What-If Montana-class BB-67

[Avery Boyer]

What a beast! Looks like a fantastic kit, I would dearly love to get my hands on one of those, but I will probably end up scratchbuilding one if I ever feel so inclined

[rtheriaque]

I wish I could get my hands on a 1/700 kit...

[EJM]

Excellent pics! Thanks for sharing.

[Randy]

I've already noticed some things I may want to change, most notably is the area around the main bridge. I've always liked this part of Iowa, and (at least the way YMW chose to do it) Montana is different in a way I'm not sure I like as much. I've looked at all the usual available photos and artist concepts, and they aren't much help.

Also, there seems to be a secondary (or AA???) mount missing from the top of Turret #2. Minor deal, I know.

Does anyone have ideas on this? Comments/suggestions always welcome.

[Dick J]

I've already noticed some things I may want to change, most notably is the area around the main bridge. I've always liked this part of Iowa, and (at least the way YMW chose to do it) Montana is different in a way I'm not sure I like as much. I've looked at all the usual available photos and artist concepts, and they aren't much help.

Also, there seems to be a secondary (or AA???) mount missing from the top of Turret #2. Minor deal, I know.

Does anyone have ideas on this? Comments/suggestions always welcome.

According to many of the sources, the bridge design on the Montana's reverted to the general arrangements of the North Carolina. As such, the nav bridge looked over the top of the conning tower, and in order for both levels of the conning tower to have forward vision, no 40MM mount could be placed on turret 2. Iowa and South Dakota, as fleet flagships, had a third CT level below the others causing the same line-of-sight problems, hence no 40MM on turret 2 there, either. One of the Montana's (Ohio?) was also designated as a fleet flagship, and the only way I can see getting the third CT level in her is to change to the Iowa class bridge arrangement, at least on that one ship.

[Guest]

Thanks much for this info: while I'm not familiar-enough with all the spaces/areas you mention, I think I can work thru what you're talking about with the aid of photos. I've been studying the line drawing at the link below, comparing it to the layout in the kit, and the drawing seems to show the bridge configuration I'd prefer to model. Plenty of room for interpretation on this project

Navsource Montana page

Edited by AZBB39: Navsource does not allow hot linking, the drawing in question is the one by A.L. Raven (12th from the top)

[ArizonaBB39]

Montana Class designs that might be of interest (These are drawings done by myself) [NOTE: The drawings here are NOT to scale, my originals are]

USS Montana Design. This first one is actually a design I came up with by myself while I was looking over other designs for the ship. This design measures out to a whopping 1182.7 Ft long.
Here is a comparison of the first design with an Iowa class ship.

Here is the USN's Scheme 8 design:

USN Scheme 8 Design

Here are designs based off of the line drawing from navsource that was mentioned above:

Design 1
Design 2
Design 3

[EJM]

I've already noticed some things I may want to change, most notably is the area around the main bridge. I've always liked this part of Iowa, and (at least the way YMW chose to do it) Montana is different in a way I'm not sure I like as much. I've looked at all the usual available photos and artist concepts, and they aren't much help.

Back when I first got the resin hull and started doing research and stuff, I wanted to put a bridge structure similiar to the North Carolina's on the Montana. But at that time (About 3-4 years ago.), my scratchbuilding skills were woefully inadequate to build something like that and, no company had come out with a 1/350 plastic North Carolina that I could rob parts from. Back in the early years of starting this project, me and my friend were heavily critisised for having an IOWA bridge structure on the Montana. Everybody told me it would just look like an IOWA wannabe (And it does........sorta.). But as time moved along, a 1/350 plastic kit did come out. Unfortuneately, it was too late as I already put the Iowa bridge on and it was there to stay. Plus the fact that the North Carolina sitting in my local hobby store cost $114! I just couldn't justify buying that Carolina kit for that amount of money just to get the damn bridge structure out of it. It wasn't worth it.

[RandyM]

Awesome - thanks: this gives me some great food for thought (and thanks for the edit on the hotlink faux pas).

[EJM]

There's something I just noticed and am curious about. Perhaps someone can help explain this. While going through all the links and other references I used to build the Montana, I noticed that some references mentioned the Montana as having 2 21" inch topedo tubes (Above the water).
http://navysite.de/bb/bb67class.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... -specs.htm

Why in the world would anybody put torpedo tubes on a battleship? Shouldn't torpedo tubes be left on subs, destroyers, frigates, and cruisers? Even if the info./specs are true, I'm not going to add torpedo tubes to the Montana as I think that would look tacky and/or out-of-place.

[ArizonaBB39]

The Bismarck class battleships had torpedo tubes amid ships. Most American dreadnoughts had underwater tubes that were later removed in refits. Being a 1940s design they probably wanted it to be comparable to other battleships of the time.

That being said, I haven't actually seen any torpedo tubes on any of the USN's prelim drawings or design models so it must have been a short lived idea.

[nick]

After seeing the comparison between the Iowas and Montanas, I just can't imagine the sheer size of the Montanas!!

[Dick J]

There's something I just noticed and am curious about. Perhaps someone can help explain this. While going through all the links and other references I used to build the Montana, I noticed that some references mentioned the Montana as having 2 21" inch topedo tubes (Above the water).
Why in the world would anybody put torpedo tubes on a battleship? Shouldn't torpedo tubes be left on subs, destroyers, frigates, and cruisers? Even if the info./specs are true, I'm not going to add torpedo tubes to the Montana as I think that would look tacky and/or out-of-place.

