Hello Jan,
Having avidly followed and admired your Repulse build I am looking forward to following this one too.

Also, I would be very interested to hear your comments on the kit Vs WEM funnels.

Having examined the subject, I cannot discern exactly what WEM were trying to 'correct', with their set, since the kit funnels do not look any different to me.

There was a long discussion over on model warships about this when the Belfast kit was initially released, and no one reached any meaningful conclusion. The kit reviewer and site owner on MWS just blankly stated that the kit funnels were wrong without saying why nor how they actually differ.

Looking forward to this one.

Dave, I'll throw my hat in ring if I may regarding the funnels, firstly I don't have the WEM set however I do have the Flyhawk set in the post. Flyhawk also replace the funnels with resin items in their set so WEM are not alone however I have checked the 'Anatomy of the Ship' book on the Belfast and the drawings in that book indicate that the funnels should be the same size and very similar in shape. The difference being that the aft funnel is rounded on its aft edge while the fore funnel is sharp, other than that they are both the same size/shape and height from the deck.

The shape and size is were the kit aft funnel fails, once the Flyhawk set arrives I'll compare it against the kit parts and the drawings.

Hello Littorio,

If I remember correctly, Flyhawk merely copied the kit's funnels and they do not differ from the kit's original funnels at all.

This, and the asking price for Flyhawk products, has put many people off from buying the set.

I went through my copy of the AOTS Belfast and came to the same conclusion as yourself. The drawing/plan shows the funnels as being identical. I also looked ta my copy of Raven & Robert's 'British Cruisers of WW2' but could not discern any further information.

I have noted that on some online builds, people have used one kit funnel and one resin replacement to get the identical funnel look.

I have the WEM resin set for mine, and I reckon I might just use one kit item and one resin item to achieve the same.

The other problem with the resin funnel set from either WEM or Flyhawk, is that the funnel tops are not hollow like the kit ones are, which makes fitting any PE a little awkward without drastic surgery.

All, thank you very much for your interest in the build and as well in the particular issues of the stacks, thats really appreciated.

I am very sorry that real life keeps me away from the shipyard for the next days since this topic becomes more and more interesting for myself as well.

Just looking at the WEM and the kit's parts, there are no huge differences to be seen, but during next work session I will make a comparison of both and provide you with pictures and measurements, so we should see! Meanwhile, happy to carry on with the discussion

Cheers

Jan

double post removed...sorry...

For myself I'm just happy to see this kit being built. As to the funnels if its got two of them and is flying the white ensign I'm happy. Looking good so far.

Okay, funnel-business

I will not manage an update this week, but I could not resist to investigate about the funnels, after the discussion sparked here last week.

So here they are, left Trumpy, right WEM:





I have to admit, this is less straight-forward than I thought. I started convinced that the kit's parts are wrong in one way or another and WEM fixed it. Bottom line up front - this is not the case.

You can see that the main difference appears to be with the forward funnel, while the aft funnels look pretty much alike. And, if you fit them to the fold-out cover plan from the Anatomy book, all seems clear: WEM ist right.

WEM:



Trumpy, see the misfit forward:



The main difference, however is the diameter of the funnels, for both of them. The WEM ones are sleeker and look more modern - and I would say, there's the key! The fold out plan shows Belfast as in her last shape 1962 - after extended refit. Which apparently included the funnels.

Fitting the funnels to the top down view on page 37:



This is as in 1942 - and the Trumpy funnels fit better.
Other sketches from 1942 vs. 1962 lead me to the conclusion: the WEM funnels are correct for the post WW2 Belfast, I can not determine when exactly the funnels were changed, the kit's funnels are correct for 1942 and WW2.

So - change of mind - I will use the kit's parts for my HMS Belfast!


I hope that clarified some questions - happy to discuss!

Cheers,
Jan

Thank you Jan, that sort of clears things up a bit just a shame Trumpeter modelled the Korean war compass platform to go with WWII funnels.

Over the weekend I'll do a similar side by side of the Flyhawk funnels with the kit ones like you have so we may have the final answer. I know WEM released a corrected compass platform which is now very hard to get but I'll also check the Flyhawk metal replacement while I'm at it.

I have had a dig through my references,

Looking at the drawings I have, ATOS, the forward funnel is over the join in page, doesn't look as deep certainly, but couldn't take any measurements.

Took this from Raven & Roberts, the dividers are the depth of the fwd funnel marked against the after funnel.



After funnel is certainly marginally deeper.

And this from Freidman's British Cruisers Two World Wars and after"



Again the after funnel looks marginally deeper.

I looks to me the changes to the funnels were made during the 1956-59 refit.

Will be interested to see the comparison with the Flyhawk funnels and bridge. The kit bridge would be difficult to live with for a 1943 model.

Looking forward to seeing some more progress Jan.

Cheers.

Si

Thank you very much Luciano and Si!!

