Calling all New Mexico-class (BB-40) fans

[Jeff Sharp]

Here are some great pics of Idaho and Mississippi in 1941 that I have never seen before! Both are wearing MS-12 camo.
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/united-stat ... leship.asp

[apfelzra]

Hello forum wizards. I'm approaching the end of my build of ISW's 1:350 USS New Mexico, and have a few detailing questions.
1. Were there three steam pipes on the top front of the funnel, or just two?
2. Were any paravanes carried, how many, and where were they stored?
3. Were there one or two ship's bells carried, and where were they located?
Thanks in advance for any answers you may have.

Bob Apfelzweig

[Cliffy B]

GREAT shots Jeff!!! Should have known the Imperial War Museum would have some shots taken by the Brits. LOVE the look of them during that period. Always on the hunt for more shots from them in Iceland

[Jeff Sharp]

Yeah, I love this time period as well. Now I'm on a mission to find a pic of New Mexico during this same time period. If you know of one, please let me know.

[Dick J]

Some of those "Idaho" photos are actually Mississippi.

[Jeff Sharp]

Now that we know that both Mississippi and Idaho were in MS-12 with slightly different interpretations during the 2nd half of 1941, we can put to bed any notion that either pulled into Norfolk in December 1941 wearing MS-1.
Now I'm on a couple of missions.

First, to find a photo of New Mexico wearing MS-12 at this same time.

Second, to find photos of both Mississippi and Idaho wearing MS-12 Modified when they left Norfolk in January '42, so I can come up with overall drawings of each ship wearing this scheme.

So far my search has found very little but I do have a starting point with the photos of each ship in the process of getting painted at Norfolk.

I was able to find some film of Mississippi, but the quality is not that good. It does however give me an idea of the shape and size of some of the splotches on the hull. Here are a couple of stills from that film.







This film isn't any help for any detail above the hull except for maybe turrets 3 and 4 somewhat.

If anyone knows of any other photos of either ship wearing MS-12 Mod, please let me know. For now, the quest continues.

[Jeff Sharp]

Here is my initial interpretation of the camouflage pattern on Mississippi's port side hull. It was vastly different from and more simplified than Mew Mexico's camouflage.
Still many question marks above the hull.

[MartinJQuinn]

Added list of kits and gallery submissions to the first post: viewtopic.php?f=47&t=7876&p=84732#p84732

[ArizonaBB39]

So I was looking through pictures of New Mexico and had a question about the pictures of her in December of 1941. She's in Ms12 mod and has the ship's number on the turrets. I thought they stopped using turret numbers when they switched to the turret colors. Did she carry the numbers and colors, or was this after they got rid of the colors and they painted the numbers back on?

http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/014014.jpg

http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/014013.jpg

[SeanF]

Back in the discussion about painted decks/deck colors in general for the Pearl Harbor fleet (on the main forum), I remember one of the official USN documents from Tracy's site made specific mention that they could keep using ship numbers on the turrets if desired, at least near home waters. (In a hurry right now, or I'd find it for you)

- Sean F.

So I was looking through pictures of New Mexico and had a question about the pictures of her in December of 1941. She's in Ms12 mod and has the ship's number on the turrets. I thought they stopped using turret numbers when they switched to the turret colors. Did she carry the numbers and colors, or was this after they got rid of the colors and they painted the numbers back on?

http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/014014.jpg

http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/014013.jpg

[SeanF]

Okay, it's in the September 1941 revision, the paragraph at the bottom of page 7 and continuing on page 8 that specifically mentions turret top numbers:
http://www.researcheratlarge.com/Ships/ ... 2Rev1.html
I immediately thought of the December '41 - January '42 New Mexico when I read that.

- Sean F.

[ArizonaBB39]

Very interesting, so if I understand that correctly she could have had numbers and colors? Or since the pictures were from after the Pearl Harbor attack they had probably painted over the color?

