Allure of a Battleship Loser ?

I will pipe in again to consider those later comments, (the last couple of posts)I have thought about that too .What would we build if not armor , warships and planes.Well , I have converted liners to carriers and I have converted the BISMARK and some others to liners .They don,t look all that weird either .I was taught in school to look at the LOGICAL PROGRESSION OF DESIGN and I have seen it more often or not in warplanes ,ships , and armor. Sure history plays a great part in this  .After all how many folks are taught about the EDMUND FITZGERALD or NORMANDIE in school anymore ? The IOWAS were still seen on T.V. during DESERT STORM surrounded by the sheer frightening light of their weapons when they supported the land forces , so there you have it . Does a liner produce that kind of powerful, and yes destructive power of the BATTLESHIP in pictures? NO ! Besides the large civilian carrying ships of today hold neither beauty or panache , they are boat shaped barges with a mall , hotel and casino and theater contained within . Would they ever outlast the kind of seas the real ships did ? NO WAY !!     tankerbuilder

f8sader

Wouldn't it be interesting if wars ended eons ago and we scale modelers were left to model things like farm equipment and commercial ships?

“I wish everyone was peaceful. Then I could take over the planet with a butter knife”—Dogbert

—Or a handy carrier battle group!

I will apologize at the start for bending the end of this thread.   That said, I think your question applies to all military scale modeling.  The design and use of all war making/military equipment is in itself a losing proposition.  (I'll stop the lecture there).  Wouldn't it be interesting if wars ended eons ago and we scale modelers were left to model things like farm equipment and commercial ships?

It is the history that draws me to scale modeling along with the gift my Dad gave me for appreciating the lines of mechanical designs.  Example: the Tiger 1 tank design has a certain look that I can further study by holding it in my hands.  There are none available at local museums.  This is the same with any military ship, plane, etc.  You can appreciate the design while building a model as well as the history.  The younger generation can learn by asking questions about the stuff we build and get some history at the same time.  (If we can interupt their GaGa and video games!)

Shipbuilderjake

I'm probably going to be opening up "Pandora's Box", but I've never understood spending a good chunk of change on ships like HMS Hood, Bismark, Tirpitz, IJN Yamato and such ? Hood was sunk in less than 20min, Bismark was crippled by a WWI relic, Tirpitz sat in a fjord, Yamato was the only one that went out fighting after sitting around in Tokyo Bay for most of the war. I've just never understood the allure of building one of these kits. Perhaps my youth prevents me from understanding the true greatness of those ships ? What is it that gets everyone going on these kits ? The guns ? The size ? The armor ? Just looking for some better insight ?

You raise an interesting point.  I am building a 1/200 model of Titanic and Arizona in the same scale.  Both were famous for sinking as was Bismark and PT-109 and Hood.  These are just some of the ships that became famous for dying.  You are correct but as was also said, if you only built winners, you would narrow the selection considerably.  Even the Iowa class of BBs would be considered losers by some in that they were obsolete when they were built thanks to Pearl Harbor which forced the hand of the US Navy to go with Carriers as the front line ship as Billy Mitchell predicted when he sunk the Ostfriesland.  But losers or not, their beauty and power are unmistakable and that is why I think they are so popular.  It could be argued that their sinking brought the historian's attention and their beauty kept his attention.

When Battleships gathered together, the tendency was to get slaughtered like pigs.

Tsushima, Pearl Harbor, Taranto, Leyte.

Sort of a (Scottish play that cannot be named) deal.

MAJ Mike

One of my ex-students had a grandfather on the USS Maryland at Pearl Harbor.  I could that as a reason for building one.

My favorite class of US BB's.

One of my ex-students had a grandfather on the USS Maryland at Pearl Harbor.  I could that as a reason for building one.

The last ship I built was a scratch-built ship-in-a-bottle (if anyone needs an empirical definition of “masochist”, build one). It was a submerged submarine.

