Calling all Fletcher-class (DD-445) fans

ARH · Post by **ARH** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:09 pm

http://www.destroyerhistory.org/fletche ... dside.html

Rick E Davis · Post by **Rick E Davis** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 7:11 pm

Ed,

I forgot to comment in my last message about the Fletcher photo. First off, I have wondered the same thing about that photo. I suspect that the crew repainted the Fletcher by hand and just didn't get to this area. Whether this means she was in Ms-12R or 18 or what? I don't know. I have not taken the time to dig out this photo at NARA and scan it and more important to check the date and I HOPE ... OTHER photos taken in the same sequence of the Fletcher and other ships. I just want to check the date the photo is suppose to have been taken. I have no reason to doubt the date, other than I have run into many photos that actually have a "received" date which is useful in having over "NO DATE", but may not nail down the exact date the photo was taken. NHC has the best web copy of this photo and they stand by the photo's date ... so it is likely the date ... but ....

Tracy White · Post by **Tracy White** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 9:19 pm

Could be, but I'll defer to the fletcher experts. I have access to some paint documents, but have made no great study of their operation histories.

Ron Smith · Post by **Ron Smith** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 11:34 pm

Tracy White wrote:Could be, but I'll defer to the fletcher experts. I have access to some paint documents, but have made no great study of their operation histories.

I'm going to decline to comment because I loathe web based photos for paint discussion.

Tracy White · Post by **Tracy White** » Sun Jul 22, 2007 12:18 am

Ahhh yes... current events!

Not finished yet but here's the aforementioned memo. Only thing left (which I'm working on now) is the distribution list and final proofreading.

*edit* - done!

Jimmy Conway · Post by **Jimmy Conway** » Sun Jul 22, 2007 3:00 am

ARH wrote:Jimmy, In larger scale there is a way of creating this corrigation effect, but for sailing models its not really practical, for static yes.
I thought about it when building Moffett but I did not have photo,s of such effects on the hull.

What you have to do is , mark out the hull, all 200 ribs, then each section were the plates meet horizontally.
When this is done you have to put very fine strips of styrene over the marked out sections, then plate the hull in litho plate, when set rub your thumb over the plates and they will indent giving the effect, a lot of work

Hello Ron! I�m going to study the directions you gave and will try some. Thank you so much for your opinion. Any progress I make for this detail will be showed for you and have some hull here to do some tests. I still believe about using thin foil to hollow between "grids" and will try some photos showing what could be some pattern for the �corrugation� of Sumners.
Nice regards: Jimmy

Jimmy Conway · Post by **Jimmy Conway** » Sun Jul 22, 2007 3:12 am

Tony Bunch wrote:Hi Guys,
Jimmy,
The Sumner that will some day be produced by Small World Models is still in its prototype stage; which means it won't be advertised till ready for public consumption. This could be a year or more from now. Dave wants to make available a complete kit for the RC or static modeler that will be a faithful copy of a Sumner Class DD. In 1/96 scale and the level of perfection Dave is capable will not avail a cheap model I can assure you, but it will be nice!
The Fletcher/Sumner hulls were virtually identical, but for the rudder arrangement. It would be easy enough to mount a single rudder and fill the holes/bosses for the hinged twin rudder arangement.
somebody correct me if I'm wrong here.
The steel plate at the forefoot of the Fletcher's Hull is supposedly for ramming submarines; according to the USS Kidd website.
Tony

Hi Tony and Sleepwalker!!
The former hull of Fletchers didn't include any plate to ram submarines. Even I didn't read about it in the Kdd's web, I think it was not frequently installed as "modernization" or "overhauling" for war progress............see the link.....some drawing of BIW for Fletchers...... never consider the molded base line as "hull"!!!

http://s209.photobucket.com/albums/bb24 ... her0-1.jpg

Tracy White · Post by **Tracy White** » Sun Jul 22, 2007 3:31 am

I actually saw some documentation on this last weekend; there were some Fletchers that had such a plate. I didn't think to scan it in, although I did note it. No plans were attached. Any interest?

Jimmy Conway · Post by **Jimmy Conway** » Sun Jul 22, 2007 4:24 am

Tony Bunch wrote:Hi Guys,
Jimmy,
The Sumner that will some day be produced by Small World Models is still in its prototype stage; which means it won't be advertised till ready for public consumption. This could be a year or more from now. Dave wants to make available a complete kit for the RC or static modeler that will be a faithful copy of a Sumner Class DD. In 1/96 scale and the level of perfection Dave is capable will not avail a cheap model I can assure you, but it will be nice!
The Fletcher/Sumner hulls were virtually identical, but for the rudder arrangement. It would be easy enough to mount a single rudder and fill the holes/bosses for the hinged twin rudder arangement.
somebody correct me if I'm wrong here.

