login   |    register
General Ship Modeling
Discuss modeling techniques, experiences, and ship modeling in general.
Hosted by Todd Michalak
New 1/350 kits from Trumpeter
warshipbuild
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: June 06, 2006
KitMaker: 220 posts
Armorama: 1 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 29, 2019 - 02:14 AM UTC
New 1/350 Bismarck, a new RN C class AA cruiser, more specifically Cairo class!

and a new Viribus Unitis in 1/350.

https://mobile.twitter.com/HobbylandOsaka/status/1177395424098832384
ghauser
Visit this Community
Colorado, United States
Joined: March 07, 2011
KitMaker: 158 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 29, 2019 - 02:18 AM UTC
They look cool, but I already have a Bismarck. Hopefully they will be released soon!!
Littorio
Visit this Community
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: September 15, 2004
KitMaker: 4,659 posts
Armorama: 492 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 29, 2019 - 05:31 AM UTC

Quoted Text

New 1/350 Bismarck, a new RN C class AA cruiser, more specifically Cairo class!

and a new Viribus Unitis in 1/350.

https://mobile.twitter.com/HobbylandOsaka/status/1177395424098832384



Not Cairo, they are in the Trumpeter catalogue as HMS Colombo and HMS Calcutta which are both C class light cruisers of the Carlisle sub-class, both completed 1919 then converted into AA cruisers, Calcutta in 1939 and Colombo in 1943.
Still I'll take both and as I don't have a Bismarck I'll take one of those as well depending how it stands up against the RoG offering.

Still waiting for HMS Kent though.
RedDuster
Visit this Community
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: March 01, 2010
KitMaker: 6,555 posts
Armorama: 248 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 29, 2019 - 05:52 AM UTC
Bismarck, not so much interested in, built the RoG kit, The Class in any form, Yes Please!!!. The Viribus Unitus is an unusual choise, but will have one, I have a soft sopt for ships of that era.

Cheers

Si
RussellE
#306
Visit this Community
Victoria, Australia
Joined: June 27, 2010
KitMaker: 3,271 posts
Armorama: 1 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 29, 2019 - 09:22 AM UTC
Sigh. Yet another Bismarck...

Nice to see some more RN cruisers though, and something quite unusual, an Austrian pre dreadnought!
SpurnWater71
#504
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: July 06, 2019
KitMaker: 76 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 29, 2019 - 11:25 AM UTC
The "C" class "A" cruisers will find their way into my fleet. I would have preferred that the pair be one as originally built and the one as the AA conversion being offered (Similar to Schweslig-Holstein '09 and '35). But will take both AAs with a smile.

The Austrian dreadnought will also make its way into my collection. A historic ship in that it was the second dreadnought to use a triple main gun turret design (after Dante Alighieri). Arguably her compact design was an engineering marvel in her date but perhaps too much sacrificed in the way of the hull protection. Also can't resist that Hausian blue, Rosa waterline, and green hull color scheme.

Like most everyone else I have a Bismarck already (RoG, not yet built), and would have preferred to see Trumpeter continue the cruiser trend or venture into WW1 dreadnoughts of the major powers. A Dido or an Atlanta would be at the top of my want list - it is curious that Trumpeter go "C" class instead of the much more widely known Dido or Atlanta

Kip
RussellE
#306
Visit this Community
Victoria, Australia
Joined: June 27, 2010
KitMaker: 3,271 posts
Armorama: 1 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 29, 2019 - 01:56 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Like most everyone else I have a Bismarck already (RoG, not yet built), and would have preferred to see Trumpeter continue the cruiser trend or venture into WW1 dreadnoughts of the major powers. A Dido or an Atlanta would be at the top of my want list - it is curious that Trumpeter go "C" class instead of the much more widely known Dido or Atlanta

