Bridlington & Wolds Scale Model Club Forum
Models => Modelling Projects => Topic started by: Pen-Pusher on February 12, 2016, 05:20:24 PM
-
After World War One, the Treaty of Versailles denied Germany the right to build any warship that had a displacement of more than 10,000 tons - effectively restricting Germany from building warships more powerful than the heavy cruisers of the time. This was a stipulation because of major British concerns about the potential of any German navy, such as had been building in the pre-war years, into a force that could conceivable challenge the Royal Navy's dominance of the high seas.
So in the Weimar period between the end of World War One and Hitler's seizure of power in 1933, Germany could not build any capital ships. Still, the remaining German naval leadership wanted to create a naval force that could help defend German interests abroad and keep Germany's North Sea and Baltic coasts secure from attack. As a result they set about designing the largest ships they could whilst ‘technically’ adhering to the 10,000 ton provision of the Versailles Treaty.
The resulting design became known as the ‘pocket battleship’ although the German Navy called the vessels Panzerschiffe, or "armored cruiser". Their main armament of six 11" guns and long range capability made them something much more than a heavy cruiser; but not sufficiently powerful to be considered a battle cruiser.
The advent of National Socialist control of the government in 1933 had the effect of expanding the size of the vessels so that they clearly defied the Versailles Treaty but not so much as to provoke a military response. Their displacement ballooned to up to 12,000 tons (the Deutschland may well have been closer to 14,000) and with their launchings in the early 1930's they were the primary ships of the line for the new Kriegsmarine - at least until the Scharnhorst class battlecruisers and Bismarck class battleships could come online.
They were and remain, unique vessels even at first glance. A vast amount of fuel, engine horsepower, and gunnery was packed into a hull that was as long as some older battleships yet as light as many contemporary cruisers. The Deutschland class pocket battleships looked more like battleships than cruisers, sporting large triple barrel turrets and a disproportionately tall superstructure relative to their size. Of course, these quirks design were meant to create tactical advantages in combat, not to adhere to any aesthetic of naval vessel design. The three sisters that comprised the class - Graf Spee, Admiral Scheer, and Deutschland (name was later changed to Lutzow) were meant to carry heavy guns far into the Atlantic where they could be used to break apart convoys bound for Britain.
The pocket battleships played an important role in the Second World War at sea - perhaps a disproportionately large role relative to their power and the cost of building and maintaining them. Soon after the outbreak of the conflict in 1939, Lutzow and Graf Spee were dispatched to the Atlantic to begin hunting the merchant vessels carrying vital supplies to sustain Britain during the war; and after surviving a British air attack that cost the RAF four bombers and did minor damage, the Scheer went through an overhaul to optimize her for combat in the Atlantic.
The Lutzow destroyed two merchant ships before being reassigned to patrol the Baltic Sea but the Graf Spee raided into the South Atlantic until December of 1939, sinking or capturing nine ships and tying up a disproportionately large portion of the Royal Navy which desperately tried to find and sink her. She was finally caught at sea by one heavy and two light cruisers operating in the South Atlantic and though she inflicted major damage on the heavy cruiser, was eventually blockaded in a neutral port in South America and scuttled to avoid capture.
The most successful of the three vessels was the Admiral Scheer, which sank nearly twenty merchant ships and escorts - seven out of a single convoy in 1940. She afterwards operated north out of Norway harassing convoys bound for Soviet Russia, and later even provided gunnery support for retreating German forces near the Baltic Coast.
The Graf Spee was scuttled after the Battle of the River Plate, for although she performed well and badly damaged a British heavy cruiser, when she put into the neutral port of Montevideo for repairs her captain, Langsdorff, believed that he would be overwhelmed by superior forces upon leaving harbour. The popular version of this story is In order to save the lives of his crewmen, he ordered the Graf Spee scuttled in the harbour.
Concerning the conduct of the Graf Spee during its months at sea while raiding British merchant shipping: no merchant sailor was killed on any of the nine ships that fell victim to the Graf Spee, and of those kept prisoner on the pocket battleship herself all reported that they were treated well by Captain Langsdorff and his crew. Only a single instance of human kindness amidst all the horror of that war, but one that should not be forgotten.
Admiral Scheer made it through the majority of the war intact, and operated from the Barents Sea north of the Soviet Union all the way into the Indian Ocean, ravaging British shipping along the way. One of the most successful of the surface raiders to put to sea, the Scheer ended the war in the Baltic, providing fire support to the embattled German troops surrounded in the Courland pocket and later participating as a repatriation ship evacuating German soldiers and civilians from East Prussia. In April 1945 a raid of hundreds of Allied bombers destroyed the vessel in port.
