SUBSIM Radio Room Forums
Page 4 of 6 123 4 56
Show 20 post(s) from this thread on one page

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)
-   SH5 Mods Workshop (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=249)
-   -   About merchant ship wartime colours (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=250803)

Mister_M 10-28-21 06:37 PM
Nice work gap. Very few ships are painted all grey. But something is interesting : it seems that buff superstructures are part of the camouflage system. Indeed, look at the tanker British Genius : original funnel colors are not buff. Maybe it was because grey paint was in short supply, and they used buff paint to do the rest... Another fun fact : the hull has a camo pattern.

Else, the Ellerman's Hall Line seems to have decided to repaint all funnels in orange... :haha: :doh:

gap 10-28-21 07:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister_M (Post 2776322)
Nice work gap. Very few ships are painted all grey. But something is interesting : it seems that buff superstructures are part of the camouflage system. Indeed, look at the tanker British Genius : original funnel colors are not buff.
Definitely. This is in confirmation of kapuhy's findings

Quote:
Originally Posted by kapuhy (Post 2776044)
- Early war British regulations were supposedly different:
"black hulls and funnels, with brown or dark buff superstructure, masts and derricks"
vs later in the war:
"dark grey hull and funnel, with brown or dark buff as above"
and by 1943:
"By 1943 Allied shipping was pretty standardised on all over grey. However the exact shade could vary depending on what was available. Where possible many still used dark grey hull and lighter upper works."
Black or grey hulls with buff upperworks are dominant in this particular convoy, but apparently there was a certain level of discretionality on how to combine the recommended colours. An interesting variation on the theme are bicolor hulls: black to light grey near the waterline and bluff on top.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister_M (Post 2776322)
Maybe it was because grey paint was in short supply, and they used buff paint to do the rest... Another fun fact : the hull has a camo pattern.
mmm... I am not sure about the camo patterrn, those sketches are way too small for us to appreciate such a fine details, but have you noticed the neutrality markings near the bows of the two Swedish freighters (Suecia and Lima)?

Here are a few pictures for visual reference:



I think similar markings are also visible on the hull of Kors Holm in the drawings of the 1941 Convoy that you have studied.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister_M (Post 2776322)
Else, the Ellerman's Hall Line seems to have decided to repaint all funnels in orange... :haha: :doh:
Yes, those orange funnels really puzzled me. Orange is definitely not what you would call a "dull" colour, but maybe they are just bluff with some colored bands, and they look orange because of the poor resolution :hmm2:

Aktungbby 10-28-21 09:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gap
mmm... I am not sure about the camo patterrn, those sketches are way too small for us to appreciate such a fine details, but have you noticed the neutrality markings near the bows of the two Swedish freighters (Suecia and Lima)?
FAT lotta good it did them: https://www.konditori100.se/SiWW2/sww2lscs.htm
Quote:
During World War II Swedish ships sailed for Sweden, the Allies, the Germans, the Red Cross and for some others.
Swedish merchant sailors memorialAround 1,400-1,500 Swedish sailors were killed when Swedish ships were hit by bombs, grenades, mines and/or torpedoes. (Plus or minus some hundreds - I've seen various numbers.)
500-600 Swedish sailors were killed on ships from other nations.
Around 270 Swedish ships were sunk.

Mister_M 10-29-21 08:44 AM
Why wearing neutrality marks while sailing into an allied convoy ? :k_confused:

kapuhy 10-29-21 08:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister_M (Post 2776370)
Why wearing neutrality marks while sailing into an allied convoy ? :k_confused:
Possibly because you do not intend to stay in the convoy for entire cruise and don't want to have to paint them back on when you separate from it. Plus, there's a small chance that given two equally juicy targets in the periscope, U-Boat will select one that belongs to the enemy nation.