Kip



Meanwhile we still are waiting for 1/350 Nelson and Rodney to materialize and aside from the Ark Royal (which looks like it's gone the way of the Dodo), RN flat tops are still as rare as rocking horse droppings
SpurnWater71
#504
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: July 06, 2019
KitMaker: 76 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 29, 2019 - 02:16 PM UTC
As well as the USS Pittsburgh and USS Baltimore. Isn't there also a Tashkent DD and a Langley AV in the Trumpeter catalog 1/350
"some day" section?
RussellE
#306
Visit this Community
Victoria, Australia
Joined: June 27, 2010
KitMaker: 3,271 posts
Armorama: 1 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 29, 2019 - 08:08 PM UTC

Quoted Text

As well as the USS Pittsburgh and USS Baltimore. Isn't there also a Tashkent DD and a Langley AV in the Trumpeter catalog 1/350
"some day" section?



Nice call Kip. Trumpeter should have the "someday" section in their catalogues for sure
Naseby
Visit this Community
Slovakia
Joined: October 15, 2010
KitMaker: 814 posts
Armorama: 243 posts
Posted: Monday, September 30, 2019 - 06:54 AM UTC

Quoted Text



Meanwhile we still are waiting for 1/350 Nelson and Rodney to materialize and aside from the Ark Royal (which looks like it's gone the way of the Dodo), RN flat tops are still as rare as rocking horse droppings

Well the Ark Royal from Merit is actualy a nice kit. Its by far the simplest (number of parts) and cheapest (basic PE in the box) full size ww2 Flattop in 1/350. The Viribus Unitis is actualy a logical choise. Austria-Hungary is far underrepresented in kits in comparison to its actual strenght in ww1.

EDIT : As per the collours of A-U ships, as with everything, there are more schools of thoughts...

P3170408

P9200344

P9200346

P9200342

P9200335
RussellE
#306
Visit this Community
Victoria, Australia
Joined: June 27, 2010
KitMaker: 3,271 posts
Armorama: 1 posts
Posted: Monday, September 30, 2019 - 09:26 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Well the Ark Royal from Merit is actualy a nice kit. Its by far the simplest (number of parts) and cheapest (basic PE in the box) full size ww2 Flattop in 1/350.



Quite right, however it looks like Merit have given up the game when it comes to being a kit manufacturer (check their website , all signs of Merit's own brand kits have disappeared) so it's anyone's guess as to where their toolings have gone, if they manage to avoid the scrap yard at all.

Now, that's one awesome (1/48?) model!
Naseby
Visit this Community
Slovakia
Joined: October 15, 2010
KitMaker: 814 posts
Armorama: 243 posts
Posted: Monday, September 30, 2019 - 10:18 AM UTC
Ah, ok didnt know that they stopped producing kits. However I dont think the molds were scrapped. That would be something that no company dealing with kits would do I think. Anyway I guess its a good thing I picked up the Ark and Enterprise as long as they were available.
warshipbuild
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: June 06, 2006
KitMaker: 220 posts
Armorama: 1 posts
Posted: Monday, September 30, 2019 - 10:54 AM UTC
Fear not - Merit don't actually make their own stuff - it's done ny Trumpeter. Ark was a Trumpeter kit but branded under the Merit badge. I got an Ark at a good price a couple of years ago and I'm sure there are still some about on ebay.

Tashkent sprue shots are up - I think on HLJ?

HMS Kent is not due until October as far as I know.
No idea what happened to the 1/350 NelRod kits.

I don't really know what to get next.
I have fallen into the trap before whereby I buy 2 or more kits of the same class only to find that they are pretty much identical. Examples would be the Trumpeter Tribals - I have all 3 yet there are no real differences between them.
Same with Exeter and York - I have Exeter so am not bothered about adding a York. Same again with the Counties. I have Cornwall so am not bothered about Kent.
Am thinking I might just add one kit from each class they release in future.
SpurnWater71
#504
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: July 06, 2019
KitMaker: 76 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Monday, September 30, 2019 - 01:04 PM UTC
Dave,

Exeter and York had very different appearances. Bridges, funnels, masts are among the most prominent differences.

