Bob, Is this Chuck's Malaya you've bought? From the photos I saw it'd been converted to look like HMS Warspite, with a tower bridge that Malaya didn't have. I don't know if the forward pair of 6" casemates was removed and the forecastle deck widened accordingly, or if the furthest aft pair of casemates was removed to match Warspite's secondary armament. Check with Curt - he's got the Warspite I converted from one of Ralph's standard QE hull's and I think he's seen Chuck's QE Class model. It might need a renaming! Bob
The old Malaya has been renamed the Valiant by its new captain. As for the casements if it does not affect game play what does it matter what a captain names a ship.
As I understand it, Valiant had 14 6-inch guns during the Great War, presumably in casemates (I'll read more on it), so I'll count them out next time I work on her. Looking at a photo of her from the late inter-war period, I count 6 on the port side; was there a seventh added, or removed, or placed somewhere else altogether? Another possibility is that the photo was taken after the change of secondaries to 20 4.5-inch guns (dual-mount). But if that were the case, would it not be 5x2 guns per side?
Hi Chris, It makes sense to have the name of a model match the historical configuration of the ship represented. The identity of a ship, even within the same class, determines what superstructure it should have to be a 'legal' combat model. The MWC, IRCWCC and Washington Treaty clubs all require superstructure components of 1 cubic inch or larger to be present and by WWII the QE Class ships had very different superstructures. The number of casemates does affect game play, by determining how much extra impenetrable area a model can have. There are rules to that effect in all 3 small gun RCNC clubs. A model can't have more casemates than the real ship had (and shouldn't have less either). When I built HMS Warspite in it's post-1937 configuration 4 of the original 12 casemates had to be removed and the forecastle deck widened. Warspite would have been illegal for use at the 2003 IRCWCC NATS and in our Nova Scotian IRCWCC sanctioned events if I hadn't removed them because the model would have had too much impenetrable area (ie, the casemates the ship no longer had after reconstruction). The QE Class is one of the more extreme examples of how different ships in a single class could be. Prior to 1937 all five ships were almost identical (for RCNC purposes), and Ralph Coles' hull is suitable for all of them. Then Warspite gets rebuilt, losing 4 casemates and getting a modern and much larger superstructure. Next, QE and Valiant got even more extreme rebuilds, losing all 12 casemates and getting new superstructures somwhat similar to Warspite's but different in detail and volume (especially the hangar area). After those ships are rebuilt Ralph's QE hull is only suitable for Malaya and Barham. Both retained the old fashioned multi-level open bridge platforms and trunked funnels of the late 1920s-1930s, but Malaya got a hangar similar to Warspite's and Barham didn't. By WWII all the QE Class ships except QE and Valiant were different in appearance, with 12, 8 or 0 casemate guns and 4 very different superstructures. Bob
Bayruun, My reference books indicate the QEs were supposed to have 14 csaemate guns, 6 pairs forward and one pair aft. I believe only the Qe got the aft pair, which proved unworkable in a seaway and was removed. During the 1920s-1930s all ships in the class had 12 casemates guns (up to the point that Warspite and then QE and Valiant were reconstructed). How many casemates does your hull have? I know it started off in Tom Cromwell's hands years ago and it was Tom who named it Malaya. He'd planned to build it as in WWII with the old bridge and the new hangars, which is a very interesting appearance. If the hull has 12 casemates why not follow that original plan and build a superstructure to match the name and casemate number? On the other hand it doesn't matter what you call the model unless you plan to compete in an offical event sanctioned by the IRCWCC, MWC or Washington Treaty clubs. (Those events are worth attending!) If you decide to build an accurate Malaya I can assist with detailed superstructure plans and advice. If you attended the Sept. battle in Fredericton you probably saw the HMS Warspite I built (operated by Curt). There are few better combat models than a QE. So few that I'm planning a new hull mold for the reconstructed QE and Valiant. Bob
Bob as I have read the rules it only states a semi accurate repersentation not completely accurate, it is after all a semi scale hobby. I don't think anyone would disallow a ship from being used a nats or any other event because the superstructure does not exactly match that of a ship. As it stands now my tirpitz superstrcuture is not right because it is missing the torpedo tubes and the wings that cover them, also the large box that is attacherd to the rear of the bridge tower is also missing. There were several differences between bismarck and tirpitz and nobody said that tirpitz could not compete at canats this year. Just my thoughts on the subject.