[SeanF]

Probably not colors simultaneously with numbers. If I understand correctly, the turret top colors were a Pacific Fleet thing. The numbers would be a holdover from earlier 1930s fleet-wide practice (anyone, correct me if I'm wrong on any of this).
These numbers are visible in many photos of battleships from the early to mid '30s, though often hard to see due to camera angles, distance, glare, and blurriness. I'm pretty sure I've seen them on cruisers also, but haven't been able to find any photos of that this morning. It's obvious there was no consistency in size, font, orientation, position (almost always on the roof of turret 2. Where on that roof... that's another matter), and color (light and dark varieties are discernible in B&W photos; might they have been yellow or blue, or red on occasion? Can't tell. Colors dictated by squadron? Possibly... but note Arizona's very large and dramatic shaded 39 - there's black and white, and I can't recall seeing that style on any other ship. I think it was left entirely up to each ship)
I do occasionally see a dark turret top with a number (See this Idaho shot: http://navsource.org/archives/01/042/014235i.jpg but I'm pretty sure that's a deck gray of some sort - note the same color on top of the armored conn. Side note, going on a little bit of limb here... perhaps the deck just below the conn is the same brown material (mastic?) used at the signal deck - it looks slightly different from the other horizontal color, and matches with the flag deck aft of the mainmast, which we know was brown, at least in 1940)
I can't recall seeing a turret top number on the #4 turret in early '30s photos; it may have been unique to the '42 New Mexico or perhaps a late '30s Atlantic fleet directive for identification marks at both ends (makes sense, from a Neutrality Patrol perspective I suppose.) I haven't noticed similar numbers on the Mississippi or Idaho at a similar time period, but then photos with the correct angle and clarity are few and far between. I expect they're out there, though.

- Sean F.

[SeanF]

Following up: On Tracy's website, the fleet orders regarding turret tops look to be a fleetwide directive, not just Pacific fleet. So perhaps it would be more accurate to say the New Mexico's 40s are a reversion back to the earlier practice. Although the fact that turret top numbers are specifically mentioned in the September 1941 camoflage document implies that this numbering was not unique to NM, and was already an established practice by Sept. '41. Makes me wonder - did the Atlantic fleet ever run with the turret top colors at all, or just skip it and coasted along on the old numbers?
(The three New Mexicos were definitely in their BatDiv 3 blue while they were off Hawaii in 1940, but after transfer to the east coast for Neutrality Patrol...? Similarly, were the old ships of BatDiv 5 ever actually given their assigned yellow turret tops?)

- Sean F.

[Haijun watcher]

Has anyone here ever built the Classic Warships 1/700 Idaho kit? I've heard it is a late-war version and recently bought one on the Trading Post board.

I was just wondering how hard it would be to backdate this Idaho kit and make her into a 1942 version of Mississippi when she was with Task Force 1 off the US West Coast in June 1942.

So does one just need to replace the radars and reduce the number of AA positions, or are there other more substantial changes that need to be made?

[MartinJQuinn]

Idaho in early 1942: http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/014251.jpg

Idaho in 1945: http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/014266.jpg and here: http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/014265.jpg

As you can see, the superstructure appears to be reduced and she now has single 5in gun turrets as her primary secondary weapons. If the CW kit represents this later fit, you'd have a lot of work to do.

[GaryJinNC]

I have the Classic Warships NEW MEXICO. It is the late 1941 version. It is my understanding that the MISSISSIPPI and IDAHO are likewise the late 1941/early 1942 versions.

Personally, I would love to see plastic kits of the NEW MEXICOs, in particular a 1944 NEW MEXICO and a 1945 IDAHO with the single 5" enclosed mounts.

[MartinJQuinn]

Martin, forward superstructure was not reduced as still same level as smoke stack as before. your 42 & 45 links shows what Haijun watcher has to do to back grade a later Idaho to 42 Idaho.

David,

Yes, I phrased it badly. It looks smaller and more compact in the later photos, that is what I was trying to say.

[Dick J]

"Reduced" is not the same as "lowered". An example is the New Orleans class of US cruisers. In 1943, the superstructures were "reduced" by being narrowed, but they were not lowered. Idaho's i945 photo shows that the side MK-31 directors (for the secondary battery) have been removed. On another point, if you look at the 1942 photo above, note that Idaho's open bridge in front of the pilothouse is canvas covered rails. Mississippi (and also New Mexico) had a steel bulwark with wind baffles there. That bridge is one of the significant recognition points for the Idaho. Any "conversion" would have to take that into account.

[Haijun watcher]

I have the Classic Warships NEW MEXICO. It is the late 1941 version. It is my understanding that the MISSISSIPPI and IDAHO are likewise the late 1941/early 1942 versions.

Personally, I would love to see plastic kits of the NEW MEXICOs, in particular a 1944 NEW MEXICO and a 1945 IDAHO with the single 5" enclosed mounts.

Thanks to Martin and all of you guys for your input!

As of this post, the kit is still in transit and hasn't been delivered yet. Perhaps when it arrives, I can post pics of the kit contents so you can ascertain whether it was early or late fit.

All I know is that the forum member that I bought it from had said this Classic Warships Idaho kit is late war fit.

As I said, I prefer early war fit.