The Deutschland, renamed Lutzow, spent most of the war in the Baltic, and was scuttled in port before the advancing Soviet Army could capture her intact. Later raised by the Soviets and added to the Baltic Fleet, she was eventually scuttled in 1947.
‘Pocket Battleships’ were originally classed Panzerschiffe (Armored Cruiser) and later simply Heavy Cruiser. They were built to the same specification although their designs were individual: Thus:
610 ft long, 71 ft beam, 24 ft draught, up to 12,000 tons displacement (?)
8 diesel engines providing over 52,000 hp
28.5 knot top speed, approximately 9000 nautical miles range at 20 knots
Main armament six 11" (283mm) naval guns in two triple turrets
Secondary armament eight 5.9 inch (150mm) and six 105mm guns
Eight 37mm and ten 20mm anti-aircraft guns, eight torpedo tubes
One or two seaplanes for reconnaissance
The armour of the vessels was proven, by the Graf Spee at the Battle of the River Plate, to be capable of withstanding multiple six inch (150mm-155mm) shell impacts. However, eight inch (200mm-205mm) shells were able to penetrate Graf Spee's armour, causing critical damage to amongst other things, the vessel's vital water purification system.
For the modeler, the Graf Spee has always been the most accessible and prolific in a variety of scales. The Lutzow and Admiral Sheer were made by Heller to their infamous 1/400 scale but are nice models nonetheless. Aurora was the first company to produce the ‘Spee’ in 1958 and that kit at 1/600 remains one of the most accurate even today. 1/700 kits have appeared in various guises from (including) MPC, Revell (who also released a curious 1/560 kit), Matchbox, UPC, Academy, Italeri and Hasegawa. Airfix released a pretty good one in 1/600 (along with Ajax and Exeter) and more recently we have seen 1/350 issues from Trumpeter and Academy and a forthcoming 1/200 due from Trumpeter this year!
In the aftermarket there is a plethora of bits ‘n’ pieces for the ‘Spee’ in both 1/700 and 1/350 and I hope to encourage the ‘seamen’ amongst you to contribute your vast knowledge of these as we progress? But first let’s turn to the kits in detail! Coming soon: Aurora’s Graf Spee.
[attachment deleted by admin]
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
So, what was the Aurora 1/600 kit of the Graf Spee like to build. Remember, back in the late 50's and 60's this company produced a number of '130 cent kits - all with the same size box but with artwork that's never been bettered even today. The 'Spee' was released twice with two versions of the same painting and both (See photos) are now very collectable. Buildwise it was typical Aurora. There was a good deal of flash and fit (where it actually touched) could have been better. on the plus side, detail was good and the overall shape and dimensions were accurate. There were no printed flags or decals that I remember but the scheme adhered to in the instructions were in a pre-war all light grey finish. Aurora's Graf Spee was re-released a total of nine times and unfortunately the moulding suffered with each. If you compare the first with the last you realise how much deterioration actually took place. Still a great kit from the halcyon days of modelling.
Next up: Airfix
[attachment deleted by admin]
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Wow!!
-
At first glance one might be forgiven for thinking the original Airfix box art was 'lifted' straight from the Aurora rendering. Before discussing the kit itself, I'd like to direct you to this site which shows this prizewinning artwork in detail.
https://www.rubylane.com/item/802481-4823/Airfix78-Original-Artwork-Cibachrome-Print-German
[attachment deleted by admin]
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
The Airfix kit of Graf Spee was first released in 1971 and to put it mildly, it was a bit rough! However, it appears the company cleaned up the molds for subsequent re-releases of '73, '85, '93 and '97 and even today there is hardly any flash on the kit's 124 pieces. The only sinkhole to be found is on the roof of one of the 5.9 inch turrets. The detail on this kit is much better than some of the other Airfix 1/600 kits. The ship's boats actually look like boats! The launches have planking scribed into the decks and the whaleboats have seats and floors, not the usual solid plastic pieces found in other kits. MPC issued the 'cleaned up version' in 1980.
The instructions are the standard found in Airfix kits, clear and easy to follow. Like the Aurora issue, the Airfix kit doesn't come with any decals or a flag sheet. As customary, German ships had an armorial shield mounted either side of the prow and this is molded into the kit too. Markings for the scout planes would have been nice as this is one of the better (and to scale) inclusions (and the right aircraft too?). Building is a nice experience. There is some awkward fitting of propeller (screws) shafts and I personally think the instructions show these reversed by number? The props themselves are crisp and don't get lost under a blob of paint!