Maybe you have answered all your questions. Maybe it's everything you mentioned about these ships. The mere fact that they were all part of history attracts us modellers to them. Practically all the WWII ships have in one way or another been part of of one's life. I come across modellers looking for an unheard of ship they want to build because their grandfather served in it. Maybe thier father died duirng a sea battle or have parts of the ships that sunk the Bismark. I built ships because I can identify with them as part of history. Maybe your neighbor's father served on the USS Hornet and mentioned them while telling stories about the great war. Maybe it's one of them. Maybe it's all of them. 

I have read this thread with interest. There has been much said in a positive note . I must add this though . If you build a model of ,sayt he BISMARK, what,s the problem? A whole nation shuddered to think what havoc she might stir up if she got loose for long . The sheer firepower of these vessels coupled with , in some cases sheer beauty of design for the type cannot be debated . Take liners , sure there are way more models of TITANIC and NONE of her successful sisters OR the ANDREA DORIA and the NORMANDIE (which by the way was deemed the most beautiful liner EVER built !!) That in the forties ! You build per your interest of , ONE , the design . TWO , the sheer firepower. THREE the history and FOUR because this is what you like to do , plain and simple . Enjoy whatever you wish to build , that is why it is called the "HOBBY"of ,model ship building .         tankerbuilder 

"Its a wonder any of us still live."

Yep - MY favorite holiday, the one I saved up for and looked forward to, wasn't Christmas, no siree, not by a long shot. It was the Fourth of July!

tigerman

 

 

Or lighter-fluid..........

Gasoline from a Windex bottle at the USS North Carolina.  Its a wonder any of us still live.

bondoman

And why the IJN made a fatal mistake targeting them.

They didn't really target them. At Pearl they wanted the carriers AND the battleships. The same was true; they wanted to strike the carriers first, but warships overall. So instead of targeting supply lines the way we did, they focused on the warships, including both carriers and battleships.

Their fatal mistake was in taking on an enemy who could rapidly out-produce and out-equip them.

bondoman

Manstein's revenge:

 

bondoman:

 

It's an interesting question, but I would put it in the realm of the question of why mass cavalry charges are no longer effective, and therefore, why modelers recreate Picton, the Old Guard or the Scots Greys at Waterloo.

 

 

 

...haven't seen any of those modeled in a loooooong while...

 

 

Because you don't go to the same Scottish bars as I do. There's a whole sub culture of folks who collect and wargame with Airfix 1/72 rubber men. Point taken however. Maybe it's that part of our culture that likes watching car wrecks.

Manstein's revenge

 

bondoman:

 

It's an interesting question, but I would put it in the realm of the question of why mass cavalry charges are no longer effective, and therefore, why modelers recreate Picton, the Old Guard or the Scots Greys at Waterloo.

 

 

 

...haven't seen any of those modeled in a loooooong while...

 

p38jl

 I think alot of it had to do with their PRE war presence..Before WW2.. the Battleship was THE ship of the fleet and the long reach of that countries diplomacy.. They were feared and dreaded... untill their demise..

During my pyro years, my friends and I would wage "naval battles" by loading up cheap model ships with M80s, cracked open roman candles, and gunpowder from various firecrackers, then shooting more roman candles at them. 

Good times.

tigerman

 

Mansteins revenge:

 

 

onyxman:

Models of any kind of ship that didn't explode or sink in some spectacular fashion don't seem to be popular. 

Could it have something to do with the allure of sending your newly built Bismark out onto the pond loaded with firecrackers?

Yes...

 

 

Or lighter-fluid..........

no one tested the " Nickel-Chrome"  armor belt ?

Mansteins revenge

 

onyxman:

 

Models of any kind of ship that didn't explode or sink in some spectacular fashion don't seem to be popular. 

Could it have something to do with the allure of sending your newly built Bismark out onto the pond loaded with firecrackers?

 

Yes...

 

Or lighter-fluid..........

onyxman

Models of any kind of ship that didn't explode or sink in some spectacular fashion don't seem to be popular. 

Could it have something to do with the allure of sending your newly built Bismark out onto the pond loaded with firecrackers?

Models of any kind of ship that didn't explode or sink in some spectacular fashion don't seem to be popular. 

Could it have something to do with the allure of sending your newly built Bismark out onto the pond loaded with firecrackers?