Torpedo tubes are not mentioned by either Friedman or Dulin & Garzke. Probably, one of your two sources made a mistake and the other simply repeated it. None of the WW-II BB designs included tubes. WW-I ships had carried them (mostly underwater tubes), and they proved something of a hazard. SMS Lutzow was (according to some estimates) done in by the compartment for her torpedoes. She received a shell hit in the area and since the compartment extended through the torpedo defense bulkhead, the hit allowed much greater flooding than otherwise would have happened. Her bow flooded, pulling the propellers out of the water, leading to her scuttling. With but a little less water in her bow, she might well have survived.

As far as having them as deck mounts, such tubes were considered too much of a hazard even on the CA's; the first 8 treaty cruisers had them removed. Only the Omaha's and Atlanta's retained them into WW-II. I doubt they would have even considered deck mounts on the BB's.

[RandyM]

Well, I can tell you that torpedo tubes can be hazardous to restaurants as well. Back in the 80s during my stint in USCG, I was stationed aboard a WHEC in Alameda in the weapons department. Back then, the ships (4 of them, pre-FRAM) tied up at the supply depot just east of NAS Alameda, in the estuary that separates Alameda from Oakland.

One warm summer day the sonar team was bored while doing some preventive maintenance on the starboard tube triplet. Since the maintenance called for the HP air to be charged (1800 psi to the launch flasks, IIRC), they decided to have a little fun. They (over)inflated a playground ball until it just fit inside the tube, stuffed it in one of them, then trained the tubes out 90 degrees from centerline, aimed directly at a restaurant across the estuary (50 yards, maybe? I really don't remember).

Next thing you know, the warning buzzer is sounding and the flask is discharged, effectively shooting the basketball as if it were a torpedo. The guys thought it would simply shoot a few tens of feet, making for a good laugh. Instead, it shot out of the tube with enough force to skip across the water once and plough thru one of the restaurant's windows, which was fortunately closed at the time.

One of the funniest things I ever saw during that period of my life.

Until the day we were leaving on patrol and the CO decided to use the remote engine controls on the bridge (vs. the repeaters down in the engine room), and we lost propellor pitch control while in reverse, backing down into a mooored 50-foot sailboat, squashing it between our stern and the pier where it sort of slumped on its lines like a piece of water-logged balsa wood.


Ahhhh, those were the days.

[janschu]

Hello to all the USS Montana fans,
i also have bought the 1/350 USS Montana from Yankee Modelworks. Having
started in June this year and the ship is 95% complete now. The things i have to do yet are some balsa rafts and floater net baskets on the main deck and on the superstructures, to finish the main tower and the area between the two funnels and the rest of the rigging.
Since i will display my Montana in a "what if" diorama berthing at Ulithi atoll in the spring of 1945 i have taken ships of the Iowa class as an example concerning the equipment. So my ship has no boats left except two whale boats, the Kingfishers have been replaced by Seahawks and the Montana is crammed full with AAA like 40mm Bofors quads, and 20mm Oerlikon twins and singles.
The barrels of the 16" and 5" guns i have replaced with turned brass barrels from BMK, available via https://shop.modellmarine.de. Burkhardt custom made the correct 5" cal 54 barrels for me, all barrels in a fantastic quality for a reasonable price.
The quality of most of the metal parts was quite poor, so i have replaced these parts with aftermarket items.
l`Arsenal: Mk37 gun directors, Mk51 gun directors, 40mm Bofors quads, 20mm Oerlikon twins and singles, paravanes, balsa rafts, Seahawks, catapults and aircraft crane and finally the floater net baskets ( the only ones with nets, not just the empty baskets! )
Corsair Armada: fairleads
Paperlab Productions: 20mm ready ammo boxes and several types of hatches ( fantastic stuff to replace the simplified parts of the kit )
WEM: US battleship anchors
Lion Roar: US Navy extra ladders
Toms Modelworks: US Naval doors, 16" and 12" portholes
Since many of the gun tubs had to be relocated and also new ones to be added i had to scratchbuild them. The upper levels of the superstructures and their platforms are also scratchbuild because the ones from the kit were too thick, especially the bulwarks. The platform on the former boat deck with additional Bofors quads is also build from scratch. Since all Iowas and South Dakotas received an enclosed bridge i did the same with my Montana and added a square type bridge like the Iowas had.
It is planned that photos of the finished model will be made at the next IG Waterline meeting at the end of January, so hopefully pictures can be seen soon after.

Regards,

Jan Schulz
IG Waterline, Germany

[EJM]

Sounds like you've got yourself quite a fantastic build there, Jan! I can hardly wait to see pics when you have them.

[rtheriaque]

Is there anything 1/700 currently available? I've checked the usual suspects with no luck...

Even a hull would be a help...

[Timmy C]

Yes, Imperial Hobby Productions has the Montana as basic kit in 1/700.

[EJM]

Adding to what Timmy said..............

IHP Hobby
http://ihphobby.tripod.com/

Click at the top where it says "Apprentice Series". Then scroll down to where it gives a listing of "1/700 Scale Craftsman Ship Kits". The item number for the Montana is 270002. The kit sells for $110.

[EJM]

After having the Montana still sitting on my kitchen table waiting for a base and case to be done, I keep looking at it from time to time and thinking it's still not done. I always manage to forget something. I've been thinking of filling the plastic floater net baskets. The only solution that came to mind was cutting and using some 0.5mm thick wire I had from long ago.
(Link no longer available. See below link instead.)
Cutting that into very tiny strips and putting those in the baskets. Trying to simulate tiny individual cork floats though is a tad beyond my modeling capabilities.
Should I leave the wire brown as is to simulate the natural appearence of cork floats or do you think I should paint it a light gray color?