As to the Tribals, I went and retrieved them from my stash to be sure but all three have difference as I suspected: masts, armament, and some structural differences. The PE is different in all three kits (a nice lattice foremast for the Huron) and Huron has a sprue G rather than the sprue F of the other two. Sprue E contains two different versions of the aft superstructure deck. E4 is unique to the Huron, E3 graces the other two. There's probably some other small details I might have missed.

Am by no means trying to be critical or corrective - please don't interpret these comments as such. Just trying to let everyone know that there is some interesting variations in these kits.

Kip
Littorio
Visit this Community
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: September 15, 2004
KitMaker: 4,659 posts
Armorama: 492 posts
Posted: Monday, September 30, 2019 - 01:32 PM UTC
Regarding the Tribals with a little bit of research and some scratch /AM parts there are loads of options for different fits, just don't forget to get rid of that 8 barrel pom-pom as no Tribal carried an 8 barrel mount they only carried quad pom-pom mounts.

For me I have Eskimo which I'm back dating for Narvik, another Eskimo to build HMAS Arunta or Warramunga and a HMCS Huron as herself.

The Counties I've left the Cornwall as I want Kent to complete the 4 Kent's of the 20th Century:
Combrig - Monmouth class armoured cruiser
Trumpeter - County class heavy cruiser
Atlantic - County class Guided missle destroyer
Trumpeter - Duke class Type 23 Frigate

Room prevents me buying both Nelson and Rodney so I'll settle for Rodney. Exeter and York both had interesting if short war service and are different from each other as pointed out by Kip plus the catapult was different on each of them, York having a rotating one also Yorks funnels and masts were racked while Exeter's were straight. Not checked if Trumpeter got that correct but have brought both, hmm need to check that when I get home from work in the morning.
SpurnWater71
#504
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: July 06, 2019
KitMaker: 76 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Monday, September 30, 2019 - 02:10 PM UTC
Luciano,

Some great adds on the "B" type Counties. As I recall, York's tall bridge structure was driven by the original plan to put catapults on her two forward main turrets, forcing the bridge to be at a high level. Turned out the catapults on the turrets was a bad idea and when the Exeter was built several years later, her bridge was lower and the catapults were after the funnels. Lesson in warship design learned.

But the best part of your post was your statement about we can make variants of kits with scratch building and after market parts. Nice post!

As I have the Exeter kit close at hand, I can confirm funnels are straight, pole masts with high top masts and top yards. The kit provides a sheet anchor - I'll have to research that as many ships did away with the sheet anchor to save weight so that more AA could be added.

Kip

RussellE
#306
Visit this Community
Victoria, Australia
Joined: June 27, 2010
KitMaker: 3,271 posts
Armorama: 1 posts
Posted: Monday, September 30, 2019 - 02:21 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Ah, ok didnt know that they stopped producing kits. However I dont think the molds were scrapped. That would be something that no company dealing with kits would do I think. Anyway I guess its a good thing I picked up the Ark and Enterprise as long as they were available.




Quoted Text

Fear not - Merit don't actually make their own stuff - it's done ny Trumpeter. Ark was a Trumpeter kit but branded under the Merit badge. I got an Ark at a good price a couple of years ago and I'm sure there are still some about on ebay.



Depends on who owns the molds and what financial obligations they have/had and whether receivers moved in to recover their debts...


Quoted Text

Regarding the Tribals with a little bit of research and some scratch /AM parts there are loads of options for different fits, just don't forget to get rid of that 8 barrel pom-pom as no Tribal carried an 8 barrel mount they only carried quad pom-pom mounts.

For me I have Eskimo which I'm back dating for Narvik, another Eskimo to build HMAS Arunta or Warramunga and a HMCS Huron as herself.