Tony

Hi all!
Tony, you are correct. The measures to both class were a merely difference of 2,54 cm in lenght and 0,3810 m in the beam.....Sumners were a bit "bigger"! My objectives in modelling are for statics.... I'm using Fletchers hull lines to build Sumner"s hull.
Will be following Dave's model and ask you about any news so I thank you for the information!!! Nice regards: Jimmy

Jimmy Conway · Post by **Jimmy Conway** » Sun Jul 22, 2007 4:29 am

Tracy White wrote:I actually saw some documentation on this last weekend; there were some Fletchers that had such a plate. I didn't think to scan it in, although I did note it. No plans were attached. Any interest?

Yes Tracy, it would be great! Any new about it is welcome. Thanks in advance! We'll make Sleepwalker to take his decision!!! Nice regards: Jimmy

Tracy White · Post by **Tracy White** » Sun Jul 22, 2007 11:29 am

Two things then
It will probably take me a month to get back to archives for them
It will not list which ships got it; it just shows the Navy planned on it

ducati650 · Post by **ducati650** » Sun Jul 22, 2007 4:18 pm

I know it is not on a Fletcher but here is a photo that talk about the added piece for ramming subs. This came out of "U.S. Destroyers, Revised Edition" by Norman Friedman

[/url]

Ron Smith · Post by **Ron Smith** » Sun Jul 22, 2007 4:50 pm

Not surprisingly the added piece is called a "ram stem" on the Booklets of General Plans.

Sleepwalker · Post by **Sleepwalker** » Sun Jul 22, 2007 8:42 pm

Hi Tracy,
I'm interested in this list. At least I'ww have an idea if such modification was predicted for USS Heermann.

Regards.

Jimmy Conway · Post by **Jimmy Conway** » Sun Jul 22, 2007 9:31 pm

Sleepwalker wrote:Hi Tracy,
I'm interested in this list. At least I'ww have an idea if such modification was predicted for USS Heermann.

Regards.

Dear Sleepwalker, you told me what I was concerned about: If the SPECIFIC ship you are building had the "hammer" plate. I told commonly that Fletchers didn't have it ( or informed that never..... ), but Tracy and other of our friends, Ducati and Ron, showed us some different reality: there were a plate or even studies to fit that in some Fletchers! But we don't know if "Heermann" had it, so I told you to make your decision. Thanks to all that brought us about this detail, and to Tracy, but he's telling about some difficulties to post images and do some research, but reffers to PLANNING and not existence or build of such plate. Let's wait! Make your model based in History..... I like it!
Nice regards to all. Jimmy

Tracy White · Post by **Tracy White** » Sun Jul 22, 2007 9:47 pm

Sleep: I don't have the document with me, but what I remember is that there was NO plans and if anything, it just said "do this with hull number XXX and above." As Fletchers were built all over the country this wouldn't necessarily tell you which ships had it without further leg work.

I have no difficulty posting images or doing research; what I have is difficulties with taking time off workj to visit my local branch. They are only open one saturday a month, and work is busy enough that it is hard to take time off.

Sleepwalker · Post by **Sleepwalker** » Sun Jul 22, 2007 11:18 pm

I'm not in rush with this plate. I will not attach it until I'll have clear evidence that it was installed on USS Heermann. I can always add it later. BTW. Different question. Some Fletchers had single, some double depth charges stands on the boards. I'v looking how it was with USS Heermann, but unfortunately best photo showing her side was made during action off Samar, and stern part is obscured by the smoke. Can anyone help me with this?
I was searching my resources (AOTS The Sullivans, Floating Plan Book, Warship Perspectives) to solve this, but without definitive result.
Regards.

ModelWarships Gallery Page · Post by **ArizonaBB39** » Mon Jul 23, 2007 12:05 am

As I've been building my Destroyers (two Fletchers and one Allen M Sumner) I seem to have misplaced the stands that came with the plastic kits, and would like to know if any of you guys out there aren't using the stands that came with the Tamiya and Trumpeter kits. I'll take all and any as I really like them and I could use some extras. TIA.

PS I'll post pics of my two Fletcher class ships to come soon

DIBBER27 · Post by **DIBBER27** » Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:31 pm

>EDIT: Navsource doesn't allow hotlinking, provide a link to the page the picture is on and what number it is. AZBB39<
Sleep, found this pic shows 2 racks pic dated Jan 9 1945. Hope this helps

Tony Bunch · Post by **Tony Bunch** » Mon Jul 23, 2007 8:49 pm

Hi Guys,
I'm gone to Dinsyeland for two days, and this thread has turbo'd!
Here is my 1/96 DD449 Nicholas FRAM. This model was originally an SSY hull with some, "skin" added......including some of the previously mentioned external bow/hull detail.
See pic.....

Steve V built this model up to a point when I bought it from him. I then made some effort to add detail as well.

Here is the USS Nicholas in her later stage of life. The bow stem detail is quite visible in this pic........

Since then, I have donated this model to my brother; an RC running partner , (one of a small number of gents), as he lost half of his DD661 in an unfortunate, "run-in" with 1/100 DKM Scharnhorst. The Scharnhorst weighs 90 pounds and the Kidd weighed 9! You do the math at a collison speed of 7 miles per hour!
Not shown is the bow detail of the 1/96 DD449, and it does indeed have a narrow, "plate", at the stem of the bow. FWIW
Tony