HMS Barham to HMS Renown: In a Thousand Easy Steps World Naval Ships Forums Archive

Naval History by Country :

ROYAL
NAVY

US
NAVY

GERMAN
NAVY

FRENCH
NAVY

*VIEW ALL OF OUR CURRENT ART SPECIAL OFFERS ON ONE PAGE HERE*
NAVAL ART	AVIATION ART	MILITARY ART	SPORT ART

ALWAYS GREAT OFFERS :

20% FURTHER PRICE REDUCTIONS ON HUNDREDS OF LIMITED EDITION ART PRINTS

BUY ONE GET ONE HALF PRICE ON THOUSANDS OF PAINTINGS AND PRINTS

FOR MORE OFFERS SIGN UP TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER

HMS Barham to HMS Renown: In a Thousand Easy Steps World Naval Ships Forums Archive

HMS Barham to HMS Renown: In a Thousand Easy Steps

Posts 1 to 50

Hi Guys, following a successful Winter/Spring refit of HMS RODNEY, a modelmaker mate and I are considering a BARHAM/RENOWN conversion. He (the owner) is not happy with BARHAM in its present form (circa 1918 fit), but wants a battleship with two funnels, NO gun casements and a Shagbat (Walrus) to put in the hangar. In order to keep me busy (and relatively sane) over the winter I've offered to facilitate the conversion in my shipbuilding "shed". Are you all demented enough for a pictorial log of the conversion to be posted here??? Sandy.
Attachments :

How complete a re-build are you talking about here?and how accurate do you hope the final model to be? the hull as it stands looks abetter match for Renown (or actually Repulse given the armour belt) than it would do for Barham (not wanting to take away from your mate if he built the mode, but if you hadn't said that was what she was meant to be id have never guessed) Renown class had a very distinctive flair on the bow, quite wide which tapered down o a very slender , but if your not going to be rebuilding the hull, and aren't to fussed about that then yeh sounds do-able, as the hull currently stands id suggest doing Repulse cos of the Armour Belt, renown had Torpedo Bulges fitted instead. id certainly be interested in following a work log with lots of loverly pictures :)

[QUOTE=Destroyerman;10003299]Hi Guys, following a successful Winter/Spring refit of HMS RODNEY, a modelmaker mate and I are considering a BARHAM/RENOWN conversion. He (the owner) is not happy with BARHAM in its present form (circa 1918 fit), but wants a battleship with two funnels, NO gun casements and a Shagbat (Walrus) to put in the hangar. In order to keep me busy (and relatively sane) over the winter I've offered to facilitate the conversion in my shipbuilding "shed". Are you all demented enough for a pictorial log of the conversion to be posted here??? Sandy.[/QUOTE] Go to it Sandy, he [the owner] won't recognise the big B after it has had the Sandy Winter Refit touch. Looking forward to it. Will take my mind off the Royal Yacht build. Dave H

[QUOTE=Andy3E;10003303]How complete a re-build are you talking about here?and how accurate do you hope the final model to be?...... QUOTE] Andy, he's bringing the model round tomorrow and we will do a feasibility study then. We're about 90% ready to go. In my opinion, it will be an improvement and it will also fit-in with our WWII pyrotechnic displays. As BARHAM stands at present, she is in 1918 fit and is fair game for the 'anoraks' out there, not being in 1942 configuration.:rolleyes: When we build these brutes (at 1:72 scale), they take a fair bit of punishment throughout a display season, so they are certainly not glass case models.;) Rather, they are representative of WWII capital ships but not slavishly scratchbuilt to an exact scale. (For instance, this model will, and always has, operated on twin screws. It doesn't rest on a brass plinth all of its life). :D Sandy.

