach your acceptable level compromize.
Just look at this guy for example
: http://www.forum.marinearchiv.de/viewto ... sc&start=0
To make a good model of Tirpitz 1941 look, you will need them both.
I saw for example FineArtModels made a lot of attention on those details, given the 1/200 scale of course, so you can use them as reference for a good level model on 1 /350.
But of course you can always count on your personal .. 'expert' ... for any question you have.
I am here to help and have fun
.Ciao Antonio