The Ship Model Forum

Iowa's is still the original height/location (or very very close to it), as well. It's just NJ's and MO's that are closer to the waterline (must've been a Bremerton thing... )

Could be! Only really noticeable on the Iowa's as they would vary a lot with load fore and aft whereas more typical ships would retain a more even fore aft trim with load change. My recollection is indeed that the ships in the mothball fleet all had a boot top only slightly above the preservation load waterline, so perhaps it was a part of the deactivation process. Only the Iowa's looked like they wanted to leap out of the water. Not sure what the current philosophy is though will have a peek when I head through there agin next month. I am aware that Missouri during her deactivation had perhaps several thousand tons of fuel unloaded at one point. How that changed the trim and whether the boot top was again adjusted, I have no information.

T

Question?

Did most of the Iowa's still carry paravanes into the 80's and 90's? If so where were they stored and how were they streamed?

Tom,

Paravanes were not shipped on the IOWAs in the 80s-90s. NEW JERSEY did not carry any after her 67 refit.

NEW JERSEY was the only one of the four to have her bow paravane tube and forefoot skeg removed and replaced with 1" thk. steel hull plating (mid-80s drydock period) - per R. Landgraff who oversaw the removal at LBNSYD.

When the ships carried that equipment (40s-50s) they were stored topside on either side of the forward single watertight hatches just forward of the breakwater. They are shown on both the 1950 Booklet of General Plans USS MISSOURI and the same document 1956 USS WISCONSIN. They are inboard of the small davits that are located on the waterway on each side of the ship - used to lower/raise the paravane. More than likely the paravanes themselves were surplused after the 4 ships decommissioned in the mid-50s as would be Navy practice (unless they went to one or more of the CAs still in commission).

Hank

_________________
HMS III
Mocksville, NC
BB62 vet 68-69

Builder's yard:
USS STODDARD (DD-566) 66-68 1:144, Various Lg Scale FC Directors
Finished:
USS NEW JERSEY (BB-62) 67-69 1:200
USN Sloop/Ship PEACOCK (1813) 1:48
ROYAL CAROLINE (1748) 1:47
AVS (1768) 1:48

Thanks Hank!

About what I figured, but had wondered if in the gulf they had been refitted due to the possibility of mines in the shallow water. I do remember seeing the small jewel like ones Kyle had on his Trumpy build.

Regards. Tom.

I think paravanes would only work against moored mines, and it doesn't work all that well.

_________________
Assessing the impact of new area rug under modeling table.

Moored mines are about the only types that can be sowed into an effective field. Perhaps in quite shallow water magnetic or pressure type mines etc could be placed on the bottom. Floating mines have the disadvantage of being at least somewhat visible to sharp lookouts and may show up on radar? Paravanes are what are used by minesweepers to catch and cut the cables such that the mines can be destroyed on the surface. Useful primarily for contact mines though they might be able to sweep deeper for magnetic mines as well. A specialized warfare with which I have only the briefest familiarity. There was a reason that variously wooden and other smaller ships and craft were used and perhaps considered a bit expendable! My recollection is that helicopters have also been used for this task in some situations.

Perhaps we have some former minesweeper folks about?

Moored mines can be equipped with a number of different fuses - contact, magnetic, acoustic, and/or pressure. They aren't as powerful as bottom mines because they have to be light enough to float, but the fact that they are much closer to the hull than a bottom mine means they don't need as much explosives. Because of this, you can place moored mines in fairly deep water (as deep as the mooring cable goes), unlike bottom mines that have to be shallow enough where their explosion can hit the ship.

Traditionally, moored mines can be cleared by either mechanical or influence sweeps. Mechanical involves you dragging a cable equipped with cutters, pulled taut by a paravane or kite. This makes contact with the mine's cable, dragging them towards the cutters. The mooring cable is cut, and the mine floats to the surface where they are then disarmed (usually by small arms fire). Influence sweeps involve a minesweeper or helicopter dragging a device that mimics the signatures (acoustic, pressure, and magnetic) of likely targets. This will hopefully set off the mines that are fused to react to such signatures.

Obviously, this a very dangerous task. Sailing into a minefield to disarm mines assumes the measures you took to prevent yourself from setting off mines is sufficient - not always the case! Ergo, with the advent of miniaturized and cheaper electronics, the US is moving towards mine countermeasures that will "take the sailor out of the minefield".