I like the way they look in my dispay case.I have built Yamato,Bismarck,POW,Modernized NJ,and Mikasa.Not for historical significance,simply because I like their look.

Thunder1,

Please don't forget that Aurora offered bizarre kits of HMS King George V, Yamato, Bismarck, and Graf Spee in the late 1950's and early 1960's.  These kits fetch a lot of money on ebay in spite of their frequently fictional detail.

I became interested in ship modeling in 1960 at the tender age of six years old, when I discovered the Pyro Table Top Navy and heard Johnny Horton sing "Sink the Bismarck!"  Then, I discovered my own family's tradition of naval service and I was hooked for life, serving 24 years and modeling the entire time.

I like the beauty of powerful ships such as Bismarck, Scharnhorst, Yamato, et al.  The apparent latent power shines through on examples of HMS Nelson and the American battleships.  I like them all and I wish the manufacturers would take notice that we need more examples of British and Italian ships.

My love of these ships led me to formally study naval and maritime history and to become a history teacher following my retirement from the USN.

Bill Morrison

The promise, pride and tragedy of these ships is a big draw, I agree.

Look, for a warship, going into battle, you have to look at it this way--someone has to lose.  So, ships like these are as popular, as those that won battles and survived.

To these battleships, I'd add our carriers lost at the beginning of the war, the Lexington and the Yorktown.  Note that there's not a lot of demand for a kit of the Wasp.  Her end is no less tragic, especially to those who served aboard her and to those who were lost, but she was relatively unremarkable in her brief career, so there's not a storied history to celebrate.

Isn't the Titanic another symbol of tragedy? I really think people are allured to dramatic events and tragedy, much like a moth to a lightbulb.

One more reason is that they all made the newspapers. The Hood was the symbol of the RN through the 20's & 30's. Her loss and the pursuit of the Bismarck by the entire Atlantic Fleet captured headlines around the world. Likewise the other ships were unsinkable monsters that "our boys" had to destroy or we would be doomed.  When model companies began making ship models in the 50's , those were the first kits they thought of designing because they would sell the best.

Jake

 The biggest reason for these ships popularity is the model manufactures desire to make a buck. I built a  model of the YAMATO in 1970 and was fascinated by the history of the ship, and it's design. Up to that point in time the only battleships in the model world was Revell's NEW JERSEY, MISSOURI, BISMARK, and ARIZONA. Airfix had a few Battleships released in the 1950-60's era and Pyro offered a fleet of "table top"  of WWII battleships. I'm sure I've missed a few BB kits here but there were no "large"Japanese kits availible in the US. My Yamato was a massive 33" long and was imported to this country by an American distributer. During this same time period the release of the Japanese "waterline" kits appeared and overnight American ship model builders  had a huge array of new, interesting, non American  ships to model. The foreign kit makers picked up on the line's  success and began to offer American, German and English 1:700 scale capital ships. Tamiya bumped up the playing field by  offering a beautiful model of the Yamato, Missouri and other BB's in 1:350 scale. As nothing suceeds like sucess, other kit makers jumped on the band wagon and big gun ships captured the attention of ship builders everywhere. It's true, ships with guns trump non armed ships both in the market place and at every model contest I've attended.  My only complaint is that people get all excited over the "new" release of(pick one) Bismark, Hood, Iowa class, Arizona, etc. How many different scales of the same ship model are going to be released while other "warships" are often over looked altogether?  Plus the manufacturers keep jacking up the price for a model of a ship that has been released (in different scales) before, it's dejar vu all over again.. My feeling is invest in some new tooling and offer some previously un released ship model. But the "bottom line" prevails and I'm sure we'll see more Yamatos, Bismarks, Hoods, etc. on the shelves of our local hobby shop. As long as builders "Ohh and Ahh" over these types of kits you can expect more of the same, the plastic kit makers play to the crowd, give 'em what they want. Oh boy, a new Fletcher class destroyer model( like I never built that  ship before in my life)....          

Definitely the size that makes Battleship appealing.... Yamato is such a favourite among ship modeller.

Manstein's revenge

Tirpitz...

Graf Spee, Lutzow