Yup, you can put me in the demented section, look forward to following your endeavours over the winter. Good luck Sandy. Regards Richard

You can put me down in the demented section Looking forward to watching Barham transform into Renown Good Luck

Sandy - Clarification please - Barham was a Renown Class Battlecruiser - will she still Barham when you have finished but in 1942 set. Asking because a very good friend of mine's Dad was one of the survivors off the Barham and was later twice Mayor of Plymouth. A nice photo of her when completed would be great to send to his Grandson who now lives in Florida. Dave H

Well that "little" project should keep you out from under foot for a while Sandy! :) I will endeavour to "amuse" you by chipping in my unwarranted, uncalled for, and uninformed few penneth from time to time. :D Just a thought for now, should you find yourself bored and have nothing to do, you could always convert "Unwanted" into something? I know, what about a Type 15 Frigate! Lol Seriously though, good luck. It is always nice to see the Chief Stoker gainfully employed!

[QUOTE=Dave Hutson;10003364]Sandy - Clarification please - Barham was a Renown Class Battlecruiser - will she still Barham when you have finished but in 1942 set. Asking because a very good friend of mine's Dad was one of the survivors off the Barham and was later twice Mayor of Plymouth. A nice photo of her when completed would be great to send to his Grandson who now lives in Florida. Dave H[/QUOTE] Hey Dave, Barham was a Queen Elizabeth Class Battleship,

[QUOTE=Dave Hutson;10003364]Sandy - Clarification please - Barham was a Renown Class Battlecruiser - will she still Barham when you have finished but in 1942 set. Asking because a very good friend of mine's Dad was one of the survivors off the Barham and was later twice Mayor of Plymouth. A nice photo of her when completed would be great to send to his Grandson who now lives in Florida. Dave H[/QUOTE] Hi Dave, thanks for your query. I do believe that HMS BARHAM was a Queen Elizabeth class battleship and HMS RENOWN was a battlecruiser of the Repulse class. At least I hope I'm correct, otherwise we are on a hiding to nothing before we start.:o So when she emerges (resplendent:D) in the Spring(ish), she will have become the battlecruiser RENOWN. We did a feasibility study on the dimensions today and reckon we can get away with the conversion. (My oppo is Robbie, the very amiable Scotsman who you met from our Team at Weymouth this year). He was also one of the original co-builders of my HMS RODNEY. BARHAM's present length is 116" (9000" in reality) which will equate to about 1:77 scale, slightly smaller than the notional 1:72 scale. I suppose the critical part of the conversion will be at the point where the two halves of the hull marry together. So I think we are committed now (some would say we ought to be!) and the hacksaws, chisels, hammers and drills will start their work soon.:rolleyes: Good to hear from you again oppo.:D Sandy.

Sandy & Andy, So solly , sadly forget to engage brain and do research before posing question.:eek: Whatever, I am looking forward to the weekly progress reports on this conversion. Scurs - you can't certify the uncertifiable.;) Dave H

Sandy, I will be following this transformation with interest. Jack.

Go for it Sandy (and Robbie) who will no doubt be eyeing the comments as well. Pitty you can't hire one of those 'Medical lecture theaters' with the steep tiers of seats and the bench in the middle, I can just imagine all these old codgers leaning forward pontificating on all things naval. Good luck ,Jim

Now I'm completely confused! Barham was a Queen Elizabeth class battleship and Renown a battlecruiser -- the hull forms are very different, especially the length, and you are planning to convert one to the other? Not being picky, but that's a heck of a project with an entire new middle section needed to make up the length? The DNC will have to be consulted! That's a very nice photo of Renown, by the way -- with either New York or Texas behind her. Regards!

Hi Don, good to hear from you my friend.:) You are quite correct, there are dissimilarities in hull length. 150 feet in fact.:rolleyes: But the model of BARHAM was built from our existing battleship mould and comes in at 116", which proportionately is too long (at 1:72 scale) for Barham at 600 feet. So the idea to convert is better suited to the hull length as it stands. So, without hull extension, RENOWN (750 feet) will come in at an acceptable 1:77 scale. Even at that scale she will be longer than RODNEY (about 1:74 scale) and the pair will look proportionately correct on the water, viewed from 100 metres or so.:D It is great to hear constructive doubts such as the one you present, and perhaps I (we) should have explained the dilemma and solution beforehand. Sandy.