gap 10-29-21 10:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aktungbby (Post 2776332)
Nice link, well done Aktungbby :up:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister_M (Post 2776370)
Why wearing neutrality marks while sailing into an allied convoy ? :k_confused:
Quote:
Originally Posted by kapuhy (Post 2776372)
Possibly because you do not intend to stay in the convoy for entire cruise and don't want to have to paint them back on when you separate from it. Plus, there's a small chance that given two equally juicy targets in the periscope, U-Boat will select one that belongs to the enemy nation.
Makes sense. We should see the Swedish merchant fleet as a "mercenary fleet" of some sort. They sailed equallity to neutral, Allied and Axis ports, but they couldn't repaint their ships their ships every time they changed destinations. The best way to set up similar nations in game, is having two rosters for each of them, one neutral and the other allied. Ships belonging to the two rosters should be visually identical, but campaign files should call neutral ships to sail to/from neutral or Axis ports, whereas the "enemy" ones should be used within Allied shipping boud to/from England, USA, Canada, USSR, etc.
Probably Vecko has already done something similar for TWoS.

kapuhy 10-29-21 11:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gap (Post 2776381)
Probably Vecko has already done something similar for TWoS.
That's exactly what "Free XXX" nations are used for.

gap 10-29-21 09:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kapuhy (Post 2776389)
That's exactly what "Free XXX" nations are used for.
Yes indeed, I know that. I am the one who reworked DesSides.cfg for Open Horizons II back in 2011, when Zedi was still in charge of the mod. With little changes the file is now part of TWoS; I think my exaplanatory notes are still in place btw.

When I created the "Free" nations I had exactly those "ambiguous" diplomatic stances in mind. Nonetheless, more recently, I came to realize that the said nations were poorly implemented in game, or not used at all. I will give you an example. The FreeAmerican nation was created for allowing the implementation of Neutrality Patrols, but I think they were never actually added to the campaign. IIRC, the last time I checked the FreeAmerican roster it was empty.

Several months ago I discussed the topic with Vecko, and I think that the shortcomings were amended at least in part. I say "at least in part" because the last time I offered to cooperate with him on those aspects of the OHII/TWoS campaign he gently refused my proposal, and then he came up with his own changes, so now I am unsure on which features were implemented according to my original idea and which not.

I hope I made myself clearer now :salute:

Mister_M 10-30-21 01:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gap (Post 2776433)
I will give you an example. The FreeAmerican nation was created for allowing the implementation of Neutrality Patrols, but I think they were never actually added to the campaign. IIRC, the last time I checked the FreeAmerican roster it was empty.
Ooooh, ok ! So, despite USA being neutral until Dec 1941, some american escort ships or airplanes could attack us ? :yeah: (but maybe without bombs and depth charges... :timeout:)

kapuhy 10-30-21 05:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gap (Post 2776433)
I hope I made myself clearer now :salute:
Yes, sorry for my Captain Obvious moment. Of all people, you know best what these nations were created for :oops:

As for things being not / not fully implemented, the more I look into campaign files the more I see how much it could be still improved regarding historical accuracy. A pity there's not nearly enough modders interested in SH5 to do it all.

gap 10-31-21 10:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kapuhy (Post 2776461)
Yes, sorry for my Captain Obvious moment. Of all people, you know best what these nations were created for :oops:
No need to say sorry kapuhy!
I hope my previous post didn't sound polemic because that was not my intention :)

Quote:
Originally Posted by kapuhy (Post 2776461)
As for things being not / not fully implemented, the more I look into campaign files the more I see how much it could be still improved regarding historical accuracy. A pity there's not nearly enough modders interested in SH5 to do it all.
If Vecko or anyone else is still interested in further improving the TWoS campaign with a focus on historical accuracy, I am on it too :up:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister_M (Post 2776444)
Ooooh, ok ! So, despite USA being neutral until Dec 1941, some american escort ships or airplanes could attack us ? :yeah: (but maybe without bombs and depth charges... :timeout:)
I am preparing a long post on this subject that you might finde interesting :salute:

U-190 10-31-21 11:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gap (Post 2776603)
No need to say sorry kapuhy!
I hope my previous post didn't sound polemic because that was not my intention :)