For those who 'detail-up' you can use Gold Medal Models 1/600 Bismarck/Tirpitz set (which can be usedwith all German ships in this scale) and both Toms Modelworks and White Ensign Models released sets for this kit in 1999 and a range of turned metal gun barrels are available which DO make a difference. (I'm sure there are more).
This to my mind is the best of all Airfix's 600th series with maybe the exception of the Ark Royal. The only model on display in the Greenwich Naval Museum depicting the 'Spee'.... is an Airfix one!! Cleverly/co-incidentally, the company issued HMS Exeter and Ajax as well? - but I digress. Next up, Revell's Graf Spee(s).
[attachment deleted by admin]
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
For those of you who remember the film 'Short Circuit' there are two memorable phrases that always stick; 'no disassemble' and 'cannot compute' - well, this may be relevant to my review of Revell's 1/720 scale Graf Spee? First of all, I did mention Revell did issue a 1/560 kit but that has long disappeared even in the collectors market so I'll stick with the latter release at 1/720.
It might be me but the scale is off-putting for as start and when measured up I think is closer to 1/710. The kit however was a boon for the waterline modellers in that it was the first 'Spee' to have a pre-cut hull to allow both options. Surface detail is good and YES there are flags and decals in the German issue but only flags (paper) in the US/UK boxing?
The kit appears to fit well with little flash. I'd recommend replacing the barrels of the main armament with brass or metal ones from after market suppliers. Detail at this scale is always a debatable subject but there is quite a lot of recognisable featuring that is absent on similar kits in the larger 1/700 range.
The only issue I have with this kit is the arrangement of the communication mast aft of the catapult? I think it is too high and also a cross section is missing... easy remedied I'm sure.
[attachment deleted by admin]
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Moving on to one of the bigger scale models I personally like Academy's offering in 1/350 (P.1) with clean moulded parts and great instructions. Academy's kit has a two-part hull (p.2) with nice scuttle details, raised armour belt and stowed boat booms moulded on. The hull features a waterline option, a scribed line running the length of the hull on the waterline. This will require cutting the hull along this line if you want to do a waterline version. There are interlocking waterline plates on Spru B to stiffen the waterline hull.
Dimensionally, the hull appears spot on. The anchor hawse detail is a bit soft. There are a line of nubs down the side of the hull the purpose of which is unclear. The hull does have the waterline boot indicated with two raised, mouldings on lines. Academy did a good job keeping the unique flared shape of the hull intact. Along the bottom of the hull are two thin spots which will need opening to allow the display base posts to be inserted in the hull.
Spru A (P.3) carries a lion's share of the meat of the kit; the decks, the torpedo tube mounts, and the main turrets for 'Spee'. The 280mm barrels are slide moulded and have open muzzles on them- a nice touch. The deck pieces have nice, if somewhat regular, planking detail and tread-plating. They also feature moulded anchor chains but these don't appear too bad. There are 6 small guns on pedestal mounts- believed to be 2CM AA guns. The torpedo tube housings are lacking detail, and the range finders for the main guns are hollow underneath.
Spru B (P.4) contains the waterline plates, bilge keels, 2 of the 3 105mm AA guns, propeller shafts and the propellers themselves. The props have an odd appearance, and the hub looks to be the wrong shape. The propellers themselves are more than a tenth of an inch to small in diameter (.37" vs .49"). This spru also contains the 150mm secondaries and gun houses, as well as more of the single AA pedestal guns from spru A. The 105mm AA housings appear too large, and are lacking periscopes and fuse setter details. The kit 150mm gun houses are open to the rear, whereas 'Spee' had double doors fitted, as well as additional armour plating and openings in the front of the gun house- all details which are missing.
Spru C (P.5) has most of the deck detail items. Boat and float plane cranes, ship's boats and float plane, and searchlights. Also of interest is the diesel exhaust stack and the rear gun director. The remaining AA guns, cradles and such are here as well.
Sprus D&E (P.6) are joined together, so we'll treat them as one. This contains the remainder of the parts for the kit; the armoured citadel style bridge and rest of the forward superstructure parts and decks. The masts and yardarms included in the kit do not match the actual ship's design but shouldn't prove to much of a challenge for most modellers to correct. Academy's plastic railings. While they have a good shape, they do not compare to photo-etched railing. They should prove adequate for the casual modeller and act as a template for shaping photo-etched railings for the more advanced modeller.
