50 Ships of the British Navy (1934-41)

More
16 years 1 week ago #1050 by janwerner
Hello all,Some advice, please: In my opinion, though nicely done, neither the stringing nor the strings in this no. 50 set are authentic, and two strings are lacking. Could some of you please comment on this, by written massage or - preferably - by sending a detailed photo of a doubtless authentically stringed set? It may have to be restrung, and the lacking ones have to be added anyway. Restringing may not be an easy job. Could someone share his experience with me/us?Thank you in advance!Kind regards, Jan Werner

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 years 1 month ago #17599 by torb
Evening I have some of these ships but I find it hard to identify the model names and part numbers. Is there a location (book or WEB site) that I can access to identify the models? I looked at Richardson's book and did not see any pictures of the models. Thanks Bob

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 1 month ago #17600 by janwerner
Hi Bob, an old thread this is! In all these years I haven't made a decision yet. In the mean time I bought spare ships in order to replace the poor examples, but I am still waiting at the occasion to come across a satisfactory replacement cord. Indeed it is hard to find good photographs for identification. The whole set tends to be shown, rather than the single parts. And there are several contemporary brands that made similar models too (without brand names and model names underneath, like many Dinky/Meccano examples), the small ships of which are very hard to distinguish. I cut my original photo in three parts in order to see more details. Please note that some tiny parts are missing, like masts, gun barrels or details of the superstructures, which may add to the confusion in identifying them. I will add the official (they may have grown or have bent from fatigue) measures below the photo details. Kind regards, Jan







Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 years 2 months ago #21747 by janwerner
Hi all, I had a little Dinky home party yesterday, fifteen enthusiasts attending. At such an occasion the visitors tend to bring some show pieces or pieces for discussion, in order to exchange views or help each other finding answers. One of the Dinky collector friends brought the British Navy set shown below. Hardly anybody discovered any anomaly, but the remarkable characteristics appeared to be the unusual black and red details surrounding the funnel tops. As very incidentally other items with the same details have shown up, this seems to be authentic. Could anybody help explaining these remarkable funnel details, please! Kind regards, Jan




Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 years 1 month ago #21751 by dinkycollect
Jan, Could this set with special finish of the funels have been made specially for Hamleys in 1940 like the camouflaged Mechanised army set # 156 ?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 years 1 month ago #21752 by dinkycollect
torbar, As far as I know, only the Dinky Toys Encyclopaedia contains large individual photos of all the Dinky Toys ships.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago #22077 by janwerner
The alternative art deco box label design. The set a generous gift from John Beugels to me, mid-2019. Kind regards, Jan


Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
4 years 10 months ago #22925 by dinkycollect
Hi all Both Mike Richardson (GBDT page 66) and Guy Girod (Tout Dinky Toys volume 4 page 5) writes that some of the ships : Nelson, Rodney, Effingham, York, and Delhi have been cast first with their name and later without. Is this true ? Why would the names have been deleted ? Jan W writes that similar ships have been made by other manufacturers. Is there a confusion between these and the Dinky Toys meaning that the Dinky have always had their name cast in ? Neither of these authors states if all the marking has been deleted or only the name of the ship with 'Meccano, Dinky Toys and made in England' remaining. The H.M.S. Hood is known to have had it's name removed after the ship was sunk on May 24,1941, 'Meccano, Dinky Toys and made in England' remained.The same applies to the H.M.S. Nelson and Rodney. This makes sense as it avoided to stock two similar variations. The question remains open for the other three ships : Effingham, York and Delhi for which I do not have any photographs of the underside. Thank you for your help to complete the knowledge about these rare ships which only very few people collect.. Jacques

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
4 years 10 months ago #22927 by janwerner
Hi Jacques, I am one of those few people who collect them - they tell a fascinating (hi)story. Unfortunately I cannot help you. I have two sets, in which they are all strung, so that I cannot check. But as both belong to the early production years, one can argue that they will have their full names underneath - unless some have been replaced in the course of time. Nelson Twells wrote that piece in the earlier DT&MM book (page 83), but I'm afraid Nelson is too old now to comment on this. Kind regards, Jan

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
4 years 10 months ago #22929 by Chris1
Jacques, Here are the 3 naval ships that I have which I can photograph the underneath. Hope this is of some help. Chris.







Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
4 years 10 months ago #22935 by dinkycollect
Dear Chris and Jan, Thank you for your help. I have now been able to find most of the pictures and data necessary for the Dinky ships chapter of the Encyclopaedia. I am still missing a picture of the inside of HMS Delhi without the ship's name. After been photographe and restored with photoshop, the photos of Dinky Toys & Modelled Miniatures are quite good.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
4 years 1 month ago #23438 by dinkycollect
The title of this thread should be changed from :--50 Ships of the British Navy (1934-41) to--50 - Ships of the British Navy (1934-41) the meaning is different, Meccano did not make 50 ships.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 1.139 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum
Cookies user preferences
We use cookies to ensure you to get the best experience on our website. If you decline the use of cookies, this website may not function as expected.
Accept all
Decline all
Analytics
Tools used to analyze the data to measure the effectiveness of a website and to understand how it works.
Google Analytics
Accept
Decline
Advertisement
If you accept, the ads on the page will be adapted to your preferences.
Google Ad
Accept
Decline
Save