Calling all Fletcher-class (DD-445) fans

[Francisco P. de Nanclares]

Thanks Rick.

Your guessing on a spare deck is just what I have in mind, but I wanted to make sure. If there are no new propositions on this, I will take it as truth.

A shame I have been running around this ship as a boy, when my dad served on her in the early sixties!.

Cheers.
Pachi.

[Rick E Davis]

Pachi,

I have to ask ... did your father keep photos of his ship? I don't know if he is still with us, but crew members liked to have photos of their ships and maybe he and/or fellow crew members have photos they will share with you for your project. I bet you wish now that you had a camera with you when you were running around on Lepanto!!!

[Francisco P. de Nanclares]

Pachi,

I have to ask ... did your father keep photos of his ship? I don't know if he is still with us, but crew members liked to have photos of their ships and maybe he and/or fellow crew members have photos they will share with you for your project. I bet you wish now that you had a camera with you when you were running around on Lepanto!!!

You can bet I wish I had a camera with me!. The fact is I was very young back then, about 6/7 years old, and no way I could think about anything else but playing around. I distinctly remember manning the 40mm with my brother!, and a Chirstmas Eve my dad was on duty and mum took us both to the ship after dinner to visit him. We ended parading with a bunch of sailors all over the ship playing a drum, trumpet and enjoying like crazy!. Ah, gone are the times...

And yes, my dad got some pics, but they are very scarce, small, and show nothing already seen in a lot of other pics. And, unfortunately, he is not around anymore to ask. And he enjoyed a great memory!.

Thanks!.
Pachi.

[Rick E Davis]

Pachi,

Too bad about your Dad, I thought that maybe this was a project for him.

You could check with any shipmates of your Dad's that you know. Also, I don't know if there is one for Lepanto, but checking with her reunion group may turn up some photos. Also, if there is a Naval History Museum/institute in Spain, they may have photos of Lepanto in their collection.

Good luck,

Rick

[Francisco P. de Nanclares]

Thanks Rick. Yes, the Naval Museum has already been contacted. No joy, really. I am trying to contact some former crewmember to shed some light on this.

Cheers.
Pachi.

[bocME262]

I'm nearing the completion of the assembly stage of my 1/350 DD 449 Nicholas. Up until now I haven't given much thought to the K-Guns and how the depth charges were stowed. I know on early Fletchers there were no racks. But how were they stowed? They certainly couldn't be left to roll around. So I looked on DestroyerHistory.org and found these pics. They show the K-Guns and depth charges on the right side of the photo's. The photos show the #3 turrett totally destroyed by hangfire.

Here you can see the charges on a semi=circular rack, or legs.

Again it looks like they are stowed in a semi-circle on some kind of rack with legs. Also it looks like one charge was rigged and ready to go. Am I on target on this? Rick, do you have ant better pics? Thanks in advance for any and all help.

Regards,
Greg

[Rick E Davis]

Greg,

You are right. The early storage method was to mount the depth charges on the arbors and then insert that assembly into storage "tubes" mounted on the deck in a semi-circle with the removable loading crane at the center. One "round" was generally kept on the K-gun. I'm traveling this week for work and not sure I can upload any photos of this area of an early Fletcher (aka "What the heck is my username and password to photobucket?" ;-} ). You could check previous pages in this string ... I have forgotten half of what is here anymore. When I get back I can check for photos/drawings. Actually, you have posted pretty good photos of that area on the Nicholas (By the way. They replaced that 53 mount with one from the Hutchins. In one of those strange story's, after Pearl Harbor Navy Yard replaced the 53 mount on Hutchins, she experienced a miss-fire during checkout ... Hutchins hit her own aft stack killing nine.). You just need drawings of that area showing the locations. The Tamiya kit I think has the location ... just can't remember how good the kit parts are in representing them.

Rick

[bocME262]

The Tamiya kit I think has the location ... just can't remember how good the kit parts are in representing them.

Rick,

You're right. Tamiya has the correct locations but the charges themselves look a little small. Unless the K-Guns used smaller ones than the aft racks. Was this the case or did they use basically the same charges. Also, I'm not seeing the storage tubes you refer to. And, what are "arbors"? Remember, your talking to a landlubber. Thanks!

Greg

[Dick J]

Greg,

The K-guns fired 300 pound depth charges while the fantail roller racks carried 600 pounders.

[bocME262]

Dick J,

Thanks! I thought they were bigger, just needed confirmation.