This means using airborne means and waterborne/subsurface drones to both detect and destroy mines of all types. Right now, they're perfecting the helicopter-borne Airborne Laser Mine Detection System (ALMDS), which scans the water using a laser to detect items near the surface like moored mines. Once found, the helicopter will then drop a small torpedo that has a camera and sonar to get close to the mine, identify it, and destroy it if necessary.

Surface drones like the Unmanned Surface Vehicle will be equipped for the influence sweep role, while the semi-submersed Remote Multimission Vehicle will tow a sonar to further identify mines both moored and bottom.

All these new techniques are to be deployed from the LCS, which is why critics' repeated calls for an updated minesweeper along the lines of the Avenger class has no place in the modern conception of mine countermeasures.


Source: wrote my Master's thesis on it.

_________________
De quoi s'agit-il?

Thanks for the update!

OK boys and girls, It Is Done.

Of course there remain a few small areas to clean up, and details to be added. But the general construction of my "Trumpeter 1/200 USS Missouri Stern Correction Effort" is complete. It has actually been pretty fun, and certainly educational. Several pics of the finished product are below. The rudder mounts are installed, but the rudders themselves are posing, as are the props. Those are the white metal parts which come in the Trumpeter "detail set" - I thinned down the cross section of the blades but other than that they are OOB.

For everyone who has contacted me regarding availability of production versions - finishing that up is my next priority.

It looks fantastic, Randy.

_________________
Assessing the impact of new area rug under modeling table.

Randy:

Not to forget there is a short centerline skeg at the start of the tunnel.

Cheers: Tom

Randy,

Beautiful job!!! I'm extremely impressed. Your approach to solve the problem really came out well.

You have achieved Master Hullman, Grasshopper

Hank

_________________
HMS III
Mocksville, NC
BB62 vet 68-69

Builder's yard:
USS STODDARD (DD-566) 66-68 1:144, Various Lg Scale FC Directors
Finished:
USS NEW JERSEY (BB-62) 67-69 1:200
USN Sloop/Ship PEACOCK (1813) 1:48
ROYAL CAROLINE (1748) 1:47
AVS (1768) 1:48

Randy,

Your work is OUTSTANDING!

Paul

Maybe Trumpy should use your hull a as a new pattern!

Looking fwd to this coming together!

Well done Randy, enjoyed watching your progress through to the finish.

I look forward to the production product

_________________
Gerry

From Garzke and Dulin, note: updated version. Preliminary hull plans do not show the skeg and a few other details vary. The hull FINAL plan was revised after testing at the Davy T Model basin and includes the skeg at the inlet to the aft tunnel.

Cheers: Tom

Sorry one of the above got posted twice...

Here is an inboard profile, the item 107 is labeled as a docking keel on the other side of the page. From Stillwell, Missouri, pp 410-411

Great work Randy!

I sure hope Trumpeter has been watching our little adventures with the stern of this kit; maybe possibly somehow it will shame them into doing a better job below the waterline on on future releases.

One thing's for sure though... there are a bunch of folks out in internet land who are working on this kit and can no longer live with it in "stock" form. You'll probably do fairly well if you can put your mod out on the market.

_________________
-Jason Channell

Current Project: 1/200 Bismarck

A sincere thanks to all for your comments: I consider peer review/acceptance a very significant achievement.

Tom: I hear you. I have a builder's drawing of the docking keel and will implement an add-on that should fit very well, but to be honest I'm a bit burned out on the bottom of the hull - I've been working on this thing for months and only recently have gotten to the point where I can turn it right-side up!

Changing gears.... HOLY COW. I just installed the front half of the Pontos main deck and it is stunning. I was very stressed over how I would get it positioned - for those who aren't familiar it is backed with some very tacky adhesive, and this is the first wood deck I've laid down that had this feature. I thought about it for most of the weekend and just now finished - what a relief. Quickie photo of the forward end below.

PS: Tom, I took your advice and used piano wire to emulate the pipe welded to the upper edge of the hull. It was a PITA to install (and in fact I probably cursed you a couple times) but in the end I think the effect comes off very nicely.