First off guys, you must start with the correct measurements. Those you have given are lengths between perpindiculars (PP) = length from the bow waterline at deep load draught to the center of the rudder post. You'd be better off using overall lengths = 640' for Barham (not including her sternwalk) and 794' for Renown. I really see you guys have your work cut out for you - not even the 15" gun turrets on both ships were the same, but good luck anyway. Monty

OK guys, we have decided to press ahead. Our project has been governed by two deciding factors: 1. Ability to transport the vessel (the length remaining as is for loading into family car). 2. To re-use most of the fittings pertinent to and already on BARHAM. First task is to completely strip the existing hull of paint; armour plate; anchor hawsepipes that were in the wrong position and finally to reprofile the the bows/stempost. RENOWN's bow was immediately recognisable as an interim 19th century, 20th century affair. All upper deck fittings have been removed and existing superstructure put aside. The first image should delight Scurs as it depicts a Chief Stoker at work.:D Sandy and Robbie.
Attachments :

The first image (above) shows clearly the straight stem on BARHAM's bow, which needs to be sawn off (much to the chagrin of the owner) prior to reprofiling.:eek: Neither of us has performed this remedial operation before so look forward to it as most septuagenarians would ........ with trepidation!:rolleyes::cool: Sandy and Robbie.

[QUOTE=Destroyerman;10007030]The first image (above) shows clearly the straight stem on BARHAM's bow, which needs to be sawn off (much to the chagrin of the owner) prior to reprofiling.:eek: Neither of us has performed this remedial operation before so look forward to it as most septuagenarians would ........ with trepidation!:rolleyes::cool: Sandy and Robbie.[/QUOTE] Hi Sandy, Here we go again mate - I trust the chopping was performed well after tottime to avoid imperial becoming metric or vicki verke. Your workshop emulates my office which is a bit cold at the moment so I have commandeered the dining room table which is six feet long [closed] on which stands the five foot hull of the Royal Yacht while all the superstructure is rejigged. Not sure how much longer I can get away with that and cannot really disguise it with Crimbo Deckies - oh, the tribulations of a model ship builder.:(:(:(:cool: Good luck with it mate - calm seas. Dave H

Thanks Dave, good to hear from you again mate.;) Right then, method employed to change profile of the bows. (Following a democratic vote from both builders).:D I had an aluminium plate, 1/8th inch thick, which just fitted the bill. First thing was to cut out the stem post profile and pick a point some 3 inches away from where we wanted the bow to be. Then a line was drawn vertically down the bow and the hacksaw was produced. Yep, you read it correctly, a hacksaw. Neither of us is a 'chippy' but we can, as ex stokers, both claim to be 'hackers'.:rolleyes: The plate was offered-up to where the bow used to be (image 1). It squeezed nicely into the recess lower down the hull, but tended naturally to swing to the left (a very natural thing for stokers to do, or so I am reminded).:D Two locating stops were cut out, both top and bottom of the hull to stop the plate moving any further aft as a result of a collision. At this point Robbie correctly decided that the new plate needed some longitudinal strengthening otherwise the bow might shear off. Four alumimium battens were then screwed securely to the plate at upper and lower levels and then passed into the hull. This would give further strength to the newly fashioned bow and could be back-filled with resin to solidify the new assembly. (image 2). Robbie and Sandy.
Attachments :

Once the plate and battens were held in position it was time to fibreglass them into the bow. Fore and aft alignment was critical. The (blurred):o image shows the fibreglass applied to the plate. Once it has completely set, reprofiling can begin ...... (The hull section is lying on its port side in the image). Robbie and Sandy.
Attachments :

The fibreglass has been sanded down and some P38 (car body filler) added to fill-in any imperfections. In turn this has been sanded down giving the finish shown in the images, yellow = fibreglass; grey = P38. RENOWN had a plate protruding at the base of the stem (under the curvature) which had two holes drilled in it. Allowance has been made for that. At this point we are becoming slightly more confident of success ....... :rolleyes: Robbie and Sandy.
Attachments :

Once the sanding is completed, it's time to add some grey primer to identify the slightest imperfections. The bows are not completed yet as there is one more vital step to be carried out. Robbie and Sandy.
Attachments :