The Counties I've left the Cornwall as I want Kent to complete the 4 Kent's of the 20th Century:
Combrig - Monmouth class armoured cruiser
Trumpeter - County class heavy cruiser
Atlantic - County class Guided missle destroyer
Trumpeter - Duke class Type 23 Frigate

Room prevents me buying both Nelson and Rodney so I'll settle for Rodney. Exeter and York both had interesting if short war service and are different from each other as pointed out by Kip plus the catapult was different on each of them, York having a rotating one also Yorks funnels and masts were racked while Exeter's were straight. Not checked if Trumpeter got that correct but have brought both, hmm need to check that when I get home from work in the morning.



Any of the Tribal kits can be modified to represent any of the class at any particular time period if enough AM is thrown at them...

As for the Nelson Rodney kits, well the Trumpy catalogue lists Nelson as 1944 fit, but no mention of what fit for Rodney, but likely to be exactly the same kit
Littorio
Visit this Community
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: September 15, 2004
KitMaker: 4,659 posts
Armorama: 492 posts
Posted: Monday, September 30, 2019 - 02:36 PM UTC
Yes I have a little bit of help with the Tribals as I have the WEM pe set which has the different mast sets and radar for different fits, but a little bit of scratch and/or AM parts and your ready to go. Black Cat coming out with twin Lewis guns was a major help as pe ones don't look right.

Yep nice catch Kip, I read that the turrets were not strong enough to take the weight of the catapult and aircraft that's why they dropped the plan.
I've just got a huge pe and wooden deck set for Exeter most important part is the wooden deck covers the deck area around B turret that Trumpeter forgot to make as wood.

Anyway all that can wait as I need to get a serious start on USS Mackinac AVP-13 and start a build thread, although that normally spells the Death Knell of any of my builds. Just finished reading 'Eyes of the Fleet' all about the US navy seaplane tenders during WWII, great book!
ghauser
Visit this Community
Colorado, United States
Joined: March 07, 2011
KitMaker: 158 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Monday, September 30, 2019 - 03:31 PM UTC
So is there many differences between the Cornwall and the Kent, or is it the same kit with different camo?
Littorio
Visit this Community
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: September 15, 2004
KitMaker: 4,659 posts
Armorama: 492 posts
Posted: Monday, September 30, 2019 - 03:56 PM UTC

Quoted Text

So is there many differences between the Cornwall and the Kent, or is it the same kit with different camo?



Kent and Cornwall are the same sub-class of County class the only difference will be down to year/fit plus Kent didn't have a hanger just a catapult.

From Wiki:
The initial seven ships Berwick, Cornwall, Cumberland, Kent, and Suffolk, built for the Royal Navy, and Australia and Canberra for the Royal Australian Navy formed the Kent class. All were ordered in 1924 and commissioned in 1928. It was quickly found necessary to heighten the funnels by some 15 feet (4.6 m) to clear the flue gasses from the aft superstructure. The Australian ships, Australia and Canberra had them raised a further 3 feet (0.91 m). Between 1930 and 1933 the aircraft and catapult were added, as was a high-angle HACS director for the 4-inch guns. Kent received an additional pair of 4-inch guns in 1934, and she, Berwick and Cornwall each received a pair of QF 0.5-inch Vickers machine guns added abreast the fore funnel.

By the mid-1930s, the British Kents were due for modernisation. However, there was little surplus weight for the designers to work with while remaining within the Treaty requirements; they were between 150 and 250 tons under the treaty limits and it was estimated that a further 200-odd tons could be gained through various savings. A 6-foot-deep (1.8 m) armoured belt, 4.5-inch (110 mm) thick, was added amidships, extending down from the armoured deck to 1 foot below the waterline. Cumberland and Suffolk had the aft superstructure razed and replaced by a large hangar for two aircraft and a fixed athwartships catapult. A crane was fitted on either side of the after funnel, and the rear gunnery, navigation and control positions were relocated to the hangar roof. The single 2-pounder guns were removed, and quadruple mountings, Mark VII, were added on either side of the bridge. The 4-inch guns were relocated, and the rearmost pair were replaced by twin mountings Mark XIX for the QF 4-inch Mark XVI. To keep weight within acceptable margins, the hull was cut down by one deck aft of "Y" turret. Berwick and Cornwall were similarly converted, but with more weight in hand the hull was not cut down; all four 4-inch mounts were twins and the 2-pounder guns were octuple mounts. By 1939, the torpedo tubes had been removed in all four ships.