If Vecko or anyone else is still interested in further improving the TWoS campaign with a focus on historical accuracy, I am on it too :up:



I am preparing a long post on this subject that you might finde interesting :salute:
:Kaleun_Thumbs_Up::up:

Mister_M 10-31-21 04:31 PM
Why not set the USA in allied side sooner, as you did first (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/sho...&postcount=398), it's a good idea, and no need to add additional (virtual) free country :

Code:
[SideEntry 5]
Country=American
Side=1
StartDate=19410410        ; First naval engagement between an U-boat and the destroyer USS Niblack; USA formally joined the conflict several months later, on 19411208
EndDate=19450901

iambecomelife 11-02-21 11:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kapuhy (Post 2776044)
Stumbled upon this thread covering the same topic as well:

http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=152218

Some interesting information from there:
- Early war British regulations were supposedly different:
"black hulls and funnels, with brown or dark buff superstructure, masts and derricks"
vs later in the war:
"dark grey hull and funnel, with brown or dark buff as above"
and by 1943:
"By 1943 Allied shipping was pretty standardised on all over grey. However the exact shade could vary depending on what was available. Where possible many still used dark grey hull and lighter upper works."

- availability of specific paints was a problem especially if ships were spread over many ports, so it wouldn't be unusual to have convoy consist of varied paint schemes. Still, general rule was to paint everything in dull colours.

-on varnished wood:
"many of the older ships had varnished brown derricks and masts, and this was often retained as the dull colour was considered sufficient"

- decks and upper surfaces were painted in dullest possible colours by ships approaching European waters, because of widespread fear of being bombed by Condor aircraft. This was done outside of regulations, often at sea with any paints on hand so shades would vary depending on what paints were available.
This is very useful to me! Somehow I missed it; this explains why the tankers in the commodore's sketches had that weird superstructure color - I knew it was the wrong color for ships of British Tanker Co., etc.

Perhaps the admiralty hoped that at a distance enemy vessels would be unsure of whether or not a ship spotted in daylight was neutral or not - as opposed to full camo, which would often be visible anyway and would give away a ship as probably British. This would probably be the best choice without painting on fake neutral hull flags/funnel colors, which would have caused protest from neutral nations....

Interesting photos of colored sketches below, showing how ship camouflage changed from WWI - they are of the standard "War" class merchantman "War Drake" in 1918 and the long bridge deck merchant "Clearpool".

It seems they decided in WW2 that the complicated dazzle camouflage was not very effective.

In peacetime "Clearpool" would have had green funnel with a checkered red emblem, grey-green or bright green hull, huge "billboard" lettering on the hull, and brown+white deckhouses (like "Danby" from the same company):


https://i.postimg.cc/90twXV51/Mercha...-Ship-1918.jpg



https://i.postimg.cc/br3Rcjzt/Mercha...r-Shipping.jpg


https://i.postimg.cc/3NhRZ5hP/8158d4...A29289-141.jpg


https://i.postimg.cc/28zybD2W/Danby-j.jpg

iambecomelife 11-03-21 01:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kapuhy (Post 2776372)
Possibly because you do not intend to stay in the convoy for entire cruise and don't want to have to paint them back on when you separate from it. Plus, there's a small chance that given two equally juicy targets in the periscope, U-Boat will select one that belongs to the enemy nation.
Yep - that's correct. I read a book called "Night of the U-Boats" that talked about the problem created by mixed nationality convoys - the author says UK sailors hated neutral ships; the giant flags & bright colors could give away a convoy's location. In HX-79 British tanker "Sitala" was sailing near the neutral Swedish tanker "Janus" on a moonlit night - both got sunk because the bright paint on "Janus" helped submarines find their convoy:

https://www.uboat.net/allies/merchants/ship/641.html

https://www.uboat.net/allies/merchants/ship/638.html


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:55 AM.
Page 4 of 6 123 4 56
Show 20 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2024 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.