The next vital step is to reinforce the bow longitudinally. The four aluminium battens that were secured to the bow plate and extended aft are instrumental in this. Once the outer skin of the bow had set, some fibreglass cloth was ripped into small patches and stuffed in the inner bow section and carefully rammed home around the aluminium battens. Then a one pint mix of resin and hardener was poured into the upturned forward section so that it levelled-off around the battens. This was then tamped down, eliminating any air pockets. Another one pint mix was prepared, poured and tamped down in the same fashion. The whole forward section was positioned bow downwards for the resin mix to set (48 hours) before any further movement. We now have a new profiled bow which extends 6" back from the stem as a solid lump. Hopefully this will turn out to be as strong and resilient as the original moulding. However, time will tell ................. :rolleyes::) Robbie and Sandy.

What ! no pictures, put em in chains an keelhaul the pair o em. Good to hear your making progress Robby, Sandy. Regards Richard

Sorry Richard, I'm afraid we didn't take pictures of that evolution.:rolleyes::D Probably decided to leave it to the imagination.:D However, it is still possible to re-stage the event, but you wouldn't want to witness two old duffers struggling to pour resin into a large space. We have enough difficulty pouring boiling water into a mug!!:eek: (At regular intervals may I add).:rolleyes: Not only do our wives prevent us using sharp objects, but they resolutely forbid us to perform any dangerous tasks, which, for us two, could be anything!:D Monday's task: fashioning and fitting the armour belt and the torpedo bulge. Sandy and Robbie.

Meantime, work commences on the post 1939 refit streamlined funnels. Dimensions are carefully marked out on a sheet of 0.5 mm plastic and cut to size. Next, each funnel "panel" is scribed onto the outer side of the sheet. The funnel formers are then cut out and assembled with coffee cafe stirring sticks as vertical bearers. This assembly has to be pretty accurate and square to accommodate the funnel skin. A slow-setting glue is used to carefully line-up the forward edge of the funnel skin and is then allowed to set. Once set, the rest of the funnel skin can be glued down. This is the first time I have tried to form a funnel so it's all trial and error. It is remarkable how strong and lightweight this method turned out to be. Images are of the forward funnel just after glueing the leading edge to the framework. Sandy.
Attachments :

Sandy..................Your Post 17.....................Never thought I'd live to see the day, but there it is! Photographic evidence of a Chief Stoker turned to! To coin and misuse, the words from some Disney film............"Now I've done near seen EVERYTHING............" :D:D To a more serious note.................good luck with your latest, and most ambitious, project. I shall support you in my usual unhelpful way! :)

hey Sandy, How are you guys doing on her??? Nikki

Great to hear from you Scurs, I deliberately set that little tempter for you.:D Actually got "Top Team" working on the RENOWN conversion, both stokers. That in itself will present a problem when it comes to positioning the Golden Rivet.:rolleyes::D But that is a long way down the line; as you are no doubt aware how productive a gaggle of stokers can be.:D Today was spent manufacturing and positioning the armour belt. (But we are not sure what calibre it was).:cool: Does it go inside or outside?? Keep the grand comment coming mate, I really look forward to it. And hopefully I can get special dispensation from the Mods again to go off topic ever so slightly from time to time.:D Stoker Sandy and stoker Robbie.

Hi Nikki, gradually posting some reports and images on the conversion. It is turning out a lot more complicated than we first imagined, but time is on our side I think. Sandy and Robbie.

[QUOTE]Today was spent manufacturing and positioning the armour belt. (But we are not sure what calibre it was). Does it go inside or outside?? [/QUOTE] Renown had a 9-inch armour belt that was completely covered by her anti-torpedo bulges. Keep it up guys. :) Monty

Thanks for that Monty. We are referring to a 1:700 kit of RENOWN as configured in 1942, and have observed that the armour belt (external:D) was almost swallowed up by the anti-torpedo bulge. Work progresses on that score insofar as we have affixed the bulk of the armour belt/torpedo bulge to the forward hull section and all that remains is to fill-in and sand down that part. It does however, add some weight to the forward section which will lead to less ballast being required in the end. Meanwhile, an image of the forward funnel with the skin wrapped round the framework. Provision is left for a piece of 0.7mm "L" section to run down the trailing edge of the funnel. The coloured bands are elastic (to hold it in place whilst drying) and the white ones are the two strengthening bands that circumnavigate the funnel in reality. Thanks, from both of us, for looking in and thanks also for your comments. Robbie and Sandy.
Attachments :

