The Ship Model Forum

This is the Calling All Ship Fans=CASF

Happy Modeling

John

_________________
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

I recall a posting that suggested mid August this year for the Shipcraft Book but have seen no posting from the publisher that confirms this or that the book is a reality and not just speculation. I for one will be very disappointed if it turns out to be just speculation.

In regard to the searchlight towers, I am using the PE set from Tom's Modelworks (#717, USN Cruisers) which contains the larger tower for NEW ORLEANS through SAN FRANCISCO which wrapped around the vent structure and rested on the deck and the smaller tower for TUSCALOOSA through VINCENNES which sat on top of the vent structure.

Okay, GREAT!!!!! Is there just one searchlight tower in each kit? Do you know any hobby websites that have them? Can I assume the towers that come in the kits will surfice for the last 3 cruisers? Thanks!

I have resin models of the New Orleans and San Francisco. I checked the search light towers on them for accuracy. They look like the towers that are included from the Trumpeter kits. I was wanted to see if I could scratch build whatever would be necessary to make the first 4 look better. But, unfortunately, the resin kits are no not accurate either.

I have a few photos of the camouflage on the Vincennes starboard side. Does anybody know where I can find a photo of the camouflage on the port side?

I unique image from Life! I believe that it is a New Orleans Class at night in the Brooklyn Navy Yard.

_________________
Charles Landrum
USNA 1983
Norfolk, Virginia

Nice shot of the Quincy! Probably late 1940 into 1941. (King board splinter screens added for the 5", but the tubs for the 1.1's are not yet installed - at least not the starboard one. It looks like the port side one is well advanced, though. Camo paint not yet applied, either.) Thanks!

Posted on the SN site is a comment that the Shipcraft book on the class is due in Novemeber.

While I have heard a lot of talk about the new trumpeter kit, what is everyone's thoughts/experiences with the Nikko 1942 Resin San Fransisco. I'm looking to do SF in 1942 at Savo - will this kit get me there?

The box review on the review board seems generally favorable, but you never know until you get there.

Any input would be appreciated.

Thanks,

David

Next question - which is the better kit, Nikko Resin San Fran. vs. Combrig Astoria?
(Construction problems, quality of fit, accuracy etc.?)

Thanks,

David

Not having the NIKO kit, I can only give my impressions from the photos. Both the NIKO and COMBRIG kits have issues. The NIKO seems to have more detail, but the communications bridge level is equal in height to all of the other bridge decks. On the actual ship, it was about 1 1/2 levels in height to raise the conning tower high enough to see over the top of turret II. The COMBRIG Astoria kit has problems with the height of the funnels. When you delete the angled cap on the forefunnel, it is shorter than the after stack. They did get the communications bridge right. Also, Astoria and San Fran had different turret types. The Trumpeter kit also has a height issue. The deck above the navigation bridge is not a full level in height. This positions the navigation rangefinder and the gun directors lower than they should be. I am sure I could find more problems as I dug into each. Each kit has advantages, and none is perfect. Your choice depends on what you can fix and what you can live with.

I purchased two damaged Trumpeter 1/700 New Orleans kits from Free Time at a great price and was expecting the worst but to my suprise there was very little damage to the contents except for one crushed upper hull and some broken masts. Of course the boxes were mangled and the paper work was crumpled. If any one needs parts that the carpet monster ate I'll be glad to help for little more than the price of postage. I can even make up a complete New Orleans kit if someone is interested or can do parts for sub assemblies such as the bridge, searchlight tower, etc. Let me know what you need.

Greetings all,

Most interesting topic here. My first really attempt to build a USN heavy-cruiser. Got myself (offer) the Trumpeter 1/700 Cisco in her 1944 version yet I'm most eager to build her between January 1939 and February 1940. No questions yet given that I have yet to read all your notes and don't want to repeat any questions that might have already been made. In any case I'm keeping a close look on this topic and will post occasionally my questions.
Regards,

Filipe

_________________
"Build few and build fast,
Each one better than the last"
John Fisher

Hey

Im coming close to the end in my San Fran 44 build, and now fitting the weapons and directors. The question is, where were the Mk51 directors placed?
could anyone confirm that:
2 near the stern 40 mm tubs
2 in small tubs on the top of hangar superstructure, just below and to the bows of the rear Mk33 director.
2 on each side of the No.2 funnel, between the 20mm guns.
2 between funnels, on the lower level of the searchlight tower.
1 forward of the main superstructure, on the 4th level of the main superstructure
2 each side of the forward Mk.33 director, on the 5th level.

More or less, direct substitute of the kit part B27.

Also, what are the parts C18? Also a kind of a director, on the rear face of the hangar superstructure and just above the tubs with part B27?

_________________
Model kit manufacturer and distributor: https://b2b.modellbaudienst.de
Distributor of Very Fire, Snowman, Milania Master Korabel, Falkonet, Microdisign in EU
1:350 HMS Diana 1794 - nearly released
Further kits in preparation.

Did CA's 39 or 44 include conical barbettes as part of their redesign of the class ?