Si, that's pretty much along the lines of what I could find out - and well, in the Anatomy book, almost all drawings have the forward funnel right over the join in the page, that does not make it any easier.

Luciano, would be very interested in the results of your comparison with the Flyhawk funnels - if you like, you are more than welcome to post them here, as well!!

And again agree with you both, the compass platform is a bigger issue - luckily I do have the WEM replacement, and that looks spot on for 1942

Who ever has the Anatomy book, look page 73 - the deck plan view - this represents the shape of the diameter, don't know who to phrase it exactly - of the WEM funnels. There is a bigger difference from that perspective than just from the side profile.

So for now it stays - Trumpy has it right for 1942 - looking forward to the Flyhawk results!

Cheers,

Jan

Hi Jan,

Just dug that book off the shelf, looking at page 73, I think I was wrong. The funnels look different both in plan and elevation to the 1942 and 1962 fits.

This leads to two thoughts, either one or both funnel casings were changed in the 1944-45 refit and the 1956-59 refit, or there is inconsistency in the drawings.

Certainly from studying the photographs in all three books, the forward funnel does look slightly smaller depth up to 1944, and I would reckon both funnels are pretty much identical now.

The more digging I do the less sure I am, but for a 1942-3 fit I would be tempted to go with the kit funnels and either replace or backdate the bridge.

Si

Seems to be a tempest in a teapot! The kit funnels have some raised line detail that is absent on the WEM ones. Is buying replacement funnels really worth it when the difference has to be measured with instruments and (possibly??) correct drawings?

This funnel malarky isn't easy to fathom is it!

I'm still undecided as to how to proceed with mine.

The only other Belfast kit I know of is the old Airfix 1/600 kit.

Airfix's Belfast is generally regarded as being quite accurate for it's time, and it looks like their Belfast kit's funnels are identical.

Can anyone furnish any further provenance that Belfast's funnels have actually been modified during any of her refits?

I have never seen any references to this.

On the subject of the kit bridge Vs the WEM modified bridge - is there not a PE strip included in the Trumpeter kit, and would this not render a 1942 kit bridge? It also appears that the kit is much closer to how she was in 1943 rather than 1942, especially when it comes to some of the AA armament mods and when the Walrus was removed.

Just to add:

I have read somewhere that Sovereign Hobbies, the new Colourcoats range owner, is talking with Toms Modelworks about an arrangement which may see the WEM PE & Resin ranges become available again in the UK.

I suppose it makes sense for Toms to become a US Colourcoats distributor in return.

My guess would be that the majority of the former WEM RN-related products were sold mainly into the UK market, so it would be great if we once more had a one-stop shop here in the UK for both the RN PE sets and their associated Colourcosts colours.

Hi Biggles,

Not tempest in teapot, I wouldn't even call it a slight swell in a saucer, just an interested debate and sharing of information, we all have the kit, and it is nice to pool information, do doubt we will come to our own solutions.

My interpretation of the photos, pre 1944-5 refit, the fwd funnel looks shallower than the after one. Now, having seen and been over the old girl quite a few times the two funnels appear identical.

Anyway, these discussions are fun and we all learn from them.

Cheers.

Si

Folks, I rather suggest that we may never reach the bottom of the Belfast funnels mystery, but as Simon has said, it's been very enlightening - not to mention fun, getting to where we are now.

The Trumpeter 1/350 Belfast kit is the only 1/350 RN WW2 cruiser kit currently available, and it would be sad (although I suspect it) if, as a consequence of a bad reception and poor sales, we never see another RN cruiser subject like this one done again by a major kit manufacturer.

I would love to see the sales figures for each Trumpeter ship kit, because I rather suspect that the reason we have never seen a 1/350 HMS Renown Battle cruiser kit may well be because of poor sales of the Repulse kit. This is sad if true, because I'm pretty sure that their Hood kit sold in shedloads.

Anyhow, enough of idle musings on my part.

Si,

I could not agree more, thanks for that, I just think it is highly interesting to share findings here and it's fun! So I appreciate the discussion here as I, and we all who are interested in the subject, can learn and get some ideas for future or current builds.
Being some 400km away from me workbench over the weekend I can't contribute to the issue of the bridge, - yes there is some PE added in the kit but it still looks more like a later fit, the WEM replacement looks more like the earlier fit. I'll do a quick comparison on that, too, once I'm back in a few days.
And finally-I dearly hope that someone will bring out more cruiser kits, and perhaps even a Renown...that would be just great!!
Cheers,
Jan

OK guys got out all the bits and took some comparison shots, just bare in mind that the drawings are 1/400.

OK firstly the Flyhawk compass platform which is cast metal, followed by the kit part the Flyhawk and the drawing for 1942. The Flyhawk set also has some pe to go round the edge.



Trumpeter do not have any strakes on the edges of the platform and just use a pe mesh to represent it.