Whilst I faff around with the funnels at home, Robbie is gainfully employed at his home making up the ships boats (a selection of whalers and motor cutters). The 45' cutters and motor launches will follow. Much can be done during the week manufacturing the smaller stuff whilst we concentrate on the major jobs on our weekly meet on Mondays. Once the hull, armour belts, torpedo bulges, anchors and two hundred scuttles are in place, the conversion starts going upwards with the superstructure etc. Hopefully it all accelerates about then.;) Sandy and Robbie.

Robbie, Sandy; While I'd consider converting a model of Barham to Renown practically impossible, I certainly admire your efforts to do so and, amazingly enough, you seem to be making tremendous headway. I am watching this thread with the utmost interest. Monty

Very many thanks for that inspirational comment Monty.:o If a job's worth doing .................... Meanwhile, the funnel progresses, with the funnel cover ring and rainwater diverter cut out to fit. The positioning of the funnel cover support bars is drawn out on the lower flat, so as the safety valve outlets and diesel generator exhaust pipes will not conflict with the funnel cover framework. Rainwater in the funnel was a constant danger in furnace exhaust gasses and was critical in an effort to minimise a corrosive phenomenen called "dew point". There still remains a signal lamp platform, the funnel cover framework, two catwalks and the sirenette platform (and sirenettes) to add. The aft funnel is considerably less fussy thankfully. Sandy and Robbie.
Attachments :

Good Grief Sandy makes my task look like a walk in the park .....or at least Ill keep thinking that to keep me going Best of luck mate

Thanks Ivor; I'm sure that your task will be simplified eventually by your taking the expedience to thoroughly research your subject.;) If a couple of aged stokers (from the coal era) can perform a conversion without passing GCE's (they weren't about then:D) I'm sure that you will produce the goods. However, keep in mind that Robbie served in HMS VICTORIOUS at one stage, and also happened to be a "Badger" (Marine Engineering Flight Deck Crew). This half of the partnership also served in: HMS HERMES, HMS BULWARK and HMS ARK ROYAL (1970's).:) Sandy.

Thanks Sandy mate. I was having trouble with my funnel on the Royal Yacht having c**cked it up many moons afore. Following your latest I am now back on track. Just shows I am paying attention and that an old Ch Tel can still learn from an old Greasy Klanky. Back to the epoxy bench, work to be done. Dave H

[quote=Destroyerman;10008873]Thanks Ivor; I'm sure that your task will be simplified eventually by your taking the expedience to thoroughly research your subject.;) If a couple of aged stokers (from the coal era) can perform a conversion without passing GCE's (they weren't about then:D) I'm sure that you will produce the goods. However, keep in mind that Robbie served in HMS VICTORIOUS at one stage, and also happened to be a "Badger" (Marine Engineering Flight Deck Crew). This half of the partnership also served in: HMS HERMES, HMS BULWARK and HMS ARK ROYAL (1970's).:) Sandy.[/quote] Well I'm only an Honorary Stoker but I will give it my best shot and know where to come for advice ..........Thanks Sandy

Glad to be of assistance Dave, albeit unwittingly.:rolleyes::D Image of funnel with waste pipes located and funnel top dry fitted. Robbie and Sandy.
Attachments :

Nice detail Sandy ... C in C home Fleet says ..she's got your card marked , and no inciting Mutiny in the forecastle.....and she will be framing a charge sheet before defaulters I hope I can deliver the same detail with my scant knowledge of ships .. As a matter of interest what formula do you use to convert 1/250 scale to produce 1/96 scale as most of the information I have is shown in 1/250 scale and as you know my hull is 1/96 scale :confused:

250 divided by 96 = 2.60142 Parts for a 1/96 scale model will be 2.60412 times larger than parts for a 1/250 scale model. Multiply all of your 1/250 scale measurements by 2.60412 Monty

There you have it.;) Thanks Monty. Sandy.

thank you kind Sir and seasons Greetings to you :D

Only too glad to help, guys. Best Christmas wishes to you all as well. :) Monty

Question for all you HMS RENOWN buffs out there. I have noticed in several prominent images of RENOWN in her post refit years that her sheet anchor (starboard only) is apparently missing or unused. (The image in post No 1 shows this, although at first I thought it may have been "catted"). This leads me to assume (in my usual grease monkey fashion), that the starboard sheet anchor had been removed during her 1939 refit as well as the stern (kedge) anchor. Both hawsepipes remain unoccupied. Only two main anchors then remained; the port and starboard bower anchors. Remember that this question is posed by a mere klankie who should not notice executive omissions such as this, but I know a little about seamanship too.:rolleyes::D Confused of Sidcup.
Attachments :

[QUOTE=Destroyerman;10009055]Question for all you HMS RENOWN buffs out there. I have noticed in several prominent images of RENOWN in her post refit years that her sheet anchor (starboard only) is apparently missing or unused. (The image in post No 1 shows this, although at first I thought it may have been "catted"). This leads me to assume (in my usual grease monkey fashion), that the starboard sheet anchor had been removed during her 1939 refit as well as the stern (kedge) anchor. Both hawsepipes remain unoccupied. Only two main anchors then remained; the port and starboard bower anchors. Remember that this question is posed by a mere klankie who should not notice executive omissions such as this, but I know a little about seamanship too.:rolleyes::D Confused of Sidcup.[/QUOTE] As ever, the mystery of anchors on ships becomes a real concern to us 'uneducated' in such matters. However, the rule of thumb of designers used to be, the bigger the ship, the more anchors she needed. But, it came to pass, that ships' Captains realised this was not the case. The information was passed to the Admiralty, and great savings could be made, by transferring some of the surplus anchors and cables to other vessels. Don't forget, many anchors were lost, and never recovered, due to wartime constraints and operational necessities. Hence you ended up without the prescribed number of bower anchors anyway. No problem though. It indicated the way to much savings in weight and money. This philosophy was persued until at least the last major Aircraft Carriers, the Ark Royal and Eagle, were in commission. Although equipped to carry 3 bower anchors, they seldom did. Some smaller Carriers only had two bower anchors designed for their entire lives. But early cruisers had 3 bower anchors, and again, thase were gradually reduced to two. Hope this helps

Sandy, Renown's sheet anchor was removed on 18th July, 1940 as a weight-saving measure that would help reduce the plunge of her bows in heavy seas. As for the stern anchor, I have many photos of Renown taken throughout her 32 year lifespan. Some photos show her with it while others show her without it. It seems that the time-frame makes little or no difference. Monty

Thanks for your replies gentlemen.:) We shall employ a little artistic licence where the anchors are concerned. We suppose that the "standard" fit of two bowers and one sheet anchor would look most balanced, leaving the stern hawsepipe empty. Nice to get willing and helpful feedback. So, onwards and upwards as they say. Robbie and Sandy.

More Posts

Everything we obtain for this site is shown on the site, we do not have any more photos, crew lists or further information on any of the ships.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE. ALL IMAGES DISPLAYED ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT LAW, AND ARE OWNED BY CRANSTON FINE ARTS OR THEIR RESPECTIVE OWNERS. NO REPRODUCTION OR COPYING ALLOWED ON OTHER WEBSITES, BOOKS OR ARTICLES WITHOUT PRIOR AGREEMENT.

Contact Details
Shipping Info
Terms and Conditions
Cookie Policy
Privacy Policy

Sign Up To Our Newsletter!

Stay up to date with all our latest offers, deals and events as well as new releases and exclusive subscriber content!

This website is owned by Cranston Fine Arts. Torwood House, Torwoodhill Road, Rhu, Helensburgh, Scotland, G848LE

Contact: Tel: (+44) (0) 1436 820269. Email: cranstonorders -at- outlook.com

Return to Home Page