This decal set (P.7) provides the modeller with many markings, from naval insignia, jacks, details for the float plane and a ships crest. None of these markings include the Nazi Swastika, keeping with the laws in certain legalities which ban the display of the symbol; but there is a black "+" sign, with some extra arms - draw your own conclusions.
[attachment deleted by admin]
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
ITC issued the very first 1/350 kit in 1961, capitalizing on the success of the 'Battle of the River Plate' movie about the Graf Spee. (Shame on you if you have never watched this!!) ITC discontinued all plastic models in 1962 which makes this kit very hard to find. Assembly of 38 parts is quite straightforward. Parts are crisply moulded and include and electric motor and R/C hardware. Instructions are rubbish and do not explain the complexities of the motorisation and R/C (if indeed they do work? The overall shape is good but detail is light with a lot pre-moulded but with the exception of the bow (which is 'raked' and curved whereas the Spee's was almost straight) it is a pleasing model..
[attachment deleted by admin]
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Admit your age and recall the Eagle/Eaglewall range of 1/1200 'table top navy' ships which (you guessed it) included the Graf Spee (Also issued as the Lutzow and Admiral Sheer), HMS's Ajax, Achilles and Exeter! Great novelty, good looking but really that's all you can say about them! Anyone fancy putting the 'battle' in a bottle? Probably the most interesting one of this series was the 'Altmark' given her association with the 'Spee' and HMS Cossack.
[attachment deleted by admin]
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Now for those few of you who read this and have been compelled to rush out and buy a model (any scale) why not build one or other of the Graf Spee's sister ships?
In all of the Kriegsmarine, no class of ship is easier to distinguish between than the Deutschland class. This is because as they were being built, new modification were constantly being made to the design resulting in each ship being better by improvements in design than the last. Aesthetic differences are probably the best place to start?
Beginning with the bridge (L/R Lutzow, Admiral Scheer, Graf Spee).
A: is marked on all three as it shows how the main bridge was moved from the main body below the armoured bridge on Lutzow up to the tower on both Scheer and Graf Spee. Although sacrificing space, this provided better visibility as well as being much less "wet".
B: This thingy (Lutzow only) helps to make Lutzow tower even taller than her sister ships.
C:This enclosed platform is wider on Scheer than Lutzow and also features more windows.
D: This area, which is the bridge on Lutzow, is the same on Scheer as it is on the Spee, right down to the number and location of the windows.
Scheer underwent a major overhall and refit in 1940 which saw much of the tower's metallic casing removed to make the ship less top heavy, and to free up space for AA platforms giving the Scheer's new tower a ‘pagoda-esque’ look. Before reconstruction Scheer's tower was nearly identical to the Spee's. The two are compared below, Scheer on the left, Spee on the right. (note the different locations of the search light platforms....
-
The temptation is there but I cannot achieve the standards required.
-
There were many differences in the bow area before and after reconstruction (L/R Lutzow, Scheer, Spee). Here we can see that both Lutzow and Scheer had their bows reconstructed with a slight ‘Atlantic’ curve, increasing their length from 610' to 616'. Spee did not survive long enough to see this modification fitted. Also worth noting is the position of Scheer's anchors compared to her sister's. Scheer and Lutzow both have only one anchor on each side, Spee however has two anchors on the port side...
-
Differences in the midship area. (L/R Lutzow, Scheer and Spee)
‘A’ is circled on all 3 ships. Notice that on Lutzow the aircraft catapult is located ahead of the funnel, whereas on Scheer and Spee it is located behind the funnel. Also notice that Scheer's and Spee's catapults are slightly higher than Lutzow's
‘B’ is also circled on all 3 ships. On Lutzow the aircraft crane is located on the front of the funnel, on Scheer and Spee they are located to the rear of the funnel.
‘C’ is represented by a line on all 3 ships. It shows the steepness of the face of the funnel cap, which is most extreme on Lutzow, and flat on Spee as the Graf Spee didnt recieve a funnel cap.
-
Finally, looking at the plan view of all three ships we see better how different they are. (T/B Lutzow, Scheer and Spee). From this vantage point we note several areas of difference. First, Lutzow's 150mm single turrets are located just behind the same turrets on the Scheer and Spee, Basically, the front of one of Lutzow’s turret is where the back of one of Spee's or Scheer's turrets and closer to the center of the ship. Lutzow’s funnel is slimmer than her sisters and the deck the rear 105mm mount behind the rear turret is rectangular on Lutzow and more triangular on Scheer and Spee.