Next the funnels.
cream is the resin Flyhawk, grey the kit. they are almost the same however the resin part has that grove around the base just where the angled part meets the upright while the kit part does not. As you can see trying to compare the forward funnel with the drawings in my book is impossible.


Now someone said the kit funnels are hollow, well yes until you add the funnel caps and here is were the Flyhawk forward funnel and the kit are different.

and for those that want a hollow funnel good luck building this lot. Anyone notice the door at the bottom aft of the funnel!


Just one last photo, you can see that all of the manufactures have missed something on the funnels! The vent pipes. One on the forward and three on the aft, they all come up on the port side of the centre line.


Does anyone have the WEM compass platform to compare?

Welcome Jan,

I am all for discussions like this.

Interesting shots of the flyhawk parts, certainly from the below picture from AOTS it looks better in section than the kit parts.



I reckon their bridge is better too, looks the correct shape for 1942-44 period, and there is some wind deflector detail.

Noted this on P360 of Raven& Roberts, note the two prominent pipes atop the after funnel, presume, along with the steam pipes they do not form part of any kit / update. A bit more scratchbuilding fun then.



Looking forward to more updates when you are back at your bench Jan

Cheers,

Si

Thank you all for the enlightening discussion and some highly interesting pics!

Si, the funnels on the picture from your book look very much like the ones from the kit, so that's pretty much the decision to stick with the kit's funnels for the 42/43 fit of HMS Belfast. - but one question, is there more than one 'Raven and Roberts' reference book out there?? I was only aware on the one about battleships, but that has no Belfast pic on page 360 - is there a Raven and Roberts on cruisers?? Could you point me in the right direction there, definitely something I would try to get for my personal references library...

Luciano, thank you very much for showing the funnels and bridge of the flyhawk kit!! Another very interesting perspective!

And here's the WEM bridge/compass platform, I was fortunate enough to get one before they went out of business...







So to me it clearly looks like WEM got a pretty good 1942-fit bridge, that I will be using.

But now finally a little progress on the Belfast - not really much I have to admit, and on top this will be my last update before I have to take a major break. More later.

Installing shafts and rudder:







The fit is again pretty good, (so much better than with good Repulse...) there will just be some surfacer needed, no major putty work...









Fitting and aligning was really good. Now a little bit of destructive work - cutting the shafts...



Since I want the shafts painted in metal color and not hull red, I have not come up with a better idea than cutting them after all is properly aligned and painting everything individually. I did that for the Repulse as well and I was quite happy with the results.

But for now it's time to say good by here on this build log until July. I am in the 'very unfortunate' situation to 'have' to attend a professional development course (or whatever you want to call those things) that takes me almost to the other side of the globe. As you can certainly imagine, for me as a German it is very hard to spend a four weeks long course in Monterey/CA, and add a few days of leave before it starts and two weeks after ist finishes. Well, that will keep me away from the workbench for some seven to eight weeks, but I would think, a nice chilled bottle of Chardonnay from Sonoma or Napa, watching the sun set over the pacific , will help me to survive somehow

For now, thanks for looking and thanks for your patience work on HMS Belfast will continue in July and I am looking forward very much to the start of the cruisers campaign in August!!

I will certainly be logging in here sometimes, but not as frequently as I used to - the perspective of prowling the pacific coast is just a litte more attractive than sitting at a desk behind a computer...

Cheers ,

Jan

Hi Jan,

Yes there is a Raven & Roberts "British Cruisers of WW2".

The WEM Bridge does look a great improvement over the kit bridge, as for the funnels, your call, as long as you are happy with the result, it does look a very close call which way to jump.

Nice progress on the build.

Have fun in Monterey, can't be all bad.

Cheers.

Si

Looking great Jan! he new bridge looks to be far better! Nice job on the screws too! I have been know to just replace the shafts with brass rod and either leave bright for contrast ...even if it's not right or tarnish. Think you have things well in hand with the painting of what you have!!

Enjoy some of our summer month prowling the coast!! Never easy to be away from the homestead or the bench. Plastic always waits though!!

Great progress so far Jan!

I can not say that I do not envy you, your time in Sunny California, mate! Enjoy!

It will be hard, I know, to be away from home for so long, but I am sure the time will fly by

Have a few on me mate, look forward to hear your stories when you get back
Russ

Jan, thanks for sharing the image of the WEM compass platform which looks very much like the Flyhawk one except the WEM one has the mounting holes in it. The subject of the screws and shafts is not one I've looked at as you have but now I've seen you do it I may give it a go.

Hope you enjoy your time in the US, we'll be waiting for your return.

I have to say, looking at the pic Jan posted of the kit and WEM compass platform parts, that if you can live without the wind deflector moulding, cutting the 'ears' off the kit part and plating over the gaps would help getting a 'mid war' look.

Tom