Randy Stone

Not as far as I can tell from what I have read. The conical barbettes were a function of the need for a larger roller path for the enlarged turrets on Wichita. She was originally proposed as a Brooklyn with the Quincy/Vincennes turrets (which suffered from "shot dispersion" issues), and the weights and stability were designed accordingly. The enlarged turrets eventually fitted were designed to increase the spacing between the guns so that they could be mounted in individual sleeves for independent elevation. Wichita lacked enough stability for cylindrical barbettes of the required width, so the conical ones were a compromise to reduce the weight. (The base of the conical barbette matched the footprint of the Quincy/Vincennes barbette.) Even with the conical barbettes, the extra weight of the turret and barbette ate all of the margins in the design, resulting in overweight and stability issues. Since the Baltimore's began as improved Wichita's, the turrets, complete with the conical barbettes, were carried over into the new design. The next heavy cruiser turret design (Des Moines) went back to cylindrical barbettes.

I heard that...

"...I wish I could remember where I picked this
: one up. Most of my sources have also been
: the published secondary ones like Morison,
: Newcomb, Loxton, and a number of others.
: After a while, they all merge into one
: single continuous story, but isolating the
: source of specifics gets tough.

...as I have more secondary sources than you can shake a stick at and they do, as you point out, become something of a blur over time.

"...My understanding of what happened to Astoria
: is that almost all of the other fires had
: been put out except one stubborn linoleum
: fire forward. (The big rain squall helped
: significantly, from what I have read.) The
: crew was trying to relight the boilers to
: raise steam, but without power for the fuel
: pumps, etc, they were having no luck. The
: ship was under tow headed for the beach at
: Guadalcanal. Shortly before noon, the heat
: from the linoleum fire cooked off one of the
: 5" magazines forward, which blew a hole
: in the hull and flooded the magazine. This
: made the ship settle in the water placing a
: number of the shell damage holes below the
: new waterline, leading to uncontrolled
: flooding and eventual sinking.

In fact, I think there were two of three very specific 8-inch shell holes in the ship amidships which were immediately responsible for dragging Astoria over and causing her to founder after the 5-inch magazine detonation at 11:30 hours, local. I'd have to check my notes but I believe these shellholes were more or less clustered about the forward superstructure and gundeck between the main and second decks, portside. This is all VERY MUCH by memory and I would have to go to my notes in the garage... (no big problem, well wait. I'll just go).

Actually, back from the garage, I'm a little ticked because I can't find my Excel file on Astoria's damage, which I always have out. I think it is in the pile of papers right next to me (or is on a floppy...or misfiled, maybe) and I'm not getting into that right now. However, I do have Greenman's Report and the diagram out of the WLR in front of me and one would immediately observe first that memory has no place in discussion and second, Astoria was badly hit by shellfire coming from both quarters, aft. Greenman's 10-page report specifically talks to the issue of RBA's in paragraph 6, page 10. Apparently, at least here, he discusses how they simply weren't too good as compared with a 'simple' smoke filtering mask. Earlier in the report he discussed that smoke, rather than noxious fumes, was responsible for the evacuation of many spaces (para. 9, page 8) which would seem counterintuitive but that is specifically what he wrote and Greenman was, by all accounts I have read (including Halsey's personal comments on very rare documents I was given), extremely well thought of as an officer.

"...The fire may have included more than just
: the linoleum, but some linoleum was
: definitely involved. The toxic nature of
: the fumes the linoleum produced made
: fighting the fire without the breathers
: impossible. Like you mentioned, they had
: already begun "stripping ship" to
: minimize the dangers. This incident
: accelerated the removal of linoleum from the
: interior decks on all combatants.

I also have the document, dated 09/26/42 by ComCruPacFlt (Fletcher, yes he was type commander as well as winning carrier battles, quite a man in my opinion), which specified execution of measures as a result of (primarily) First Savo and paragraphs 1 (d) clearly state: "Remove all paint from bulkheads and overheads and linoleum from decks in all officers' and C.P.O. mess rooms and all officer's rooms." and 1 (g) "Remove linoleum from all decks and paint from all bulkheads and overheads in all spaces within the ship. Priority for this work should be as follows..." and the document mentions compartments and passageways to be dealt with in certain order.

As I recall, and this could be subject to interpretation, the fires forward on Astoria migrated down an ammunition passage and into the magazine (could that be ?) or into an adjacent compartment to detonate ammunition in the the 5-inch magazine itself, whereupon Astoria foundered and disappeared about 45 minutes later into some 400 fathoms. Sure wish Ballard had found Astoria and Vincennes; they can't be too far from Quincy, my estimate is within 3 miles and maybe quite a bit closer. Northampton and Canberra are within a mile of one another but what do I know ? And the seabed is very expensive and difficult to search, of course.

Would you kindly contact me offline ? If the sig above doesn' work my email is as follows:

r.stone.eal@juno.com

Randy Stone

Tragic in nature, but incredibly useful for research. Thank you, Tracy.

Does anyone have a source for the little (1/700) "38" decals needed for the SF as seen in the 1942 Savo Island battle?

Are there any other decals necessary as well?

Thanks,

David