Well, that’s it for aesthetics! As previously mention Scheer and Lutzow were 6' longer than the Spee. As built Deutschland weighed 14,290t full load, Scheer weighed 15,180t full load and Spee weighed 16,320t full load. However Lutzow and Scheer both weighed over 18,000t by 1945. All had the same engines. All three had an 80mm armour belt. Lutzow's deck was 40mm thick whereas Scheer and Spee's decks were both 45mm thick. All three had 170mm turret faces and all had 150mm armored bridges. Scheer and Lutzow however had their AA armament increased through the years.
Happy modelling...
-
The temptation is there but I cannot achieve the standards required.
Rubbish!!!!!!
-
I thought you were referring to my posts there.... or are you????
-
It was a reply to Zak's post. Anybody that can do what he does with bits of plasticard and other stuff can certainly build a ship, just not in a few days, which is the normal build time for one of his masterpieces.
Haddock.
-
It was a reply to Zak's post. Anybody that can do what he does with bits of plasticard and other stuff can certainly build a ship, just not in a few days, which is the normal build time for one of his masterpieces.
Haddock.
That's why I can't - takes too long. My bold pressure would be even higher than it is now.
-
I consider myself reasonably adept at aircraft recognition (WW2) but ways of telling ships apart has always escaped me - until now. Thanks for this info PP, I shall study it in slow time and see what I can make of it all.
-
Hi Zak,
Is 'Bold Pressure' a new phenomena?
Or is it a form Ships'O'Freenia
Bigkev
-
My chill spucker is not working!
-
Getting back on course... I'd almost forgotten one of the best kits of the Spee came from the Frog stable (or should that be dock?) although, as far as I'm aware it never actually appeared under the Frog logo (correct me if I'm wrong). A couple of years before Frog 'capsized' (keeping to naval parlance?) they issued a 1/500 'Spee' to complete their Battle of the River Plate series. The mould however was curiously sold to Nichimo of Japan who issued the kit along with an 'Achilles' (Which was a 'copy' of Frog's Ajax and completely wrong). The Graf Spee kit however was very nice, good fitting and none of the usual soft-edging often found in kits of that period. Yes, one to look out for...!
-
Today, I ‘acquired’ another 1/700 Graf Spee (Review to follow) from a not unknown master of modelling in Bridlington and have spent the last couple of hours drooling over the possibilities of ‘boarding and commandeering’ the dining room table for yet another modelling ‘project’ – after the divorce!!
There has been much debate over the camouflage colours of the Graf Spee in her final metamorphous. I was convinced that the darker colour on most models and line drawings was correctly shown (like on this box art) as green but have since found out this started when the ‘on-ship' museum of the USS North Carolina (Wilmington North Carolina) ordered a model of Graf Spee in the 1950's.
Recently I’ve been ploughing through ‘The Drama of the Graf Spee and Battle of the River Plate’ anthology and came across references by Argentinian historian Guillermo Ramirez who had been in contact with F.K. Rasenack, a former officer on board Graf Spee (and Tirpitz) and author of a detailed book about the former. Sadly there are no colour photos of Graf Spee that I am aware of but I would take F.K. Rasenack witness report as a reference. AJ-Press Morskie, Poland, who also published books on the Spee lately corrected their opinion too.
Many ‘wrong’ ship camouflage colour schemes just start from personal interpretations and some from errors on drawings etc., but I’m pretty sure that dark grey not green is most likely to be correct!
(PS. Thank that kindly 'youngster' for a very nice cuppa this afternoon)
-
A couple of 'interesting' photos: #1 Completed model (?) of the Spee in correct colours. #2 Photo showing one side and rear of bridge superstructure showing evidence of what looks like a 3-colour scheme?
-
This " correct colour " thing is designed to drive you nuts!!
-
Remember the scale effect and so on and so forth, colour as Haddock says may drive you mad.
Depends on so many factors, sun, shade, photo, camera, film, filter, the list is endless. How thick was it applied, where was the batch made.
It really is a minefield - take your best guess and argue with those who think they know better.
-
The only "correct colour" is the one you put on your model and that YOU are happy with.
After 20 years at sea the colour on the ship changes with so many factors that the rivet counters who claim "the colour is one shade out" get me mad.
-
Zak - me argue, never!