[Sauragnmon]

Rick, Re - USS Black Configurations, you can actually see the 5-gun setup, if I am not mistaken, in the second and fourth pictures on navsource. They're clearly lacking the forward Bofors twins, while at the same time retaining the quads. This would I believe be indicative of the 5-gun configuration. In examination of a Trumpy Sullivans, I think I can manage to pull off the Five-Gun with it, since it's a matter of cleaning off the forward Bofors when it comes to the 40mm mounts, though I'm still examining everything about it. I bought a sullivans on impulse since it was in the LHS... and the owner gave me a slightly suspicious look when I had the box open and was examining the kit itself. Though I think he'll warm when I buy a few other kits through him. Such is life, and at least it's never boring.

There's only one annoyance... I'm trying to find the details of the ordnance layout for the five-gun setup, and I can't seem to see any Oerlikon positions on the sides or fantail. Anybody got details on this? It's a little confusing to see none of those blasted things, will I be spared the annoyance of building them?

[Rick E Davis]

Sauragnmon,

Actually, the fourth photo (third ship photo) is of Black in the 5-gun configuration ... I missed that one. The other one is of her in the 4-gun configuration. The twin 20-mm guns on the post-war (recommissioned for the Korean War) Fletchers only remained onboard until about 1954. They were located as in the anti-kamikaze configuration ... two twin mounts per side amidships and two twins on the fantail. The Trumpeter kit does not include twin 20-mm guns ... a real oversight. I'm going to "guess" that Black retained the twin 20-mm mounts until she was updated to the 4-gun (4-5-in., 6-3-in., 5-TT) configuration. I have never seen twin 20-mm guns on any 4-gun Fletchers. The depth charge equipment was slowly reduced and other changes occurred as well as time went on. You will need to look at photos to determine configuration at a given time.

[Sauragnmon]

Of course, it's hard to do because the class is so damn big, attempting to find out which ones survived to that point and were in five-gun config is the question. True enough, there is no twin 20mm's in the kit, though I could cheat a little with some decent-gauge wire and make twin barrels at least. The fact the Trumpeter Bofors come with gun barrels seperate makes it tempting to try building the 3" mounts, since they were mostly similar save the gun barrels and magazine patterns, to the Bofors quads, but I would have to custom order the gun harrels to get a precise look, and having seen and handled 15cm guns at 1/700 in brass, I find myself reluctant to consider brass 7.62cm guns. That and the lack of a third quad Bofors position leads me back to considering four-gun, since it's the only configuration I could produce, with knife and putty, with this kit. It has the Oerlikons, it has the quad positions, it has the aft twin. All I need is a better aft view or a cleaned elevation view so I could get details of the depth charge racks circa 1952.

[Sauragnmon]

Alright, so far I've managed to hammer out the weapons suite of the USS Black '52, but the hard part is isolating the camoflage scheme. Since the pictures are black and white, I'm assuming it's haze grey on the verticals, with something like 5-N on the deck and turret tops? Not that I can really give more than the sense of contrast, but it's got my curiosity spiked.

[Navboyry]

An impressive Fletcher . . .


http://www.mocpages.com/moc.php/22641

[SamuraiPaddler]

Hi guys,

Been a while since I've posted, but I've been collecting more references and aftermarket items. I've re-christened my 1/350 USS Charles Ausburne the "USS Tax Return" because that's what's funding my aftermarket buying spree

I'm actually about ready to start for real...and one of the first things I intend to do is paint and weather the hull. To that end, does anyone know which sketch below is correct? Are the propeller shafts left unpainted, or are they painted as well? I've seen models that show both and I have yet to find a photo that definitively answers the question. Hard to tell in a B&W photo if a dark shaft is oxidized metal or faded paint.



Anyone care to help a dumb airplane guy out? I'd appreciate it!

Thanks,
Mike

[Navboyry]

Top is correct, shaft supports are painted, while the shaft itself is not.

[SamuraiPaddler]

Thanks Navboyry - I appreciate it!

I'm quickly running out of excuses for procrastination - guess I HAVE to start working now

Thanks,
Mike

[Navboyry]

It's not work, it's fun!

I'm tracing the original Fletcher blueprints, so I can have an accurate reference for my model . . .

The things I'll do to save myself 29.99

[SamuraiPaddler]

Will this help?

http://abbot.us/DD629/plans/

It's not work when you know what you're doing, but when you're not that familiar with ships and you just KNOW as soon as you do something, you'll run across something that makes it abundantly obvious you did it wrong...well that's just plain nerve wracking

But I think the fun is gonna outweigh the work...although I think I might do better to work in the medium of Legos like that link you posted!