Kent had less weight available for improvements and therefore was not given such an extensive modernisation. While she received the 4-inch armour belt and the double 4-inch gun mounts like her sisters, she retained the rotating catapult and after superstructure, with an additional fire-control position mounted on a distinctive lattice structure aft. Her anti-aircraft armaments were improved as for her sisters, but the multiple 2-pounders and their directors were carried aft, by the lattice structure. The naval historian H. Trevor Lenton estimates that despite the best attempts, none of these ships stayed within the treaty limits; Kent's full load displacement was 14,197 tons, indicating a standard displacement of around 10,600 tons. Lenton expresses doubts whether the Admiralty ever informed the Government of these excesses, as with war imminent, "there were more pressing demands on their time"
blaster76
Visit this Community
Texas, United States
Joined: September 15, 2002
KitMaker: 8,985 posts
Armorama: 3,034 posts
Posted: Monday, September 30, 2019 - 05:17 PM UTC
Yes I see they are listing the 350 Nelson/Rodney and Baltimore/Pittsburg as new this year. Seems they have had the BB's as going to be released for what 5 years now? The CA's for 3. Sigh wasting our time with yet another Bismarck kit. I wont be holding my breath on seeing any of them this year. Keep hoping maybe they will quit placing so much emphasis on the 200 line. Those that do buy them pretty much limit due to size.
Naseby
Visit this Community
Slovakia
Joined: October 15, 2010
KitMaker: 814 posts
Armorama: 243 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 01, 2019 - 02:12 AM UTC
I for one hope they will continue with the 1/200 but with different subjects. I recently built the Pegasus class and its a little marwel. I wish they would do some DDs in 1/200.
RussellE
#306
Visit this Community
Victoria, Australia
Joined: June 27, 2010
KitMaker: 3,271 posts
Armorama: 1 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 01, 2019 - 09:28 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Yes I see they are listing the 350 Nelson/Rodney and Baltimore/Pittsburg as new this year. Seems they have had the BB's as going to be released for what 5 years now? The CA's for 3. Sigh wasting our time with yet another Bismarck kit. I wont be holding my breath on seeing any of them this year. Keep hoping maybe they will quit placing so much emphasis on the 200 line. Those that do buy them pretty much limit due to size.



As Kip mentioned, Trumpeter need a "Someday Section" for things like the Rodney/Nelson and Baltimore/Pittsburg
SpurnWater71
#504
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: July 06, 2019
KitMaker: 76 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 01, 2019 - 12:01 PM UTC

Quoted Text

I for one hope they will continue with the 1/200 but with different subjects. I recently built the Pegasus class and its a little marvel. I wish they would do some DDs in 1/200.



I have the Hobby Boss 1/200 Pegasus - a nice kit of a unique vessel. Were I not so far down the collecting road of 1/350 scale small ships (WWII DD and below, roughly)I would be more inclined to purchase any such future releases. Bring on the Loch, Bay, River, and Tacoma class frigates; the Black Swan sloops, DEs and the corvettes and others - all fairly sparsely represented in the 1/350 scale - and I *might* be tempted to go more 1/200. But, generally, the 1/200s coming too late for me.

In the end, it becomes a matter of space as well.

Kip
SpurnWater71
#504
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: July 06, 2019
KitMaker: 76 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 01, 2019 - 12:09 PM UTC

Quoted Text

As Kip mentioned, Trumpeter need a "Someday Section" for things like the Rodney/Nelson and Baltimore/Pittsburg



On a side note, Scalemates website announced the Trumpeter Langley and the Kent county class heavy cruiser in September but with a "Future" tag.