MSea - get mad - frequently!
-
New paint set for Kriegsmarine vessels... £15.95 on eBay?
-
Personally, I think that's a bit steep. I have a chart that converts almost every naval colour in the world (except the most modern) to Vallejo paints. Whoever has done it has done a magnificent job. Vallejo modelcolour and aircolour is available from Boyes at £2.00 a bottle so if you run out, replacements aren't far away.
Just a thought.
Haddock.
-
Agreed. I think a lot of these 'authentic' colour-packs tend to be suspiciously high. I too have a comparison chart which I use for my favourite Tamiya Acrylics (brush painting) but have recently tried a couple of Vallejo with good results.
Many thanks,
-
Agreed. I think a lot of these 'authentic' colour-packs tend to be suspiciously high. I too have a comparison chart which I use for my favourite Tamiya Acrylics (brush painting) but have recently tried a couple of Vallejo with good results.
Many thanks,
I now use Vallejo exclusively and I am well satisfied with the results.
-
I also like Vallejo - when I get chance to use them - as they paint on well. I also have a selection of Humbrol enamels and after chatting to Pete of Merseyside Modellers at Huddersfield, I'm also trying out Tamiya acrylics too - not for that elusive "authentic colour" but to see how I get on with applying them as I liked the finish he got on his small scale armour which I'm getting back into. I picked up 10 of the larger 26ml jars ever so cheap recently so I figured it was worth a small investment.
As far as shades go, if it looks alright, that'll do for me.
-
Good find there Wizzel!! I like the texture and finish of Tamiya Acrylics and their colours are pretty close to anything you need - also easy to mix!!
-
With a project in mind, the wreck (Photo 1) of the 'Spee' although now completely submerged is a subject of much interest and speculation. One area of debate is the 'unexplained' fate of the three 11" guns of the Spee's aft turret as shown missing below (Photo 2)? I have studied all the wreck photos but cannot identify them anywhere. If anyone has any info I would be very grateful....?
-
Hi Pen Pusher,
You would think that nowadays technology would be able to locate them in the debris field. A mystery, it would be nice to hear if they were 'found' and if so 'where' in relation to the wreck.
Bigkev
-
As a sub-note, a group of 12 new armored ships (Kreuzer P ), successors to the famous Admiral Graf Spee , Admiral Scheer and Lützow , were part of the German Z-Plan. The design studies for the three battlecruisers of the O-class (Schlachtkreuzer O, Schlachtkreuzer P, Schlachtkreuzer Q ) were simultaneous started to those of the new Panzerschiff design (Kreuzer P ) in 1937.
In 1939 it was considered to replace three of the Panzerschiffe with the same number of this new battle cruisers. Construction orders were given to Deutsche Werke, Kiel, the Kriegsmarinewerft in Wilhelmshaven and the Germaniawerft in Kiel in the same year, but none of the ships were started.
Those ships were planed with the idea of the war against commerce as a priority but with sufficient armament for combat with 9 x 11" main guns. Therefore, they should get a mixed propulsion system, diesel engines for long range medium speed cruises and additional turbines for high speed combat action. As the main task for of these battlecruisers was to engage enemy convoys and destroy transports and cargo ships, in difference to the heavy protected H-Class battleships, they would have armor protection of a cruiser only. So it's very doubtful that one of these ships would have been able to attack a well protected allied convoy with any great success.
Only one kit is available of this speculative design and that comes from Russia. HNV produce the 'Schneidheim' (A name not mentioned as being intended in any source I can find) at 1/350 scale but at a high cost of £140 (equiv) plus shipping.
-
A friend of mine in Germany has just sent me these photos of his model of the 'Spee' (Academy 1/350) showing her 'River Plate' era camouflage scheme and the false funnel and additional forward turret (using the gun-bridge) to make her resemble an American cruiser.... note the figures Haddock!
-
More...
-
Here's a photo of the real thing! The Graf Spee with a pair of 'dummy' guns mounted above her forward turret. These were made of wood and came apart in three sections for storage. At a distance they looked quite convincing. The Lutzow carried a similar set but there is no record of them being used.
-
Hi Pen Pusher,
Never seen those before. Very interesting to see them in model form.
Thanks,
Bigkev
-
Here's another, maybe better view Kev! Note the support frame atop A turret to hold the lighter wooden imitations in place. Spee adopted this deception twice that I'm aware of and successfully fooled two British ships into believing they were seeing an American cruiser. Methinks there is a modelling prospect for this after all.....?