True Chris. Most RCNC models are semi-scale but for some reason the clubs have that rule about including superstructure elements larger than 1 cubic inch. Maybe the original idea was to encourage models to have more accurate appearances so competitors could easily distinguish friend from foe. (Those Texan RCNC battles of the early 90s - see Swampworks tapes - were very large.) Maybe the hobby's founders can give us some input. We've never been that picky about superstructure accuracy or missing bits (especially turrets) in our Maritime battles. Casemate number is different issue due to effect on impenetrable hull area. No one liked my SNS Espana's limited impenetrable area due to 10 casemates on a short hull. They would have been very unhappy if it had a few extra casemates! If Bob's hull has more casemates than the number carried by the QE Class ship he decides to build at a particular point in its career it's easy to cut off the extra ones and reglass the hull. It took only a few hours to convert my Warspite hull from 12 to 8 casemates. It seems the model is going to be rebuilt so it would be a good time to do any such mods. Bob
Bob there are only 4 casements per side so I don't think the hull needs to be changed. Curt could you call the house I have a couple of questions for you.
OK, If there are 4 casemates per side it's been converted to Warspite's unique appearance after reconstruction. Warspite was the only ship in the QE Class with 4 x 6" guns. I have the 'Anatomy of the Ship' book used to build my version of Warspite. It's the best source of Warspite plans and info and is relatively cheap from Amazon.ca. If Bob builds a Warspite it wouldn't be the first time NABS saw two models named Warspite in action. Marty Hayes and mine teamed up several times for Cannats and were usually the last Allied ships afloat. Marty's was the mid-1930s version with an unmodified COles' hull so it was easy to tell them apart. Bob
Hm, I'll see what I can do about that. The Warspite is much too popular a ship for my tastes; I prefer the fringe ships, the ones that, say, get torpedoed and half-sink in the Mediterranean, then are kept half-afloat for propaganda purposes. I seriously doubt I will ever build a ship most people have heard of. By the way, how would I add casemates, in this case?
bayruun, Adding casemates to a fiberglass hull is far more difficult than removing them. In this case you'd also have to narrow the forecastle deck by about 1.5"-2". That's because the forward pair of casemates were removed and the forecastle on Warspite was widened to occupy the space where they'd been. Adding them again also requires the forward embrasures to be widened and new 'walls' made from them to the deck. Given the time and degree of difficulty involved in reconstructing the missing casemates and remaking the forecastle deck and forward embrasures I recommend ordering a fresh QE hull from Ralph Coles and selling this one (if you already have it) to someone who wants a Warspite. I'm an experienced mold and hull maker with the ability to modify fiberglass hulls, but in your situation I'd conclude it was better use of my time to buy a new hull instead of trying to restore that one to it's original configuration. Bob
Hey Bayruun you could build her to her post refit look with no casements I have several pics of her with no casements and she then had 12 4.5" dual purpose guns. This would be easier to do than trying to put additional casements in.
Good idea Chris. The only tricky bit would be reshaping the bow area to get the full width forecastle deck and a good flare to the bows. It could be done by cutting off the remaining casemates and embrasures, then CA gluing 1/32" balsa to the outer side of the hull to give the desired shape. The new hull section would be laid up on the balsa which would be sanded away when the hull has cured. There's an excellent Profile Morskie booklet on the QE with lots of scale drawings. QE was almost identical to Valiant. Bob
